Intersection of Sports and Ethics Remains a Busy Place
Jan 22nd, 2008 • Posted in: NewsWeek’s news features controversies over steroid use and racially charged remarks in a golf match
WASHINGTON and NEW YORK
Sports again captured headlines last week, with careers and credibility on the line in a number of cases. Among the stories:
- Baseball pitcher Roger Clemens says he will meet with congressional investigators this week to discuss a report that linked him to the use of performance-enhancing drugs. Bloomberg reports that Clemens will be asked to submit to a deposition or a transcribed interview. Clemens was named in a December report from former U.S. senator George Mitchell linking more than 80 players to illegal substances.
- A former All-Pro defensive lineman for the San Francisco 49ers pleaded guilty last week to lying to a federal agent about his use of performance-enhancing drugs. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Dana Stubblefield will be sentenced on April 25. While lying to a federal agent can carry a five-year prison term, defendants who, like Stubblefield, have no criminal record generally receive six months or less.
- A conflict over racially charged remarks in a golf match escalated last week as GolfWeek Magazine replaced the editor who illustrated the cover of the magazine with a noose. The magazine was covering a previous incident in which a golf commentator joked that the only way competitors could surpass champion Tiger Woods is to “lynch him in a back alley.” The magazine illustrated the story about the comment with a stark picture of a hangman’s noose against a purple background. “We apologize for creating this graphic cover that received extreme negative reaction from consumers, subscribers, and advertisers across the country,” said William Kupper, Jr., the head of the company that publishes GolfWeek. “We were trying to convey the controversial issues with a strong and provocative graphic image. It is now obvious that the overall reaction to our cover deeply offended many people.”
- Intelligence Squared, an organization that holds Oxford-style debates, usually about subjects like global warming, last week staged a debate about the role of performance-enhancing drugs in sports. The Associated Press reports that debaters supporting the use of the substances argued that permitting them would result in development of safe, regulated drugs, and that elite athletes take many risks and using drugs is no different. Pro-use debaters also contended that the use of human growth hormone to recover more quickly from an injury is ethically no different that an actor, who makes a living from his body, using Botox or liposuction. But opponents, according to the AP report, argued that athletes make a contract with their competitors and audience to compete fairly. They also posited that use of the substances by athletes would cause drugs to filter to youth. After the debate, which was moderated by Bob Costas, the number of polled audience members who were willing to say that performance-enhancing drugs should be permitted doubled. Still, 59 percent of the audience concluded that performance-enhancing drugs should be banned.
Sources: Bloomberg, Jan. 19 — San Francisco Chronicle, Jan. 19 — USA Today, Jan. 18 — AP, Jan. 16.
For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Dec. 17, 2007 — Related Newsline Commentary, Dec. 17, 2007 — Related Newsline story, Nov. 26, 2007 — Related Newsline story, Nov. 19, 2007 — Related Newsline story, Feb. 22, 2005 — IntelligenceSquared, link to debate transcript.
Print This Story
Email This Story
[...] more information, see: Related Newsline story, Jan. 22 — Related Newsline story, Dec. 17, 2007 — Related Newsline story, Nov. [...]