Athletes from the pre-television era were certainly not perfect. Babe Ruth would show up drunk to Yankee Stadium. Mickey Mantle, Billy Martin and Whitey Ford would go out partying until 7 in the morning the day before an afternoon game. There was illegal gambling (especially in boxing, and notably the Black Sox of 1919), and racism (who could ignore Ty Cobb?), and womanizing (too many to list) all throughout sports, but without the constant eye of TV cameras and constant media coverage, the public was never exposed to the reality of their "heroes".
Here is an excerpt from "A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication" by Richard Harris: "Media coverage of sports has enhanced, or at least altered, the perceived reality of the hero. Sports stars have long been heroes emulated by youth, but the age of television, and to a lesser extent other media, has changed this role somewhat. On the one hand, a superstar such as Michael Jordan may be seen by many more people on television than was previously possible. On the other hand, the close scrutiny of television shows the faults as well as the nobler aspects of a potential hero."
Had there been an ever-watchful eye following the superstars of that era, hero worship may not have been as common. It would have been more likely to see an athlete, like many of those who play today, get picked apart for the little things they've done wrong - or thrown to the wolves for, slightly bigger, um, issues?
Some examples: let's look at Alex Rodriguez, Kobe Bryant, and Michael Vick.
These three athletes are (or in Vick's case, used to be) all superstars in their individual sports. However, they were also caught up in some messy and scandalous situations. Michael Vick was once considered to be the most exciting, and certainly one of the most talented players in the National Football League. However his career as the stunningly quick Quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons came to a screeching halt when he was arrested for torturing and murdering dogs, for fun. Who could forget the constant media coverage, not only on ESPN but on national news channels? It was all anyone could talk about for weeks. Television allowed the public to watch all the details of the step-by-step self-destruction of Michael Vick's promising career. We all got a front row seat to see the media and the rest of the football world tear Michael Vick down from his pedestal (and rightfully so).
"Reminiscent of the O.J. Simpson case, sometimes sports figures dominate news outside their sporting environs. Jessell (2003) criticized the media for overemphasizing the rape trial of Kobe Bryant because the story lacked meaning for people not directly connected to the case, writing that "the media has a role in this as it does all trials: to bear witness and make sure that justice is done. That's it. Anything else is pandering and sensationalism."" (Brown & Bryant, 97) Now, whether or not you agree that the Kobe Bryant rape scandal should have been publicized the way it was, that's just the reality of what happened. Kobe's reputation took a nose dive at the time this story leaked. People were shocked and caught off-guard that their superstar basketball hero could do something so horrible. So of course, the media, especially television media, followed Kobe's story around for weeks on end, exposing a darker side to the Laker legend.
And of course, I must include Alex Rodriguez. For those of you who missed the February 16, 2009 issue of Sports Illustrated, the headline of the feature story was "The Latest and Greatest to Fall". The story was a nearly 2,000 word expose by Selena Roberts on Alex Rodriguez's positive drug test from 2003. The test, which was supposed to be anonymous (I won't even get into that issue, I could rant all day), revealed that Alex Rodriguez had tested positive for two anabolic steroids while a member of the Texas Rangers. Now, in the days and weeks following the news, we've seen a one-on-one interview between Rodriguez and ESPN's Peter Gammons, a Nationally televised press conference (aired on FOX, as well as YES, and ESPN), and countless hours spent on countless TV stations talking about A-Rod, A-Rod, and oh yeah, A-Rod. In fact, if you turn on Sports Center - look at the bottom of the screen at the "sports ticker". It gives brief game recaps and breaking news of each sport covered by the ESPN network. But now there's a new category. There's MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, NCAA ..... and AROD. He's got his own category! He's ONE person. The media, especially television media has been all over this story like nothing I've ever seen before. He's on ESPN everyday. He's on local New York Media everyday. I heard him being talked about on Connecticut's Channel 8 local news - this morning. It's ridiculous. Television has given us a gigantic telescope aimed directly at Alex Rodriguez's life. (And it wouldn't be the first time - the stripper, the divorce, broken friendship with Derek Jeter, affair with Madonna, need I continue?)
It's human nature for people to want to know about the lives of those they admire, such as sports athletes. "Enjoyment "depends not so much on conflict as on its resolution and what the resolution means to the parties involved. It depends on how much those who come out on top are liked and loved, and on how much those who come out on the short end are disliked and hated." (Bryant and Miron, 2002) Predispositions and dispositions, then, toward personalities, players, teams, and other stimuli in a sporting event, are critical to the viewer's enjoyment of that mediated experience. How does this theoretical perspective of the television audience advance our current discussion of sports coverage on cable television? Certainly, the ongoing efforts of sports cable programmers to provide additional coverage, information, and analysis of teams and their cast members contribute to the viewer's development of sentiments toward the very characters portrayed in these growing number of television contests." (Wood and Benigni, 154) This basically states that the media is just trying to serve the human desire to seek out all of this information - the information we feel is necessary for us to know both on a social and psychological level. Thus, the media goes out and finds every little piece of information possible that could expose an athlete and shred some light onto who they really are - and not just the pretty image we've made for ourselves in our heads. it is because of this need, this drive and desire to know it all - that maybe, we've heard too much, seen too much. Would we have been better off left in the dark? Left to continue believing the best in our sports idols - that they're not all steroid-using, dog-killing, rapists? Television has taken off our blinders - and for that, should we be thankful? Maybe we should ask for them back ...
I don’t believe that television has taken the hero out of sports. Instead, I think it has just made the line between hero and villain much finer. Everyone has heard about the marijuana issue with Michael Phelps, and how his status as a hero has taken a huge hit. Over the summer, Phelps was far and away the biggest name in sports, and even rappers like Ludacris were making references to his performance. All of a sudden, the infamous picture surfaced, and just like that he’s losing sponsors, fans, and a lot of respect from all corners of the sports world.
ReplyDeletePeople love seeing the hero become a villain, which is where the question of “Has television taken the hero out of sports?” comes from. The issues surrounding Phelps and other athletes are almost commonplace these days. Because of the constant coverage, people can see the human side of their favorite athletes, and a lot of the time it isn’t as pretty as everyone wants it to be.
Sometimes, however, the overexposure from the media will cause the fans to actually support the athlete over the scandal. H.A. Jessell is quoted in Handbook of Sports and Media as saying, “the media has a role in this as it does all trials: to bear witness and make sure that justice is done. That’s it. Anything else is pandering and sensationalism” (97). Athletes and other celebrities will also speak out against the media in support of another athlete who is under public scrutiny. For instance, when pictures surfaced depicting Matt Leinhart holding a beer bong, many athletes supported him since the pictures were taking at his own house during the off-season. Many times, the athletes’ opinions will improve the public’s perception of the issue.
So even though I do not think that the “hero” in sports has disappeared, I will agree that it is much easier to go from a hero to a villain. If players do not have an impressive resume of helping the community or have specials during the Super Bowl about how great a person they are, they are only one wrong move away from being thrown under the bus. Unfortunately, the positives don’t always make for good television, which is why the fall to infamy can happen overnight in some cases.
If one really takes a step back and looks through the incredibly narrow media viewpoint provided in the past, one can see that Elizabeth has a valid point. Heroes like Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle were not innocent sporting figures. People were just uninformed during that time because television coverage was incredibly limited (although at this point, I think I would rather be in the dark than listen to one more dominant sporting figure be exposed as a fraud). However, it is not only the media that is changing, but also what people want from their media is shifting. Like Elizabeth said, “media is just trying to serve the human desire to seek out all of this information - the information we feel is necessary for us to know both on a social and psychological level.” It seems that more and more individuals want the drama and the scandals to fill their television screens. Individuals are more likely to stop channel surfing if the program is telling stories about the shameful and sometimes outrageous actions of our current athletes. As Zillmann states in Handbook of Sports and Media “the enjoyment of sports is contingent upon several factors, including drama, certainly present in suspenseful games; interesting characters, who are covered extensively by sports news and programming sources; conflict, an inherent component of athletic competition; and satisfying resolutions, reflected in winning or losing efforts.” (154) The television industry is not stupid. They understand in order to bring in the ratings and steady cash flow, they must broadcast what the audience craves; and in this case, that is drama and conflict. If it means uncovering personal disputes and disregarding human beings privacy, so be it. Because of this, we see many well known athletes for what they are (unfortunately) and that hero image is sometimes diminished. Of course, this does not ring true for all athletes. I still look up many who sometimes pop up on the television screen because of a minor slip-up. People sometimes fail to realize they are human, and mistakes are inevitable.
ReplyDeleteBut this is how it is now, and this is how it’s always going to be if television media manages to continue its hold on individual’s lives. So make yourself comfortable in the new sports age of gossip, blame, and uncertainty...
Michelle Kokot
While television may be to blame for ruining the image of the sports hero, I don't believe it is the only reason that athletes have been held to such higher standards. The fact that many of these players are making tens of millions, and in some case hundreds of millions of dollars. In today's society, we hold people like that to such a higher standard. I am a big Yankees fan and a fervent A-Rod supporter, but it's hard to see him as a hero when he makes almost $30 million a year and was cheating. These "heroes" must know that they are being held to a higher standard and must act accordingly.
ReplyDeleteTelevision may not have helped the cause of these "heroes" but let's not forget that t.v. has made it possible for many athletes to become iconic figures. Now everyone around the country at any given moment can turn on Sports Center and see the stats that LeBron James or Kobe Bryant have put up that night. In Chapter 9 of the Handbook, Chris Wood and Vince Benigni write that "ESPN is also notable for its repetition of popular programs. The latest edition of Sports Center is repeated throughout the following morning on the parent network." (164) This book was written a while ago so now Sports Center is done live every morning starting at 9 a.m. This allows the network to keep constant updates going and if Kobe scored 61 at the Garden, they can show it more than once in that hour.
Another great thing about sports on television is how it continues to evolve. Just when you thought there was no more innovations on both cable and satellite, some new sports programming comes out. I think it should be interesting to see how a up and coming sport like MMA does on television. Right now it is solely on Spike, but soon enough it might go mainstream and find its way to ESPN.
It is almost as if sports “idols” are superhuman. With the overwhelming fan base that sports teams and players attract, these so-called heroes have lately been disappointing their fans due to negative media attention. Most recently our country has seen a major downfall in two star sports idols, Michael Phelps and Alex Rodriguez. Unfortunately for them, their careers have suffered a serious blow, and those that were once loyal fans, have seen in front of their eyes their careers shatter. Our nation was stunned, and appalled at what was discovered of these athletes. Baseball’s biggest star was found guilty of previously using steroids and our 2008 Olympic gold medalist is now seen as bong ripping pot smoker. What kind of reputation is America going to have now?
ReplyDeleteThanks to television, our nation sees daily updates on our biggest stars exploited through the media as if they are the only people in the world that have smoked marijuana and taken performance enhancers. Do they really deserve this treatment? These athletes have accomplished so much, and proven themselves to be truly amazing in their sports, that they deserve the right to keep their mistakes private. What happened with Phelps and A-Rod should not tarnish their careers in the extent that it did. The problem is that although these athletes are technically only human, the public looks at them as icons and unbelievable heroes.
In reference the 2003 incident with Kobe Bryant, now, less than six years later after being charged with raping a woman in a Colorado hotel, Bryant’s image will forever be tainted even though he arguably NBA’s best player. He did manage to win his first NBA MVP award last season which is impressive for someone who was being accused of being a rapist just a few years before.
These athletes have the media to thank for exploiting them beyond their control. When A-Rod’s steroid confession became public, television stations were eating it up. Post Super bowl, Peter Gammon had a sit-down with Rodriguez about the leaked information about his steroid use. Gammon did put A-Rod on the spot asking him why he lied to Katie Couric in 2007. When A-Rod was trying to come clean about his less than perfect past, he still was brought down to an even lower level when he was a accused of being a steroid user, and a liar.
Television has made it painful to tune into Sports Center, ESPN, and plenty of other channels seeing the latest allegations, arrests, and suspensions of our athlete icons, instead of finding out top scores, and plays. It seems almost taunting to watch our favorite athletes look like horrible people in the media spotlight.
According to Nielson Media Research, by October of 2003, ESPN led all basic programming with an average rating of 2.4 in prime time. In other words, that means that approximately 2.8 million American households tune into ESPN on an average evening (Brown and Bryant, page 80). But do these people really want to see these scandals be shown over and over again? Probably not. It takes away from the excitement of sports in general when you see one your favorite athletes be criticized and accused of degrading things.
No, television is not to blame for taking the “hero” out of sports. Yes, so often we are reminded that athletes are human, that they make mistakes, and that it’s a good thing all of our bad life choices don’t show up on ESPN. But because they are human, athletes are just as capable of making good decisions as they are bad ones. There are plenty of heroes in professional sports, but because America loves a scandal, they are harder to find.
ReplyDeleteAthletes who are caught in tricky situations often try to play it off like the mainstream media has somehow victimized them, when no actually forced them to take a bong hit or cheat in their game. Yes, television has affected sports programming monumentally, like the NBA for example. As the Handbook of Sport and Media says, “A once graceful and obviously athletic game ‘is now one primarily of power and aggression’” (Brown and Bryant 100). But in this case TV has just reflected the changing culture of America, not created it. This is just a scenario of the game changing though. People haven’t really changed, but it’s unfair to blame television for the lack of positive role models in sports.