Sport stars should be protected by the media just like any other person. Sport stars have not chosen nor seek the lime light such as Paris Hilton. Like many ethical issues that arise in the media there should be a boundary that the media can not cross in regards to an athlete’s personal life. If a sport star has repeatedly committed inappropriate acts and gotten away with them because of his celebrity status then the media does have a right to publicise these events. However, editors and journalists shouldn’t be able to make a athletes life or personal trouble in relation to their marriage, family or social life front line news. I feel that the only time that the media shouldn’t protect sport stars are when they have repeatedly offended and are involved in criminal activities not who they are seen leaving the bathroom with.
“They have not chosen like movie stars to become famous…”
On the front page of the Daily Telegraph on May 11th 2007 the picture and main story on the front page was not Labor’s reforms for schools but former Australian Basketball player Trish Fallon taking an AVO on her former husband with a picture of her and her child on the front. What right does the public have to knowing that a former Opal is taking out an AVO out on her husband? During a very traumatic time it would be far better for Trish Fallon and her daughter and the family to have not had these troubles broadcasted on the front page of the paper. In this case the editor should have protected the former athlete and respected her families privacy.
“He and Fallon, 34, have a nine year old daughter Tashia. The couple separated a long time ago after a long relationship” (Daily Telegraph on May 11th 2007)
Another example of the Daily Telegraph and the Sydney Confidential crossing the boundaries instead of protecting an athlete was the “Sonny Loo” incident. Sonny Bill is only twenty three years of age and was public hung by this paper because of a frolic he had with another athlete Candice Falson. Photos where published on the Daily Telegraph website of Sonny Bill in the bathroom with Falson which, is surely a breach of privacy. The story ran for over a week and was front page headlines during the height of this saga and yet it was a nothing story. The story put Sonny Bill relationship with his girl friend in jeopardy and lost Candice Falson a number of sponsor ship endorsements. In situations of relationships and ones personal life athletes should be granted some protection by the media. Why is it the publics right to know that Trish Fallon has taken out an AVO against her former husband or that Sonny Bill and Falson got together on the weekend.
On the other hand there are some cases where athletes such as Wes Naiqama, Wendell Sailor and Ben Cousins where the media shouldn’t protect them. These athletes do not deserve to be protected by the media but do deserve in some instances some leniency from the media. All three men have found themselves in trouble with the law on a number of occasions. Naiqama has had his license suspended until 2013, caught three times drinking driving and will serve a twelve month detention sentence in Parramatta jail, Sailor numerous alcohol and off field incidents and Cousins has many numerous off field incidents. For these matters I believe that the media has the right to inform the public of what types of people these men are. There are no excuses for criminal activities and in this case the media are allowed to do publish their indiscretions.
Another prime example of this would also be the recent Todd Carney incident. The media should be able to criticise him and the Canberra Raiders because of his repeated indiscretions and the clubs inability to act upon his indiscretions. It is these types of cases that I believe are the only real times that the media should be able to publish and not protect the athlete. In an article by Josh Massoud a Rugby League columnist for the Daily Telegraph he wrote on May 30th 2007 the double standards of the Canberra Raiders football club and the indiscretions of Todd Carney. In this case I felt that Massoud in his article “Double Standard, NRL concerned over Raiders discipline” was justified. During the course of the article he questioned the Raiders and heavily criticised Carney for constantly jeopardising peoples lives by drinking and driving.
“Irwin’s future remains in limbo, despite the fact, unlike Carney, he has not been charged by Police” (The Daily Telegraph, May 30th 2007)
However, shifting back to a degree the media should protect the athlete. As mentioned before Cousins has been involved in numerous incidents such as been involved with under world figures and a shooting, evades a booze bus and repeated drunken offences. However the media should have acted responsible during the recent Cousins scandal involving drugs. Cousins and his family after being placed on the front page of every newspaper in the country for two weeks should have had some protection by the media. It became apparent that Cousins suffers a drug addiction to ice, how does hanging him in the public eye help his problem. The Daily Telegraph on Marc 21st 2007 had on the front page “DRUGS, BOOZE, PARTIES, Fallen Eagle… will West Coast superstar Ben Cousins ever play football again?” In the press conference by the West Coast Eagles chairman Dalton Gooding he stated that Cousins had “private and personal issues” The key words there are private and personal issues which do not mean that the Australian public deserves to know all the problems that face Cousins during this period. For his past offences he was deserved of the media circus but being hounded by the media every where you go during an extremely tough stage of ones life does not help.
“We’ll work closely with Ben and his family to help him overcome these private and personal issues” Dalton Gooding ( The Daily Telegraph, Wednesday March 21st 2007)
Just like the Chris Walker case, he to who clearly and has admitted to an alcohol abuse problem yet the media felt that it was there right to publish his problems all over the six o’clock news. His family and close friends at the time asked for some respect and privacy during this time because they where afraid that he may harm himself because he was unable to handle the scrutiny and pressure that was placed upon him by the media.
In conclusion, I believe that the media should protect athletes to a certain extent because it crosses ethical boundaries and invades ones privacy. The media in cases of relationships, marriage and personal issues the media should restrain from public broadcasting these athletes private lives who are everyday people too. There are only some instances where I believe the public and the media should not protect the athlete and that is when the athlete has committed a criminal act such as drink driving or abusing someone.
Highs and lows for role models - Opinion - smh.com.au
