We need change in sports broadcasting

It happened during a high school rugby game in Australia on the damp, dew-soaked grass of a cold Saturday morning. I attended an unusual public school that was focused on the arts, where we took drama, dance and music classes as a part of our curriculum.

We didn’t even make it to the first whistle when a kid said, through gritted mouth guard, “we’re going to kick the shit out of you f*gs.” It didn’t personally affect me. To me it was just some trash talk. Some shit talking. It made me mad, sure — but little more than that.

The slurs continued all game, and by the end nothing was enjoyable. My teammate, who we’ll call “John,” said almost nothing after the game. He got on the bus in a stupor. Didn’t engage anyone around him. It turned out John came out over the Christmas break. His mother immediately accepted him, wrapping her arms around her son. His father, furious, demanded he left the house, and wanted to disown him. John’s parents divorced shortly after. John blamed himself, put the weight on his shoulders and felt he was to blame. In his mind he was the reason his 8-year-old sister wouldn’t have a childhood with their parents together.

Those slurs weren’t just trash talk to him. They were a constant reminder that some people in the world wouldn’t accept him. John couldn’t just play a game for 80 minutes, to escape the world, without feeling like he was being singled out and hated.

John quit the team the next day. To my knowledge he never played rugby again.

When Thom Brennaman casually used that same slur it took me back to that moment. When Mike Milbury insinuates that women in sports are a “distraction” I think of my mother being cat-called while walking her son to school. When a broadcaster makes a racist joke, or an discriminatory comment against a marginalized community it’s a solemn reminder that while humanity has evolved, we’re tragically regressive.

It might feel like no big deal if you don’t deal with prejudice every day, but moments like this are supremely hurtful. “A slip of the tongue” is a weapon, jabbing the marginalized, and reminding them that there are people in this world who hate them just for being themselves. Nobody should have to endure that, especially while trying to do something as simple as enjoy sports on TV. It also emboldens those who believe this type of language is okay, perhaps saying to themselves “If a successful sportscaster can say this stuff in front of millions, then it’s okay for me to say it.”

We’ve become too accustomed to the stale loop these comments precipitate. A broadcaster says something offensive on air, halfheartedly apologizes, the network says the broadcaster “doesn’t reflect their values,” and we move on, waiting for the next incident to rear its head. Maybe the broadcaster comes back after some time off, perhaps they don’t — but the pattern remains. Milbury himself has gotten into trouble numerous times, twice prior for insensitive comments about women.

Nowhere in the loops exists a real commitment to change from networks. Their “values” extend only as far as their carefully-worded PR-penned tweets extend, as far as we know — because they haven’t offered any other information on how they want to instill these values in their employees. As far as we know their motivation for extolling their virtues exists only to do the bare minimum required to shut up the public. We need to see more. There needs to be transparency. It’s time for a full examination of these systemic problems.

We’re past the point of simply demanding more out of aging broadcasters. Time and time again we’ve seen that even with lessons inside their own industry, overwhelmingly they keep making the same mistakes. It’s now up to networks to form concrete plans to alter the systemic practices in their business that allow its employees to feel safe enough behind closed doors that they can have these “slips of the tongue” in front of a national audience.

Enter the office of any major corporation in America and part of the significant on-boarding process involves interpersonal training that sets the expectations of the company and establishes that racism, sexism and discrimination will result in counseling, or termination. Either these programs don’t exist inside sports networks, they’re not applying these rules to on-air talent, or these broadcasters are ignoring company rules. Just because these sportscasters started decades ago doesn’t earn them the right to be grandfathered in to avoid the exceedingly low bar of “don’t discriminate against others.” And undoubtedly, if their tongues are slipping like this with a mic in front of them, there’s no doubt it’s happening in employee meetings, pre-production sessions or during work travel. We’ll never know the extent of these actions, and how many people have dealt with a toxic work environment because of it.

It’s become critical that leagues play a larger role in this process, and demand more out of their broadcast partners. It’s not good enough to take a sack full of cash, dust their hands of the situation, and leave the scenario by condemning the actions of these broadcasters. Because every time these situations arise we are left with the sport itself looking worse as a result. If sports leagues want to truly make a statement about their sport being “for everyone,” then their commitment has to extend beyond making a cursory donation each year, or selling a truckload of rainbow apparel. There must be accountability that pressures broadcasters to overhaul their workplace practices so not only do these events happen less frequently, but there are clear protocols for how these situations are handled. Not just “this isn’t me, I’m a man of faith!” cries on a microphone, desperately trying to save their job in the interim.

Cyd Zeigler over at Outsports explained that he doesn’t believe Tom Brennaman should be fired for his statement. Instead he needs to be educated. It’s here where real change can be made. There needs to be a multi-faceted approach to inclusion that not only ensures serious consequences if someone utters a slur on broadcast or behind closed doors, but puts an emphasis on education to make people understand why these words are horrific and painful, the history behind them, and how they make others feel.

Intelligence is gained by studying the work of others and formulating your own beliefs based on them. Wisdom is gained through osmosis, by walking a mile in someone else’s shoes and experiencing the breadth of the world. Right now there’s a lot of intelligence in broadcasting, and a shocking lack of wisdom. So how do we change that?

Firstly, anyone being put in an on-air role needs to have an intimate understanding of their audience. Diversity and inclusion have moved forward leaps and bounds in the last 20 years, and understandably could have left a lot of (particularly older) broadcasters behind. Seminars on race, gender, sexual orientation and socioeconomic background should be a part of any broadcasters ongoing study. Lawyers need to take exams every year to ensure they’re aware of new laws and proceedings, so it only makes sense that people in a position to talk to a wide audience are kept abreast of changes in society — to pull them out of their bubble.

Secondly, clear, iron-clad protocols need to be in place in case of offensive slurs and discriminatory comments being uttered on air. In depth sensitivity training should be a first step, as well as a review of a person’s overall background. Isolate the context in which the statement was made, and whether it was truly just a horrific mistake, or part of a pattern. Whether it’s working with non-profit organizations, or speaking to people from marginalized communities, there needs to be a push towards trying to teach people, not just fire them. By ceasing employment without any chance of contrition it helps solidify the “us vs. them” mentality that is polarizing the world. Not everyone deserves a second chance, particularly if they have an established pattern of discrimination, but some do — and we need to meet those people with compassion.

Finally, and most importantly, there needs to be active moves inside the world of broadcasting to provide more opportunities for diversity. Not just in race, but gender, sexual orientation and religion. This isn’t “token hiring,” it’s intelligent practice. If you want your broadcast booth to convey information to a wide audience, it should contain as many members of that wide audience as possible. Fellowships, mentor programs, opportunities not only to effectively groom the next generation of sports broadcasters, but pair some of the old guard with younger, more diverse voices — which also fulfills the first criteria of continued learning.

In every walk of life the world is evolving. It’s high time the broadcast industry caught up. Until networks commit to real, substantial change at a systemic level we will continue to have more “slips of the tongue,” more hollow apologies, and more people turned away from sports because they feel like it’s a pastime that isn’t for them. Everything in this world must evolve or die, and without major overhauls we will witness sports crumble, all because nobody was willing to do the hard work now to preserve the future. We can, and should demand better. Let’s get to work.