Wednesday's announcement [Geoffrey York, The Globe and Mail] that the Dalai Lama will be barred from visiting South Africa until after the 2010 World Cup was rather interesting. After all, as the Globe pointed out in their editorial on the matter, this is a country famous for producing civil-rights advocates like Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu. This move seemed a step back from the recent success of South Africa, and more in tune with the country's ugly past under apartheid.
Government spokesman Thabo Masebe told the Globe the move “would not be in South Africa's best interests.” That depends on the interests you're considering. There's a good reason "Follow the money" is one of the most memorable lines from the film version of All The President's Men, one of my favourite journalism books of all time. You can often learn quite a bit from the greenback trail. Let's try and apply that methodology here and see where it takes us.
South Africa, of course, is hosting the 2010 World Cup, a massive multibillion-dollar event. The World Cup is organized by FIFA, known for shady financial dealings and influence-peddling in the past (see this excellent story by Andrew Jennings on the Swiss bribery trial where FIFA head Sepp Blatter has been named; there are plenty of other examples in his book, Foul). FIFA gets the money to put on lavish World Cups through TV rights deals and sponsorship agreements with global companies such as adidas, Coke, Visa and McDonalds.
Those global companies are always looking to expand their brands into new and emerging markets. One of the most crucial markets for expansion is the People's Republic of China, which boasts over 1.3 billion people and an emerging middle class with significant buying power. The PRC has had significant problems with the Dalai Lama for some time due to his credentials as a Tibetan exile leader, and accused him of orchestrating riots [The Associated Press via MSNBC] in the lead-up to last summer's Olympics. Given the power of the PRC government, it could make either life very difficult or very easy for those companies if it felt like it. That doesn't mean that they're involved with this ban, but it does suggest that they would have strong motivations to help the PRC if asked.
Of course, the sponsors needn't necessarily be involved at all. China is also a key target market for FIFA: 1.3 billion people with substantial purchasing power in an area where soccer has not yet become the dominant game. Given the PRC government's control of the country's media, they have tremendous power to either aid FIFA in their marketing or make it very difficult for anyone in China to watch or follow soccer. FIFA has also been known to exercise substantial political influence before [one example from Andrew Jennings, in the Sunday Herald], so it's not like meddling in international relations would be anything new for them.
There are also options for China to put substantial pressure on South Africa without involving soccer or corporate intermediaries. As York wrote, "The ban is the latest signal of Beijing's growing power and influence in Africa. China has become the top trading partner of many African countries, and China's ruling Communist Party is reported to be one of the biggest financial contributors to the African National Congress, South Africa's ruling party." Yeah, that probably didn't hurt their case.
It's not a secret that the PRC is at the back of this. From York's story, we learn that "The Chinese embassy in South Africa has confirmed that it opposed the Dalai Lama's visit. In Beijing, a foreign ministry spokesman said yesterday that China appreciates any country that takes "measures" against the Dalai Lama." They may or may not have invoked the help of those looking for Chinese support in the soccer and corporate worlds; that's not for me to say without evidence. However, as pointed out above, exerting pressure on South Africa to keep the Dalai Lama out is in line with the key goals of the PRC government. Thus, FIFA and the global companies involved certainly can't oppose this easily without annoying a key government ally they need on their side, and the PRC may have even persuaded them to go along with it. If they felt like it, they could add their voices to those of the PRC and make life even tougher for the Dalai Lama to pick up a few brownie points with the Chinese government. It's business as usual in the world of soccer, but it's a depressing day for humanity and civil rights.
Update: 9:43 P.M. Found some other good takes on the situation. Sam of The Canadian Stretford End calls it "a disgusting move", while Cesar Benoit sees it as a "huge PR blunder".
Showing posts with label Sepp Blatter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sepp Blatter. Show all posts
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
More scandal in soccer
Anyone who thinks Sepp Blatter and FIFA have any integrity left needs to read Andrew Jennings' story today in the Daily Telegraph about how a Swiss court recently ruled that FIFA had made attempts to deceive detectives investigating the missing $45 million embezzled by ISL, FIFA's former marketing agency, and forced them to pay some $57,000 in court costs as a result.
As Jennings writes, "In an extraordinary decision, three judges in Zug hearing a fraud trial into the collapse of Fifa’s former marketing partner, ISL, ruled earlier this month that football’s governing body 'knew more than they told investigators', that their behaviour “was not always in good faith”, and some of their claims 'were not credible.'"
That's pretty significant. FIFA's defence in the whole ISL case was that they didn't find out about the missing money and the kickbacks to top officials until it was too late, even though there was compelling evidence to the contrary. With this ruling, it's shown pretty clearly that the court is certainly skeptical of those claims and that FIFA likely made efforts to impede the investigation. An excellent overview of the case is provided in Jennings' article, and more detail can be found in his great book, but basically, it comes down to ISL running World Cup marketing for decades and paying massive kickbacks to FIFA officials for the right to do so. A solid backgrounder with plenty of detail can be found on the Sport Journalists' Association newsblog, where they relate a speech Jennings gave on the topic to the Play The Game international journalism conference in 2007.
On the court case itself: as a related story from The Canadian Press shows, some of the charges against the ISL executives didn't stick. However, one key figure, Jean-Marie Weber, was convicted of embezzlement. Weber has close ties to FIFA head Sepp Blatter, as related in this article from German news magazine Der Spiegel.
"The investigators are convinced that the money was then transferred from these entities to corrupt officials. But the traces have been wiped clean. Prosecutors believe at least one man knows the names of the beneficiaries, but he's the principal defendant in the trial: 65-year-old Jean-Marie Weber, the former vice-president of the ISMM supervisory board.
During the hearings, Weber behaved like Helmut Kohl, the former German chancellor and chairman of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), when confronted with charges of illegal party contributions. He kept his secrets to himself. The payments, Weber said under oath, were "confidential" and he intended to respect this "principle of confidentiality." Weber mentioned "commissions" and "fees" which had been paid "in parallel to the purchase or sale of rights."
An attorney from the small Swiss city of Baar described to investigators how silently Weber operated. The attorney had managed the almost six million francs that had been transferred from the Sunbow Foundation to Sicuretta, one of the front companies, in eight separate payments. The attorney said that he had withdrawn the entire sum in cash each time and turned it over to Jean-Marie Weber -- without getting a receipt.
According to the attorney, the money had been earmarked "for the acquisition of rights." The attorney was part of the network. Weber had invited him to attend a match at the football World Cup in Paris in 1998, where he introduced him to the freshly elected FIFA president, Joseph Blatter.
Weber and Blatter have known each other since the 1970s, when both men worked closely with former Adidas CEO Horst Dassler at the German company's corporate branch in the Alsace region of France. Blatter was the technical director of FIFA, Weber was Dassler's personal assistant. Dassler recognized early on how much untapped marketing potential big sporting competitions had for his company. And because he had always enjoyed the best of relations with FIFA officials and the International Olympic Committee, Dassler founded the ISL agency in 1982. He was soon merchandising for both the World Cup and the Olympic Games.
his pioneering phase was probably the period when Jean-Marie Weber learned the art of bribery. The ISL agency's rapid rise to the position of global industry leader, followed by its bankruptcy after 20 years (which ended when ISMM acquired it), apparently went hand in hand with lavish bribery budgets from the very start. One defendant told investigators that since its founding ISL had been involved in the "preferential treatment of important personalities in sports to promote its sports policy and economic goals."
After the early death of Adidas' Horst Dassler in 1987, according to the documents, Jean-Marie Weber took over the job of "cultivating relationships." The Alsace native, who was working without a written employment contract and for whom, at the time of the ISMM bankruptcy, a "base annual salary" of 870,000 Swiss francs had been negotiated, became one of the most mysterious figures in the business of international sports. He was dubbed "the man with the black list" in the industry.
Weber emulated Dassler, his role model. He used Sports Holding AG as a hub for "all sorts of payments that were dangerous from a tax perspective." The investigators learned of this through an attorney who was familiar with the internal procedures."
Hmm... so Blatter's buddy has been sent up the river for embezzlement, and there's convincing testimony implicating Blatter himself from former FIFA finance director Urs Linsi and former FIFA general secretary Michel Zen-Ruffinen. Yet, this is barely drawing any attention in the press, and most of the articles that mention it just briefly talk about FIFA having to pay court costs, with no discussion of the damaging testimony or the implications of this whatsoever. We all know there's plenty of sports scandals, but in my mind, this is the most significant: even the Donaghy case [The Associated Press via The Globe and Mail] didn't directly implicate David Stern? Is it any surprise that Blatter's choosing this week to sound off about "modern slavery" [Matt Lawless, The Daily Telegraph], domestic player development and his ridiculous 6+5 rule [Goal.com ], Cristiano Ronaldo [Jack Bell, The New York Times], the Olympics [CBC Sports], and everything else? I see a smokescreen, and the sad thing is, it appears to be working: plenty of people are happy to report on Blatter's various verbal fumblings, but the deeper scandal is going without a lot of coverage.
As Jennings writes, "In an extraordinary decision, three judges in Zug hearing a fraud trial into the collapse of Fifa’s former marketing partner, ISL, ruled earlier this month that football’s governing body 'knew more than they told investigators', that their behaviour “was not always in good faith”, and some of their claims 'were not credible.'"
That's pretty significant. FIFA's defence in the whole ISL case was that they didn't find out about the missing money and the kickbacks to top officials until it was too late, even though there was compelling evidence to the contrary. With this ruling, it's shown pretty clearly that the court is certainly skeptical of those claims and that FIFA likely made efforts to impede the investigation. An excellent overview of the case is provided in Jennings' article, and more detail can be found in his great book, but basically, it comes down to ISL running World Cup marketing for decades and paying massive kickbacks to FIFA officials for the right to do so. A solid backgrounder with plenty of detail can be found on the Sport Journalists' Association newsblog, where they relate a speech Jennings gave on the topic to the Play The Game international journalism conference in 2007.
On the court case itself: as a related story from The Canadian Press shows, some of the charges against the ISL executives didn't stick. However, one key figure, Jean-Marie Weber, was convicted of embezzlement. Weber has close ties to FIFA head Sepp Blatter, as related in this article from German news magazine Der Spiegel.
"The investigators are convinced that the money was then transferred from these entities to corrupt officials. But the traces have been wiped clean. Prosecutors believe at least one man knows the names of the beneficiaries, but he's the principal defendant in the trial: 65-year-old Jean-Marie Weber, the former vice-president of the ISMM supervisory board.
During the hearings, Weber behaved like Helmut Kohl, the former German chancellor and chairman of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), when confronted with charges of illegal party contributions. He kept his secrets to himself. The payments, Weber said under oath, were "confidential" and he intended to respect this "principle of confidentiality." Weber mentioned "commissions" and "fees" which had been paid "in parallel to the purchase or sale of rights."
An attorney from the small Swiss city of Baar described to investigators how silently Weber operated. The attorney had managed the almost six million francs that had been transferred from the Sunbow Foundation to Sicuretta, one of the front companies, in eight separate payments. The attorney said that he had withdrawn the entire sum in cash each time and turned it over to Jean-Marie Weber -- without getting a receipt.
According to the attorney, the money had been earmarked "for the acquisition of rights." The attorney was part of the network. Weber had invited him to attend a match at the football World Cup in Paris in 1998, where he introduced him to the freshly elected FIFA president, Joseph Blatter.
Weber and Blatter have known each other since the 1970s, when both men worked closely with former Adidas CEO Horst Dassler at the German company's corporate branch in the Alsace region of France. Blatter was the technical director of FIFA, Weber was Dassler's personal assistant. Dassler recognized early on how much untapped marketing potential big sporting competitions had for his company. And because he had always enjoyed the best of relations with FIFA officials and the International Olympic Committee, Dassler founded the ISL agency in 1982. He was soon merchandising for both the World Cup and the Olympic Games.
his pioneering phase was probably the period when Jean-Marie Weber learned the art of bribery. The ISL agency's rapid rise to the position of global industry leader, followed by its bankruptcy after 20 years (which ended when ISMM acquired it), apparently went hand in hand with lavish bribery budgets from the very start. One defendant told investigators that since its founding ISL had been involved in the "preferential treatment of important personalities in sports to promote its sports policy and economic goals."
After the early death of Adidas' Horst Dassler in 1987, according to the documents, Jean-Marie Weber took over the job of "cultivating relationships." The Alsace native, who was working without a written employment contract and for whom, at the time of the ISMM bankruptcy, a "base annual salary" of 870,000 Swiss francs had been negotiated, became one of the most mysterious figures in the business of international sports. He was dubbed "the man with the black list" in the industry.
Weber emulated Dassler, his role model. He used Sports Holding AG as a hub for "all sorts of payments that were dangerous from a tax perspective." The investigators learned of this through an attorney who was familiar with the internal procedures."
Hmm... so Blatter's buddy has been sent up the river for embezzlement, and there's convincing testimony implicating Blatter himself from former FIFA finance director Urs Linsi and former FIFA general secretary Michel Zen-Ruffinen. Yet, this is barely drawing any attention in the press, and most of the articles that mention it just briefly talk about FIFA having to pay court costs, with no discussion of the damaging testimony or the implications of this whatsoever. We all know there's plenty of sports scandals, but in my mind, this is the most significant: even the Donaghy case [The Associated Press via The Globe and Mail] didn't directly implicate David Stern? Is it any surprise that Blatter's choosing this week to sound off about "modern slavery" [Matt Lawless, The Daily Telegraph], domestic player development and his ridiculous 6+5 rule [Goal.com ], Cristiano Ronaldo [Jack Bell, The New York Times], the Olympics [CBC Sports], and everything else? I see a smokescreen, and the sad thing is, it appears to be working: plenty of people are happy to report on Blatter's various verbal fumblings, but the deeper scandal is going without a lot of coverage.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Apocalypse Now, soccer style
"We must kill them. We must incinerate them. Pig after pig. Cow after cow. Village after village. Army after army. And they call me an assassin. What do you call it when the assassins accuse the assassin? They lie. They lie, and we have to be merciful, for those who lie. Those nabobs. I hate them. I do hate them."
- Marlon Brando as Colonel Walter E. Kurtz in Apocalypse Now (Photo from Michael Heilemann)
"The European Union is an economic and political power with 27 members and 30 (soccer) associations — 15 per cent of the total of the FIFA family. Shall they make the rules for all the others? This is political interference. We should not be afraid to intervene."
- FIFA president Joseph S. "Sepp" Blatter
What's the connection between one of Hollywood's most interesting characters and the world soccer El Supremo? It's not as far-fetched as you might think. One is a power-crazed maniac willing to do anything to accomplish his nefarious goals; the other was famously played by Marlon Brando.
If you're one of the five people who have never seen Apocalypse Now, I highly recommend it: it's one of my all-time favorite movies. The special edition I have is particularly cool, as it features both the original movie and the 2001 "Redux" edition and has some very interesting commentary by director Francis Ford Coppola. I was watching it again the other day, and was struck by some of the similarities to the current world soccer situation, where Sepp Blatter's about to get into a no-holds-barred fight with the European Union over his proposed "6+5" rule. Like Kurtz, Blatter seems willing to do absolutely anything to accomplish his end goals, even when those goals contravene laws.
Apocalypse Now interlude:
"He's out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond the pale of any acceptable human conduct. And he is still in the field commanding troops." - General Corman
The EU has made it absolutely clear that this proposal is blatantly illegal, and they've stopped behemoths before (just ask Bill Gates!). Consider these comments from EU spokesman John MacDonald (I assume he's no relation to McGlovin, McPrimeMinister, McPremier or McFootballer):
"'The 'six plus five rule' of FIFA is simply a rule that is based on grounds of nationality so that is incompatible with community law,' he told Sky Sports News.
'If they were to implement the 'six plus five rule' in Europe what would happen is any professional football player who feels aggrieved by the rule would be able to take the football club concerned to court and he would probably win the case.'"
That's a pretty firm stance, and the comments about anyone feeling aggrieved taking the club concerned to court should bring back enough Bosman memories to give any sane man room to ponder if he really wants to fight an extremely powerful multinational government that has shown before it isn't afraid to get involved in the business of football. MacDonald's comments were later further backed by the commissioner responsible for employment issues, who took an even stronger stance.
"'The European Commission is showing a red card to the 'six-plus-five' rule,' said European Commissioner for Employment and Social Affairs Vladimir Spidla.
'This would be direct discrimination on the basis of nationality, which is unacceptable. It's a non-starter.
'Professional football players are workers, therefore the principle of non-discrimination and the right to free movement apply to them.
'If EU member states allowed the application of the six-plus-five rule they would be in breach of EU law and players who are discriminated against could take the member states to court - and they would win.'"
Apocalypse Now interlude:
"You smell that? Do you smell that? Napalm, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that. I love the smell of napalm in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed, for twelve hours. When it was all over I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' dink body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like … victory." - Lieutenant-Colonel Bill Kilgore
At this point, most people would be bowing and scraping to the E.U. and sending them baskets of flowers and chocolate so that they might be allowed to escape with their hides. However, Blatter hasn't backed off one iota. From this Soccernet story:
"Blatter last week cleared the first major hurdle for his controversial rule when the FIFA congress voted 155-5 in favour of him pursuing the plan.
That vote in Sydney kept Blatter on a collision course with European lawmakers who say the rule, which would limit the number of foreign players who can start a match to five, would contravene its free movement of workers regulations.
Blatter, however, disagreed.
'I am sure it will be done... I am very confident about it,' he smiled after the vote. 'They are saying it is illegal. For what, for whom and when? And if there is a law ... you know a law can be amended or altered.'"
Doesn't that just sound slimy? You can picture Mr. Burns rubbing his fingers together while saying that. You think of a rogue soldier like Colonel Kurtz, doing whatever he deems necessary to achieve his end goals. If it's illegal, so what? I'm sure legalities don't mean all that much to someone who's already faced substantial allegations of corruption (I highly recommend Andrew Jennings' excellent book "Foul!" if you want more details).
Apocalypse Now interlude:
"Well, you see Willard... In this war, things get confused out there, power, ideals, the old morality, and practical military necessity. Out there with these natives it must be a temptation to be god. Because there's a conflict in every human heart between the rational and the irrational, between good and evil. The good does not always triumph. Sometimes the dark side overcomes what Lincoln called the better angels of our nature. Every man has got a breaking point. You and I have. Walter Kurtz has reached his. And very obviously, he has gone insane." - General Corman
The soccer version:
"Well, you see... in the murky world of international football, things get confused out there, power, ideals, money and practical political necessity. Out there, running one of the world's most powerful sporting organizations, it must be a temptation to be god. Because there's a conflict in every human heart, between the rational and the irrational, the idealistic and the pragmatic, the good of the game and the good of those running the game. The good of the game does not always triumph. Sometimes, the dark side of world finance and politics overcomes the better angels of our leaders' nature. Sometimes, the tremendous power they hold leads them to think they're above the law and can challenge the world's most powerful governments. Every man has got a breaking point. You and I have. Sepp Blatter has reached his. And very obviously, he has gone insane."
The biggest problems with this whole idea are that it isn't good for the game, it isn't good for the fans and it isn't good for the players. People can speak all they want about providing opportunities for local players, but the fact remains, those opportunities already exist. There currently aren't any leagues where the local players aren't good enough to compete. Consider England, often used as a case in point: except for Arsenal, I'm quite sure that every side regularly starts at least one English player (and Arsenal do as well from time to time). The Premier League attracts much of the best talent from around the world, but there are still plenty of local players in it. The situation in Italy, Spain and Germany is quite similar, except with even more local talent. If you listen to Blatter and his cronies, you'd think English players are being kept out of their own league, which simply isn't the case. The ones who are good enough to compete at that level have jobs: the ones who aren't have to go elsewhere.
When you start mandating a "6+5" rule, not only do you diminish opportunities for foreign players, you reduce the overall quality of the game and you spread the players far too thin. Do fans really want to see Didier Drogba and Solomon Kalou playing for some no-name team in the Ivory Coast league because English teams have used up their import quotas? They'd probably catch on somewhere, but this is the logical conclusion of these kind of rules. Is it good for the game to remove a creative foreigner like Patrice Evra solely on his country of origin and replace him with Nigel Walker from Brighton? My answers are no and no.
One thing that's helped with soccer's recent rise in popularity, especially in North America, is the prominence the English Premier League has gained. Fans want to see the best players in the world competing against each other on a more regular basis than just at the World Cup every four years. England doesn't have them all yet, but the English league is attracting more top-quality talent than ever, which in turn fuels massive TV revenues, which makes the clubs richer and allows them to buy even more expensive players. If you bring in 6+5 and reduce English soccer to a dull, plodding game with only a few top-level talents, say bye-bye to that popularity surge. This isn't intended as a slight on English players: their best players can compete with the best in the world and deserve the Premier League positions they have. Their middling talents, however, cannot compete with the best players in the world: that's why they are middle-of-the pack players. They're the ones who you'll see if 6+5 comes in, and they'll be responsible for the demise of entertaining top-level soccer as we know it.
Apocalypse Now interlude:
Jay "Chef" Hicks on Kurtz: "He's worse than crazy, he's evil!"
In my mind, this is a typical Blatter move, pandering to his support among African and Asian countries while hurting the Europeans (who voted for Lennart Johansson back in 1998). The thing is, though, it isn't even good for the players in those countries, as you're now taking away their chances to play on the big stages, gain valuable experience and earn a decent salary. It's also going to hurt those countries' national teams: competing against the best has a dramatic tendency to improve your own game, but their players won't be challenged if they're stuck in a crappy domestic league. The people it is good for are the elites running soccer in those countries. They don't care about the welfare of their players, and they probably aren't even too concerned with how their national teams do, but if their domestic leagues all of a sudden get an influx of stars who used to play in Europe but now have nowhere else to go, their revenues rise dramatically and their pockets get lined.
Apocalypse Now interlude:
Willard: They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?
Willard: I don't see any method at all, sir.
In the end, though, this is likely moot, as I can't see FIFA winning this if they go to court against the EU. Thus, it turns into another ill-advised publicity stunt by Blatter (remember the short shorts fiasco)? It's interesting that this comes at a time when the Swiss bribes trial (involving Blatter) is still going on. Blatter also managed to turn "6+5" into the big issue of the FIFA General Conference last weekend, nicely avoiding most of the discussions of the trial (the chair of the ethics committee, Lord Sebastian Coe, didn't even bother to turn up).
Perhaps the whole thing is merely an attention-grabbing ploy? In any case, we'll see if this comes to the ominous showdown I expect where Blatter finds out that he can't just follow Kurtz and act unilaterally, or if he decides to back off. Will the European judges have the guts to play Willard to Blatter's Kurtz? In any case, like Apocalypse Now, the journey just keeps getting more and more surreal.
P.S. Thanks to Mike for pointing me in the direction of the original Globe piece on this.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Sonics: Lies throughout history
November 17, 1973: "I have never profited, never profited from public service. I have earned every cent. And in all of my years of public life, I have never obstructed justice. And I think, too, that I can say that in my years of public life, that I welcome this kind of examination because people have got to know whether or not their President's a crook. Well, I'm not a crook. I've earned everything I've got." - Richard Nixon to a televised audience
June 23, 1972: "Of course, this is a, this is a hunt, you will-that will uncover a lot of things. You open that scab there's a hell of a lot of things and that we just feel that it would be very detrimental to have this thing go any further." - Richard Nixon to chief of staff H.R. Haldeman
January 26, 1998: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." - Bill Clinton to the White House Press Corps
August 17, 1998: "I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not appropriate. In fact, it was wrong. I misled people, including even my wife. I deeply regret that." - Bill Clinton to the nation
April 17, 2007: Tom Ward: "Is there any way to move here [Oklahoma City] for next season or are we doomed to have another lame duck season in Seattle?"
Clay Bennett: "I am a man possessed! Will do everything we can. Thanks for hanging with me boys, the game is getting started!"
Ward: "That's the spirit!! I am willing to help any way I can to watch ball here [in Oklahoma City] next year."
Aubrey McClendon: "Me too, thanks Clay!"
- E-mail exchange among Sonics owners
August 17, 2007: "As absolutely remarkable as it may seem, Aubrey and I have NEVER discussed moving the Sonics to Oklahoma City, nor have I discussed it with with ANY other members of our ownership group, I have been passionately committed to our process in Seattle, and have worked my ass off. The deal for me has NEVER changed: we will do all we can in the one year time frame (actually fifteen months) to affect the development of a successor venue to Key Arena, if we are unsuccessful at the end of the timeframe, October 31, 2007, we will then evaluate our options. I have never wavered and will not. Further I must say that when we bought the team I absolutely believed we would be successful in building a building." - Clayton Bennett to David Stern
A lie just doesn’t carry the same weight any more. Nixon? Damned to eternal public vilification, more because of his efforts to cover up crimes than what he actually did. Of course, being caught in a lie on tape played a major role. Clinton? Got off on a technicality, became a best-selling author, and is now a key spokesman for his wife’s presidential campaign. Bennett? Well, nothing’s happened to him yet, and the sordid tale of how he’s been lying through his teeth for the last several years didn’t even crack the front pages of the sports sections outside of Seattle. That doesn’t mean their crimes were equivalent, but it does seem to suggest that the value of the truth has gone down.
On the sporting side, consider Rafael Palmeiro, caught on tape wagging his finger at a congressional committee and insisting he’d never used steroids, less than five months before his positive test. What was his punishment for promising to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? An even better example is Blue Jays’ general manager J.P. Ricciardi, who told the media complete fabrications about an injury to B.J. Ryan last year, and then uttered the gem “They're not lies if we know the truth?” Surely, a high executive caught in such a sleazy act would have been demoted or forced to resign, right? Nope: as we speak, Ricciardi continues to slither his way through life as a major-league G.M. What about Sepp Blatter and his cronies, whose underhanded dealings journalist Andrew Jennings has done a great job of exposing?
There are countless other examples, but the point is made: there’s no public outrage over lies in sport any more. The same is true in the business world. In an Forbes article I read the other day, over half of the human-resources personnel interviewed said they'd caught someone lying on their resume. The same survey showed that 18 per cent of applicants were estimated to have lied. More shocking, though, was that seven per cent of the managers who caught lies still hired deceitful candidates. Lying's all over the place in the corporate world as well: just look at executives like Kenneth Lonchar of the ironically-named Veritas Software or RadioShack's Dave Edmondson.
Perhaps the largest reason for the devaluation of the lie is a widespread intense cynicism that doubts if anyone still tells the truth. The media itself has been frequently called into question, and on many occasions, it has been found wanting. Consider the cases of Jayson Blair of the New York Times, Stephen Glass of The New Republic, or Patricia Smith of the Boston Globe, who completely fabricated stories, people and quotes. They were eventually caught, but their outing perhaps caused some to wonder who can still be trusted.
It's been pointed out by eminent personalities such as Slate's Jack Shafer that the vast majority of journalists are telling the truth, but these kind of scandals cause people to wonder. There’s also pseudo-newspapers like the British tabloids or the American celebrity sheets that routinely print fabrications and exaggerations, reducing the trust quotient of the medium. Even serious papers, radio and television programs mess up frequently, further damaging the reputation of the press: check out Craig Silverman's terrific list of the best errors of last year for more examples. Thus, many people doubt what actually is true. As George Orwell cynically predicted, "The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history."
Another aspect may come from the promotion of the liars in popular culture. Frank Abagnale Jr. spent a lifetime lying, impersonating doctors, airline pilots and lawyers. His reward? Well, he wound up being played by Leonardo DiCaprio in Catch Me If You Can. Blair wound up writing a book about how he deceived the Times, and Glass' story was turned into the movie Shattered Glass (although it remains to be seen if having Hayden Christensen play you is a good thing). In light of these examples, it would seem more profitable to lie your way to the top than struggle to the middle by telling the truth. As Terry Pratchett wrote in his excellent novel The Truth, "A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on."
I don’t want to get dragged into nostalgically reminiscing about the morals of the good old days, as there were still plenty of liars back then too. I’m not crusading for greater morals in sports, either: athletes can have all the sex, (non-performance-enhancing) drugs and rock and roll they like in my books, and Dock Ellis is one of my heroes. However, truth goes beyond morality, and should be valued above it. Lying used to be a significant offence. Now, it’s as if no one’s interested in the truth, and people aren’t bothered to find out that someone’s been lying to them. I’m undoubtably biased, coming from a profession that still aims to seek truth, but it’s awfully disillusioning when you get the story, you catch them in the act, and nobody cares. That doesn't mean we should stop trying, though: as Orwell once said, "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
Hopefully, David Stern and the rest of the NBA will come to their senses before April 17’s meeting. If they've got any brains, they might realize that it isn’t a fantastic idea to have an owner in their exclusive club who’s been lying to them all along. In the best-case scenario, Bennett would be forced to sell the franchise to Ballmer and co. and slither back to the Oklahoma City grass where he belongs sans SuperSonics. We’ll have to see if repeatedly and blatantly deceiving your business partners still deserves punishment, or if that too is now part of the game.
June 23, 1972: "Of course, this is a, this is a hunt, you will-that will uncover a lot of things. You open that scab there's a hell of a lot of things and that we just feel that it would be very detrimental to have this thing go any further." - Richard Nixon to chief of staff H.R. Haldeman
January 26, 1998: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." - Bill Clinton to the White House Press Corps
August 17, 1998: "I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not appropriate. In fact, it was wrong. I misled people, including even my wife. I deeply regret that." - Bill Clinton to the nation
April 17, 2007: Tom Ward: "Is there any way to move here [Oklahoma City] for next season or are we doomed to have another lame duck season in Seattle?"
Clay Bennett: "I am a man possessed! Will do everything we can. Thanks for hanging with me boys, the game is getting started!"
Ward: "That's the spirit!! I am willing to help any way I can to watch ball here [in Oklahoma City] next year."
Aubrey McClendon: "Me too, thanks Clay!"
- E-mail exchange among Sonics owners
August 17, 2007: "As absolutely remarkable as it may seem, Aubrey and I have NEVER discussed moving the Sonics to Oklahoma City, nor have I discussed it with with ANY other members of our ownership group, I have been passionately committed to our process in Seattle, and have worked my ass off. The deal for me has NEVER changed: we will do all we can in the one year time frame (actually fifteen months) to affect the development of a successor venue to Key Arena, if we are unsuccessful at the end of the timeframe, October 31, 2007, we will then evaluate our options. I have never wavered and will not. Further I must say that when we bought the team I absolutely believed we would be successful in building a building." - Clayton Bennett to David Stern
A lie just doesn’t carry the same weight any more. Nixon? Damned to eternal public vilification, more because of his efforts to cover up crimes than what he actually did. Of course, being caught in a lie on tape played a major role. Clinton? Got off on a technicality, became a best-selling author, and is now a key spokesman for his wife’s presidential campaign. Bennett? Well, nothing’s happened to him yet, and the sordid tale of how he’s been lying through his teeth for the last several years didn’t even crack the front pages of the sports sections outside of Seattle. That doesn’t mean their crimes were equivalent, but it does seem to suggest that the value of the truth has gone down.
On the sporting side, consider Rafael Palmeiro, caught on tape wagging his finger at a congressional committee and insisting he’d never used steroids, less than five months before his positive test. What was his punishment for promising to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? An even better example is Blue Jays’ general manager J.P. Ricciardi, who told the media complete fabrications about an injury to B.J. Ryan last year, and then uttered the gem “They're not lies if we know the truth?” Surely, a high executive caught in such a sleazy act would have been demoted or forced to resign, right? Nope: as we speak, Ricciardi continues to slither his way through life as a major-league G.M. What about Sepp Blatter and his cronies, whose underhanded dealings journalist Andrew Jennings has done a great job of exposing?
There are countless other examples, but the point is made: there’s no public outrage over lies in sport any more. The same is true in the business world. In an Forbes article I read the other day, over half of the human-resources personnel interviewed said they'd caught someone lying on their resume. The same survey showed that 18 per cent of applicants were estimated to have lied. More shocking, though, was that seven per cent of the managers who caught lies still hired deceitful candidates. Lying's all over the place in the corporate world as well: just look at executives like Kenneth Lonchar of the ironically-named Veritas Software or RadioShack's Dave Edmondson.
Perhaps the largest reason for the devaluation of the lie is a widespread intense cynicism that doubts if anyone still tells the truth. The media itself has been frequently called into question, and on many occasions, it has been found wanting. Consider the cases of Jayson Blair of the New York Times, Stephen Glass of The New Republic, or Patricia Smith of the Boston Globe, who completely fabricated stories, people and quotes. They were eventually caught, but their outing perhaps caused some to wonder who can still be trusted.
It's been pointed out by eminent personalities such as Slate's Jack Shafer that the vast majority of journalists are telling the truth, but these kind of scandals cause people to wonder. There’s also pseudo-newspapers like the British tabloids or the American celebrity sheets that routinely print fabrications and exaggerations, reducing the trust quotient of the medium. Even serious papers, radio and television programs mess up frequently, further damaging the reputation of the press: check out Craig Silverman's terrific list of the best errors of last year for more examples. Thus, many people doubt what actually is true. As George Orwell cynically predicted, "The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history."
Another aspect may come from the promotion of the liars in popular culture. Frank Abagnale Jr. spent a lifetime lying, impersonating doctors, airline pilots and lawyers. His reward? Well, he wound up being played by Leonardo DiCaprio in Catch Me If You Can. Blair wound up writing a book about how he deceived the Times, and Glass' story was turned into the movie Shattered Glass (although it remains to be seen if having Hayden Christensen play you is a good thing). In light of these examples, it would seem more profitable to lie your way to the top than struggle to the middle by telling the truth. As Terry Pratchett wrote in his excellent novel The Truth, "A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on."
I don’t want to get dragged into nostalgically reminiscing about the morals of the good old days, as there were still plenty of liars back then too. I’m not crusading for greater morals in sports, either: athletes can have all the sex, (non-performance-enhancing) drugs and rock and roll they like in my books, and Dock Ellis is one of my heroes. However, truth goes beyond morality, and should be valued above it. Lying used to be a significant offence. Now, it’s as if no one’s interested in the truth, and people aren’t bothered to find out that someone’s been lying to them. I’m undoubtably biased, coming from a profession that still aims to seek truth, but it’s awfully disillusioning when you get the story, you catch them in the act, and nobody cares. That doesn't mean we should stop trying, though: as Orwell once said, "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
Hopefully, David Stern and the rest of the NBA will come to their senses before April 17’s meeting. If they've got any brains, they might realize that it isn’t a fantastic idea to have an owner in their exclusive club who’s been lying to them all along. In the best-case scenario, Bennett would be forced to sell the franchise to Ballmer and co. and slither back to the Oklahoma City grass where he belongs sans SuperSonics. We’ll have to see if repeatedly and blatantly deceiving your business partners still deserves punishment, or if that too is now part of the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
