Category Archives: Beyond

Beyond

PGA/LIV Golf Partnership Creates Huge Divot in Fairy Tale of Sport

Leave a comment

For centuries, cultures around the world have used fairy tales to communicate various cultural norms in an attempt to pit good versus evil in their storytelling.

In Medieval times, morality plays sought to tell stories that dealt with the very battle for one’s soul.

I thought of fairy tales and morality plays when I read that two feuding professional golf organizations had agreed to combine their operations.  Two sports leagues merging is certainly nothing new. The National Football League (N.F.L.) is the result of a merger between two smaller leagues.

Still, the merger of the PGA and LIV Golf is bigger than just two competing leagues combining forces.

According to published reports, the new merged golf league will be funded exclusively by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund. This continues a trend by Saudi Arabia of sportswashing as a means to cleanse their image and launder their reputation through investment in various athletic events, teams and leagues.

The new golf partnership gets more slippery than a sand trap when one remembers that PGA commissioner Jay Monahan noted when asked in June 2022 about the Saudi kingdom’s ties to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack that, “I have two families that are close to me that lost loved ones. My heart goes out to them and I would ask that any player that has left, or that would ever consider leaving, have you ever had to apologize for being a member of the PGA Tour?”

It has been said that there is a prize at which anyone’s principles can be bought. It appears that the price at which the PGA principles could be bought was just paid by an entity tied to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Graphic R. Anderson

What a difference a year makes.

While PGA leadership seemed to have no issues with the old take the money and run approach, by trading in their principles faster than someone seeking free room and board with someone that they have philosophical differences with, it was reported that Tiger Woods turned down $700-800 million to play in LIV last year.

I certainly have not agreed with everything that Tiger has done in his life, but I certainly respect his stance in this regard.

It will be interesting to see if that stance remains now that the Saudi kingdom is basically signing the checks for Tiger and all of the other players in professional golf.

There is no reason to think that Saudi Arabia will stop their attempts of image repair at the 18th hole.

In addition to rumors that they want to buy World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), it is completely plausible to think that the kingdom could set their sights on buying one or more franchises in the MLS, NBA, NFL, MLB, or NHL.

I could rattle off fact after fact about all of the reasons that selling sports assets, or any other assets to foreign powers is a bad idea

I could also list the various reasons why Saudi Arabia is not really the best country to be doing business with.

Instead, I have written a fairy tale of my own about the risk of compromising one’s principles and selling off sport assets to the highest bidder.

Once upon a time, there was a far away kingdom that was built upon sand. Underneath the sand, flowed a magic black goo that the rest of the world coveted.

Although this black goo was harmful to the planet, and other options existed to ween the world off of the goo, much like a cowboy on a mountain, the world did not know how to quit the black goo.

The kingdom knew the power they possessed. They wielded great might over the price of the black goo throughout the rest of the world by limiting how much of their goo they made available at any given time.

Much of the world was so dependent on the kingdom’s black goo that they turned a blind eye to many of the activities that occurred within the kingdom walls.

They would say, “while we certainly would not do things like that here, who are we to judge what other’s do behind their kingdom walls? Besides, if we do not buy their goo they will just sell it to someone else.”

The kingdom made so much money from selling their black goo that they did not know what to do.

One day, a man in the kingdom thought, “why don’t we use our black goo money to buy other things that the world is addicted to?”

For the kingdom knew that someday the world might decide they no longer wanted their black goo.

Therefore, the kingdom thought, we will use our money to buy prestige and respect in the world of sport in an effort to be someone others will admire and support.

And so it was that the kingdom started to acquire race horses and race cars and entire leagues of athletes with their black goo money.

There were quiet whispers from the rest of the world stating, “but we should not support this kingdom, they do not share our values.”

Still, those whispers went unheeded as many people were blinded by the shear magnitude of the amount of money the kingdom was willing to spend on their sport assets.

Even organizations that once shouted loudly from the clubhouse of the atrocities of the kingdom were won over by the vast amount of money the kingdom was willing to pay for their principles.

For you see, as long as the world remains dependent on the black goo that flows under kingdoms built on sand, few will be willing to take a morale stand.

To be fair, the issues in professional and collegiate sport run far deeper than whether or not assets are sold to Saudi Arabia.

The golf merger is just the latest example of how the world of sport is changing, and not for the better.

In addition to rumors that they want to buy World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), it is completely plausible to think that the kingdom could set their sights on buying one or more franchises in the MLS, NBA, NFL, MLB, or NHL.
Photo R. Anderson

In the same way that a theology student might unexpectedly become an atheist after getting disenchanted with what they learned at their seminary, I became more and more disheartened with the world of professional sport the deeper I got into my Sport Management master’s program.

I have spent a large portion of my career working in various capacities within the sports world.

For the most part, I enjoyed each of those experiences.

However, in the last few years I have noticed a rapid change in the way the sport industry operates.

The ideals of fair play and competition are rapidly giving way to greed and corruption at all levels of sport with no signs of stopping any time soon.

While the professional golf merger can be described as a cash grab way for the rich to get richer, it is certainly not the only example of sports leagues choosing profits over principles.

One need only look at how professional sports leagues went all in on embracing sports books and gambling to see how they are willing to monetize all areas of their business despite the optics.

As I noted in a column earlier this year, entire leagues are being created as mere television product giving little thought to building actual support from fans with the community.

In other leagues where fans are a factor, ticket prices are often inflated to the point that the average fan cannot afford to go see their team in person even if they wanted to.

In the current climate, there is every reason to believe that Saudi Arabia will seek to gain a larger foothold in American sports. There is also every reason to believe that if they do come calling, they, and their cargo planes full of money, will be welcomed with open arms.

Like someone believing all fairy tales have happy endings, perhaps it was naïve of me to cling to the ideals of sport bringing out the best in society.

Sport, like the rest of the society seems poised to continue to move towards a place where greed is good and only a small percentage get to live happily ever after.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have the sudden urge to read some Brothers Grimm.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

Late Arriving Memorial Day Gives Extra Time to Reflect

Leave a comment

Next Monday, May 29, 2023, is Memorial Day. I say that with confidence after checking a calendar to confirm my suspicions. Normally, I would have no trouble at all remembering that the last Monday of May is set aside as a day of remembrance, and a time to honor the men and women who died while serving in the United States Armed Forces.

However, this year, thanks to May having five Mondays, Memorial Day is arriving later than normal. Formerly known as Decoration Day, Memorial Day originated after the United States Civil War to honor soldiers on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line who lost their lives in battle.

The Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum was commissioned in 1921 as a memorial to veterans of World War I.
Photo R. Anderson

As I have noted in the past, for me, the highlight of the extended Memorial Day weekend usually is, as the announcer used to say, “Sunday, Sunday Sunday.”

I would awake before the sun to catch the Monaco Grand Prix, and then switch over to the Indianapolis 500 before ending my day of nonstop auto racing with the Coca Cola 600.

The times that I was not watching racing, I could catch numerous baseball games from coast to coast. Sure, I knew that there was a solemn reason behind Memorial Day, and I have always respected the troops, but the need to truly sit still and quietly thank them seemed like an afterthought, especially when the world of sports was offering so many of the best of the best events.

Whether it is because I had an extra week to think about it, or because my priorities have changed, I find myself not really that excited about the prospect of wall to wall racing this Sunday.

Instead, I find myself for the first time in years really focusing on the message behind Memorial Day, while also being truly worried about the direction that the country is headed in. When trying to find a reason why I feel this way as Memorial Day approaches, my thoughts kept turning to a trip I took to Washington D.C. at the beginning of the month.

I was born outside of Washington D.C., but had not been back there for decades. When I lived there, I was constantly reminded of the various monuments and memorials to the various people and groups who paid the ultimate sacrifice in defense of the American experiment in Democracy.

In Washington D.C., there are over 130 memorials honoring everything from the founding fathers, to fallen soldiers. The myriad monuments help ensure that the sacrifices of those who have come before us are always remembered.

Back when I would visit Washington on school field trips, seeing the various signs of democracy that so many have fought to protect, always made me feel a little bit more American

While the concentration of memorials in D.C. works out to roughly one memorial every two miles, there are memorials spread throughout the world honoring sacrifice of all shapes and sizes.

As a younger version of myself living outside of the Nation’s Capital, it was easy to think that America was as strong, if not stronger, than the various marble monuments that stood guard over the National Mall.

In reality though, the American experiment in Democracy really comes down to a quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin by Maryland Constitutional Convention delegate and founding father James McHenry who quoted Franklin as replying to a question about whether America was a republic or a monarchy by saying that it was a republic, “if you can keep it.”

What had seemed like a throwaway statement when studying American history in school, now rings even more ominously as a cautionary warning that the American ideals that were fought for over 200 hundred years ago, are not guaranteed for 200 more years, or even 200 days.
Just this week, individuals were sentenced to prison for engaging in seditious conspiracy during an attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021. Photo R. Anderson

What had seemed like a throwaway statement when studying American history in school, now rings even more ominously as a cautionary warning that the American ideals that were fought for over 200 hundred years ago, are not guaranteed for 200 more years, or even 200 days.

Just this week, individuals were sentenced to prison for engaging in seditious conspiracy during an attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.

In past challenges that are remembered on Memorial Day, like World War II, citizens rallied to do all they could to defeat the common enemy, versus attacking the various symbols of democracy. My grandmother built battleships in Georgia, and my grandfather fought at Pearl Harbor, among other battle sites. My grandparents, and millions of other people’s grandparents, parents, brothers and sisters have done similar things when called to duty.

Memorial Day reminds us that Americans owe their freedom to the sacrifice made by countless individuals who came before us, and to the people who are currently serving in the armed forces. The sacrifice of those who came before us who we remember on Memorial Day made us who we are.

Instead of focusing on that aspect of Memorial Day, we find ourselves with a battle between the Executive and Legislative branches of government battling over whether to pay the nation’s debt, and a football coach turned senator holding up military promotions on political grounds.

These are just two examples of the rampant division that is infecting America and threatening not only people’s financial health, but also the very health of the nation itself.

As was the case during the Covid-19 pandemic, there were voices who said that sports were the great distraction that people needed to forget about their troubles.

Sports have been a large part of my career in various capacities. But at some point, people need to stop being distracted by shiny things and start demanding action.

When Sunday rolls around, I may yet revert to old habits and watch some racing on television.

However, hard deadlines that will potentially shape the lives of everyone person in the world will start to arrive shortly after Memorial Day.

Those same soldiers that we honor on Monday may soon have their paychecks delayed if Congress cannot reach an agreement on raising the debt ceiling.

I try to remain optimistic that grown ups will emerge in Washington D.C. to avert a catastrophic financial meltdown caused by two sides failing to put aside petty differences and remember that there are real world consequences to their political gamesmanship.

A lot has happened in Washington D.C. in the decades since I was last there. Some of the monuments and sights that I had treasured in my youth have been sullied somewhat by the actions of extremists and wannabe dictators. Yet, for now, the monuments and the democracy still stand. Photo R. Anderson

A lot has happened in D.C. in the decades since I was last there. Some of the monuments and sights that I had treasured in my youth have been sullied somewhat by the actions of extremists and wannabe dictators.

Yet, for now, the monuments and the democracy still stand.

I am glad that I got to return to Washington D.C. and I still want to believe in what the monuments represent.

However, Washington does not exist in a bubble. Actions and inactions have consequences.

Sadly, red lines that once seemed uncrossable are now used as political pawns by extremists on both sides of the political spectrum.

Memorial Day stands as a reminder to the best of us.

Unfortunately, that message seems to be falling flat among many of the rest of us.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have some quiet reflection to get to.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Ballparks, Beyond

NFL Bans Players for Gambling Despite Taking Millions of Dollars from Sports Books

Leave a comment

The National Football League (NFL) recently banned five players for betting on sporting events.

Receiver Quintez Cephus and safety C.J. Moore of the Detroit Lions and defensive-end Shaka Toney of the Washington Commanders were suspended for the 2023 season for betting on NFL games, while Lions receivers Stanley Berryhill and Jameson Williams were suspended for six games each.

Despite the NFL bringing in millions of dollars in revenue from partnerships with gambling entities, it is still against the rules for player to bet on football games.

Merriam Webster defines hypocrisy as a, “behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel.”

Using that definition, one could make a strong case that the NFL punishing players for conduct that they encourage their fans to engage in is the epitome of hypocrisy.

However, a closer look reveals that the players were suspended for breaking a rule under the collective bargaining agreement between players, teams and league.

Despite all NFL employees being prohibited from entering or using any sportsbook during the season, the Washington Commanders opened the first in-stadium sportsbook in January, the Arizona Cardinals and the New York Giants and Jets have sportsbooks outside their venues.

Despite all NFL employees being prohibited from entering or using any sportsbook during the season, the Washington Commanders opened the first in-stadium sportsbook in January, the Arizona Cardinals and the New York Giants and Jets have sportsbooks outside their venues.
Graphic R. Anderson

That is a nice way to say that the NFL can have their cake and parlay, too, by saying that the players knew the rules and fans are not under the same restrictions.

Sports betting has always been a part of the game.

Some of my earliest memories of watching football involve Brent Musburger and Jimmy “the Greek” Synder talking about point spreads and predicting winners of games using coded language on the NFL Today pregame show on CBS.

While sports and gambling always had a connection of some sort, the floodgates of the rise in sports betting opened wide in 2018 when the United States Supreme Court voted 6-3 in the case Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association to strike down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, a 1992 law that forbade state-authorized sports gambling everywhere other than Nevada.

At the time of the ruling, all four major U.S. professional sports leagues, the NCAA and the federal government had urged the court to uphold the federal law and rule against New Jersey governor Phillip D. Murphy.

In the years that followed the Supreme Court decision, those same leagues went from opposing sports betting to embracing it. In fact, sports betting became mainstream to the point that now there are professional sports teams in Las Vegas, and official Sports Book sponsors in multiple leagues.

What was once only whispered in the shadows came out into the sunshine and spread like a kudzu vine choking out everything in its path.

Personally, betting on sports has never appealed to me. Throughout my career as a collegiate Sports Information Director, sports reporter and editor, I avoided any actions that could seem to be ethically questionable. That included betting on teams I covered, or really any sports for that matter.

That is the stand that worked for me. It is similar to the stand that the NFL and other leagues have for their employees.

I know some people who held similar positions to me take a more relaxed view of the issue of sports betting.

One of the first newspaper groups I worked for in Houston had an annual Christmas party at a local Greyhound racing track. I thought that it was an interesting choice of venue for a newspaper group.

A few years later, while working for a different newspaper, I was sent to do a feature on that same greyhound track because as my editor said, “they are a big advertiser and we like to keep them happy.” In fact, every night I had to dedicated a large about of space in the sports section for the results from the track.

I mention all of this to say that media groups and sports leagues have long been embedded with various forms of sports wagering. As more and more sports betting became legal, more and more embraces between leagues and sports books were made.

There is a huge difference between greyhound racing and the NFL when it comes to participants and betting.

The greyhounds did not know that people were making and losing money based on their performance. In many cases, the greyhounds were just doing what they were trained to do by going around in circles chasing the mechanical rabbit around the track in a counter clockwise motion.

On the other hand, NFL players, and other professional and collegiate athletes know about the millions, if not billions, of dollars that are being wagered on the fruits of their labors.

To be fair, I do not think that athletes should be betting on games that they are playing in. The Black Sox Scandal and the Pete Rose suspension were justified to prevent players and managers from throwing games for financial benefit.

Teams throwing games for better draft picks is an entirely different issue and a column for another day.

There is no easy answer for what to do with sports betting and athletes.

The future of sports betting, as well as player compensation, were topics that came up quite often while I was working on my Masters in Sport Management. In fact, I studied the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act in both my academic and professional career.

Leagues are going to continue to gladly accept the revenue that comes from sports betting advertisements with the really small print about how gambling is addictive, etc.

At the same time, athletes are going to continue to test the limits of how much betting they can do on the sports they play in to get a share of the millions, if not billions, of dollars changing hands every sports weekend.

Speaking of million-dollar bets, there is a Houston area business man who is famous for bankrolling promotions at his store with large bets that he makes in Louisiana.

This individual was asked what he thought about the growing movements to legalize sports betting in Texas.

His response was that legalizing betting by phone would bolster gambling addiction, and that his two-hour drives to Louisiana to place bets “limits impulses by a factor of 1,000.”

When those comments first came out, many people called the aforementioned businessman a hypocrite based on the appearance that he saw nothing wrong with him traveling to place bets, but felt that the people of Texas would not have the same control if betting become legal in the Lone Star State.

Online sports betting is now legal and active in 36 states across the country. Massachusetts, Maine and Nebraska are all expected to join the legalized sports betting states in the coming months.

California, and Florida are amongst the states where it’s not yet legal to place an online bet. Texas is one of seven states, along with Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma and South Carolina, with bills or ballot initiatives to legalize sports betting.

With so much momentum moving towards legalized sports betting from sea to shining sea, it is likely that soon the professional sports leagues will be even more in bed with online gaming sites.

Municipalities will claim that they will earn money from taxing gambling operations, and sports leagues will continue to say that embedding their content with online gambling gives a more well-rounded experience to fans.

Time will tell if their actions remain such that they can be called hypocrites, or if they will make it easier for players to get a slice of the pie.

Meanwhile, five football players may never take another snap in a league that makes billions of dollars for their fans and themselves off of the efforts of their players.

Suddenly, it sounds a little better to just be a greyhound focusing on the rabbit unaware of everything that is going on around them

Now if you’ll excuse me, all of this talk about sports betting has given me a bit of a headache.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

XFL and USFL are About to Duel for Fans

Leave a comment

This weekend, for the first time since early 2020, two spring football leagues will be competing at the same time as the USFL joins the XFL in a battle for viewers and fans in the great quest to fill those football free months between the end of the Super Bowl and the beginning of NFL training camps.

The experiment in 2020 regarding whether two spring leagues can survive between the XFL and the Alliance of American Football was cut short due to financial troubles with the AAF and a cancelled XFL season due to COVID-19.

The XFL returned to the gridiron this year under new ownership and his entering the final stretch of their season. The United States Football League, aka the USFL, is set to return for season two since arising like a phoenix from the ashes in 2021.

For the first time since early 2020, two spring football leagues will be competing at the same time as the USFL joins the XFL in a battle for viewers and fans in the great quest to fill those football free months between the end of the Super Bowl and the beginning of NFL training camps.
Graphic R. Anderson

While there will be two leagues for the next couple of weeks, the approach between them could not be more different.

The XFL returned for its third iteration following a sale of the league from Vince McMahon of World Wrestling Entertainment owning fame, to an ownership consortium that includes Dwayne “can you smell what the Rock is cooking” Johnson fame.

The third version of the XFL has already lasted longer than version two in 2020 and seems to be on strong footing despite lackluster attendance and television ratings.

For someone used to watching football on television, it can be a bit of a shock to see near empty football stadiums during a time without the COVID-19 limitations that forced games to be played fan free for two years.

Nearly empty stadiums were something that also plagued the USFL during their reboot season last year.

For those unfamiliar with the USFL, it was a spring football league that played for three seasons from 1983 through 1985. Some notable USFL players who later joined the NFL include Jim Kelly, Doug Flutie, Steve Young and Hershel Walker.

Ultimately, like the myriad spring football leagues that followed, the USFL went the way of the dinosaurs and became extinct. With the number of failed leagues trying to come back to life lately perhaps one should say the USFL is trying to atone for its Icarus style hubris of flying too close to the sun during its initial three season run.

I will not get into the inner workings of why the USFL failed during their initial late 20th Century incarnation. Numerous books and documentaries cover that subject in grave detail. However, for those wanting to get down in the weeds on why the league failed, I do recommend the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary “Small Potatoes: Who Killed the USFL?”

Spoiler alert, the answer to the question of who killed the USFL may surprise some, and seem completely on brand to others.

While the original USFL included individual owners for each of their franchises, the current version of the USFL is owned in part by Fox Sports, which will share broadcasting rights with NBC. The XFL games are televised on ABC, ESPN and FX.

As I noted in a column last year when the return of the USFL was first announced, the rising symbiosis between leagues and broadcast partners is a troubling trend that is certainly column subject for another day.

Suffice to say, as a classically trained sports journalist, as well as someone with a Masters degree in Sport Management, I am deeply troubled by the trend of mergers and blending of networks and leagues.

I am equally troubled by the way that sports leagues have gone from acknowledging sports betting with a nudge, nudge, wink, wink, to fully embracing it by including live betting lines on their broadcasts.

I have nothing against someone wanting to bet on sports. I just trhink it sets a bad example when players can be banned for life if they bet on their games, but fans are free to bet until their hearts content.

Turning professional sports leagues into glorified Jai Lai and dog racing is bad optics from my point of view. Then again, that is another column for another day.

It goes back to the age-old journalism school question of whether sports events are news or entertainment. Based on the number of leagues jumping into bed with gambling interests, I would say sports are sliding into the easy to manipulate realm of entertainment programming which could very well soil the sanctity of the game.

Further proof of the football as mere television commodity model is the fact that despite recycling the cities and team nicknames from the USFL of old, for the second straight year, the USFL will not play games in the host cities. Instead, all USFL games will be played in the hub cities of Detroit, Canton, Memphis and Birmingham.

Currently, Houston, TX is the only city with a team in both the XFL and USFL. However, someone wanting to catch a Houston Gamblers game would need to travel to one of the USFL’s four hub cities to see their “home” team play a home game. Fans of the XFL’s Houston Roughnecks can actually see the team play in Houston.
Graphic R. Anderson

Currently, Houston, TX is the only city with a team in both the XFL and USFL.

Someone wanting to catch a Houston Gamblers game would need to travel to one of the USFL’s four hub cities to see their “home” team play a home game.

Fans of the XFL’s Houston Roughnecks can actually see the team play in Houston.

The XFL realized that home field advantage and leaning into a fan base is a smart business model.

Given the chance to actually see a game in your own town, versus watching them from afar is definitely likely to earn more fans for the Roughnecks than the Gamblers.

The USFL is gambling that enough people will attend the games in the hub cities to make it look good on TV without actually caring if the people in the stands have any connection to the towns the teams claim to represent.

I am no stranger to spring football leagues. One of the first sports articles I ever wrote was about the arrival of the World League of American Football (WLAF).

My article focused on the Orlando Thunder and the excitement that the City Beautiful was getting another chance to be a professional football town.

I have gone down this road many times and it never ends well. One of the first sports articles I ever wrote for my high school newspaper was about the arrival of the World League of American Football (WLAF). My article focused on the Orlando Thunder and the excitement that the City Beautiful was getting another chance to be a professional football town. The excitement lasted all of two seasons as the WLAF became NFL Europe and the Thunder and the other domestic teams ceased operations.
Photo R. Anderson

The excitement lasted all of two seasons as the WLAF became NFL Europe and the Thunder and the other domestic teams ceased operations.

A fun fact tying the WLAF to the USFL was that Lee Corso was the Orlando Thunder’s general manager after coaching the Orlando Renegades of the USFL.

Leagues will always say that they learned from the mistakes of others as they climb over the smoldering remains of all of the spring leagues that came before them. In this way, they really are like the classic tale of Icarus who flew too close to the sun and fell down to earth after his wax wings melted.

It really would be fitting for a spring football league to use Icarus for one of their teams if one could decide if the plural should be the Flying Icaruses or the Flying Icuri.

Over the course of the USFL three seasons only five teams played all three years without relocating or changing team names. Those lucky teams with the most stability were the Denver Gold, Los Angeles Express, Birmingham Stallions, New Jersey Generals, and Tampa Bay Bandits.

Already in year two of the USFL, the Tampa Bay Bandits are a casualty of teams that were around last year and failed to take the field for year two.

The official word is that the Bandits, who were once partly owned by the Bandit himself, Burt Reynolds, and coached by the Old Ball Coach himself, Steve Spurrier during “classic” USFL, have gone “on hiatus.”

Although the USFL issued a statement that the move to replace the bandits with the Memphis Showboats is based on a restriction of only eight teams in the made for television league, one has to wonder whether anyone will really notice if the Bandits return based on the whole not playing in the home markets approach.

Time will tell whether the latest iteration of the USFL can match, or best the three-year high-water mark of spring league viability it set nearly 40 years ago. Perhaps Icarus will use some stronger wax this time.

Since spring football leagues seem to be all about gambling these days, my money is on the XFL making more of an impact on football fans than the USFL based on the ability of fans to actually go to a stadium in their home town and root for their team.

To see how much fun spring football can be for hometown fans, one need only look at the XFL’s Washington Defenders, where fans have the opportunity to make an awesome beer snake in the stands, and the St. Louis Battlehawks, where football hungry fans have brought life back to a long abandoned domed stadium.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have a trip to a football stadium to plan.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

Trump Arrest Places Media in Uncharted Waters

Leave a comment

Yesterday, April 4, 2023, for the first time in United States history, a former president was arrested.

While other countries around the world have experienced their top leaders being arrested, for nearly 250 years, the United States had managed to avoid becoming a member of that club.

That all changed when Donald Trump exited a courthouse in Manhattan charged with 34 felony counts.

On April 4, 2023, Donald Trump became the first current or former United States president to be arrested for a crime. Trump faces 34 felony counts in New York State.

Although no current or former U.S. president had ever been arrested before yesterday, there is a general consensus among many historians that Richard Nixon would have faced charges after he resigned in 1974 had he not been pardoned by Gerald Ford.

Additionally, Bill Clinton’s law license was suspended for five years in Arkansas after he reached a deal with prosecutors in 2001, at the end of his second term, over allegations that he lied under oath about his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

A less known presidential “what if?” involves whether President Warren Harding would have been implicated in various crimes as part of the “Teapot Dome Scandal” had he not died in office, in 1923.

In the days, weeks, months and years to come, there will be countless opportunities to delve into whether the arrest of the 45th President of the United States was valid.

It is also possible that there will be other arrests of the same individual over the coming months that will also be debated.

Right now, presidential historians and journalists are likely securing publishing deals for the myriad books that will be written on this chapter of American history.

This is not a column about the arrest, nor is it an exploration of whether the charges are valid.

Although no current or former U.S. president had ever been arrested before yesterday, there is a general consensus among many historians that Richard Nixon would have faced charges after he resigned in 1974 had he not been pardoned by Gerald Ford.
Photo R. Anderson

Instead, this is a column about how a hyper divided country like the United States can navigate its way through something that was likely never considered by the Founding Fathers.

A high visibility case involving a high visibility individual is certainly nothing new.

Since the O.J. Simpson trial in 1995 put cameras in the courtroom, Americans have been fascinated with watching celebrity court cases.

Last year, viewers clamored around coverage of the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial.

So far in 2023, viewers were treated to the Alex Murdaugh and Gwyneth Paltrow cases.

These are just a few of the many court cases that have drawn the attention of viewers through the years.

Any potential trial in New York would likely not begin until next year. As such, there is a lot of time for other things to happen between now and then. It is also not clear whether a trial would be televised, since the judge would ultimately have a say on the issue of cameras in their courtroom.

If a case involving a former president goes to trial, and is televised, viewership would likely rival any of the previous cases.

Watching the helicopter coverage of the former president’s motorcade leading to the New York courtroom yesterday definitely gave me some white Bronco related déjà vu.

This brings us to the role the media should play in how they cover any lead up to a trial, as well as how a trial itself is covered, as well as post-verdict aftermath.

O.J. Simpson had many fans who believed that the Juice was innocent. Those fans were elated when the glove didn’t fit and the jury had to acquit.

However, if O.J. had been found guilty, it is highly unlikely that his supporters would have rioted in the streets, or charged the courthouse.

Granted, this was nearly 30 years ago, before social media, and during a time when society was slightly more civil towards people with differing opinions. So, perhaps there would have been riots if the O.J. trial happened in the 21st Century versus the 20th Century.

While we may never know how the O.J. trial would have been different during a time of social media, one can be fairly certain based on events that have happened since January 2020, that if there is a trial involving a former president, it could get messy.

To be clear, I am in no way comparing the crimes that O.J. Simpson was accused of with the crimes that Donald Trump has been accused of. I am merely comparing the way the media and public are drawn to coverage of both trials.

The media therefore faces a delicate balance between feeding the public’s right to know with avoiding any reporting that encourages incitement of violence.

Even if a network felt that providing wall to wall coverage was not the right thing to do, there would likely be great pressure to push ahead to avoid being the only network not covering the event.

In this way, the media herd mentality and desire to not miss out on a scoop works against them.

There are many individuals and groups who blame the news media for the hours of free coverage they gave Donald Trump during the 2016 election. Some have even gone so far as to say that the coverage of nearly every rally and speech given by the former president on the campaign trail played a huge role in the outcome of the 2016 election.

I thought of this as I watched the prime-time coverage of a speech given by the recently arrested former president last night.

There was certainly a news value in airing the speech. It was a historical moment documenting a moment in American history that had never occurred before. It is the news media’s job to cover events like that.

However, as the speech ventured into a slew of attacks on individuals, as well as a greatest hits list of grievances, the news value of the speech dwindled with each passing moment.

As the current court case, and perhaps other cases move towards potential trial, there will be other moments where the media will be tempted to cover a speech in its entirety.

Such is the dilemma of the news media. How does one differentiate between what is truly in the public interest, and what is just a man getting free air time to rant around the Festivus pole with an airing of grievances?

Arguments around media coverage potentially tainting a jury pool is a possible consideration. Although, it is highly likely that all potential jurors already know who the former president is.

Whatever happens from here with the case will continue to plow new ground for legal experts and journalists alike.

We are definitely going to need a bigger boat as we navigate the uncharted waters and choppy seas ahead, as well as a measured approach to steer it through the rapids and eddies.

Now if you’ll excuse me, all of this talk about alleged presidential crimes and journalists has me in the mood to watch “All the President’s Men.”

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

Weather Extremes and Gun Violence Show We Are in For a Bumpy Ride

Leave a comment

The other night I was awoken at 3:30 a.m. by a loud clap of thunder.

In this part of Houston, getting awakened in the middle of the night by a storm is nothing new. Based on weather patterns, most of the bad weather that arrives here comes in like a thief in the night.

What is odd about this latest bit of overnight extreme weather, is the fact that it seemed to come out of nowhere and just sort of formed without warning.

As I sat in bed listening to the storm, I thought to myself that it will likely become more frequent that random storms just pop up in the middle of the night.

Scientists will say that the rise in extreme weather, like more frequent hurricanes and tornadoes, is the result of global warming and climate change.

The other night I was awoken at 3:30 a.m. by a loud clap of thunder. In this part of Houston, getting awakened in the middle of the night by a storm is nothing new. Based on weather patterns, most of the bad weather that arrives here comes in like a thief in the night. As I sat in bed listening to the storm, I thought to myself that it will likely become more frequent that random storms just pop up in the middle of the night.
Photo R. Anderson

I agree with that assessment. I also believe that more should be done to address climate change to ensure that we do not turn the only planet with a habitable atmosphere into a stormy terrarium where only cold blooded creatures and aquatic life can live.

Those who do not believe in science will say that there is no correlation between more extreme weather and global warming.

The reasons for denying the facts can be both economical and political in nature. The reasons usually are the result of a selfish need on the part of the person who is denying the facts that are getting increasingly harder to ignore.

As I continued to sit in bed as the storm raged, and now fully awake with no chance of drifting back to sleep any time soon, my thoughts went from extreme weather, to extreme acts of gun violence as yet another mass shooting took place in a school earlier that day.

When I first heard about the shooting at a private school in Nashville, my first thought was, how does this keep happening?

Then, while sitting in bed listening to the storm that came out of thin air, I thought to myself, in many cases, the same people who deny that global warming is real are the ones who do not think that America has a mass shooting problem.

I will never understand how someone who sees entire towns wiped out by more frequent tornadoes, and elementary school children and their teachers getting killed by assault rifles can think that either occurrence is normal, and not something that should be addressed with the full power of the private and public sector.

Extreme weather events, and mass shootings each tear communities apart and leave lasting physical and emotional scars among the survivors.

Following the latest shooting in Nashville, many lawmakers recycled some of the talking points that emerge after every mass shooting.

The tropes of “lone wolf,” “mental illness,” and “unsecured school” filled the airwaves as politicians made themselves into human pretzels twisting and turning their words while trying to balance the needs of their big gun lobby donors with the hurt felt by average citizens.

As I always point out during my way too frequent columns after a mass shooting, I am not advocating for a repeal of the Second Amendment, or saying the answer to solving the issue of mass shootings is to take away all guns.

What I am saying, is I refuse to believe that nothing can be done to eliminate mass shootings, which as noted before, seems to be an uniquely American problem.

One particular talking point that disgusted me the most was an elected official from Tennessee who, after being asked why gun violence seemed to mostly only occur in America, said that part of price of our freedom as Americans was that we had to accept that mass shootings were just a part of life, since in order for us to be free, we have to let some people abuse that freedom in the form of gun violence.

With all due respect to the lawmaker, I refuse to accept that part of living in a democracy means that people are free to gun down people.

I also refuse to believe the narrative that the key to stopping gun violence is to turn schools into impenetrable fortresses. As shown by the various other places where a gunman has taken lives like houses of worship, movie theaters and grocery stores, a mass shooting can happen anywhere.

The shooting in Nashville also shows that locked doors can be shot through in order to gain entrance. This fact, blows to shreds the whole locked doors stop mass shootings narrative even further.

Furthermore, even if a locked door could stop a mass shooter, it would be impossible to reinforce every soft target, or to think that an armed good guy with a gun will always stop the bad guy with a gun.

To be clear, there is no way that the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms will ever be stricken from the United States Constitution. Although, one should really stop to consider whether the right to bear dozens of high-powered assault rifles is really what the founding fathers had in mind when they were amending the Constitution.

For a bit of context, here is the exact wording of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There is a huge difference between ensuring that citizens can protect their families and property in case the British decided to invade the colonies again, as was the basis for the Second Amendment, versus using it as a jumping off point to say that there should be no regulations nor permits for the type of arms one can bear.

Instead of tightening laws, in many states, it is being made easier to own and carry firearms out in public.

For the majority of gun owners that is not an issue.

Most gun owners use their guns responsibly.

Most gun owners surveyed want stricter controls on who can own guns.

As noted in many of the columns I have written about mass shootings, I am forever thankful that mass shootings in schools were not something that I had to worry about when I was in school.

Early in my journalism career, I had the opportunity to interview a man who traveled the country teaching high school students how to survive an active shooter attack at their school. Promoting a common-sense approach may have worked 20 years ago, but I have to question whether that approach nowadays is the equivalent of telling students to hide under a desk during nuclear fallout.
Photo R. Anderson

There is hardly enough time in the school day for teachers to cover all of the subjects that students should learn without having to practice active shooter drills.

My entire life, I have heard how the United States of America is the most powerful country in the world.

I do believe that there is a lot of truth to that statement. I also believe that will great power, comes great responsibility.

That responsibility includes ensuring that children can learn in a safe environment, and that to every extent possible, everything is done to slow, it not reverse, the impacts of climate change.

As the old saying goes, it is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. There is no reason why the aforementioned most powerful country in the world cannot address both climate change and gun violence at the same time.

In the 1960s, President John F. Kennedy challenged America to reach for the stars and land a man on the moon by the end of the decade.

Many scoffed at the “moonshot” speech. Yet, in July of 1969, human footprints were placed on the lunar surface in response to that quest to “go to the moon and do the other things.”

As the president said at the time, the goal to go to the moon was chosen, “not because it was easy, but because it was hard.”

In the 1960s, President John F. Kennedy challenged America to reach for the stars and land a man on the moon by the end of the decade. Many scoffed at the “moonshot” speech. Yet, in July of 1969, human footprints were placed on the lunar surface in response to that quest to “go to the moon and do the other things.” It is time for the elected officials and common citizens alike to unite for a 21st Century Moonshot to curb climate change and more importantly find common sense solutions to addressing gun violence and mass shootings.
Photo R. Anderson

Tackling climate change and the wholly American problem of gun violence will certainly not be easy.

However, it is time for the elected officials and common citizens alike to unite for a 21st Century Moonshot to curb climate change.

Additionally,, it is time to find common sense solutions to addressing gun violence and mass shootings.

Due to geography, I may never be able to fully prevent thunder from waking me up in the wee hours of the morning.

However, I would love to have a night where I was not holding back tears due to watching news coverage of another mass shooting.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I am off to take a nap since I really did not get much sleep last night.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

Some Journalists are Showing a Total Lack of Respect, Bruh

Leave a comment

The other day I read a story about a reporter being fired for calling Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson “bruh” on Twitter.

The reasoning behind the firing as cited by the Dallas Morning News, was a violation of the paper’s social media policy.

Many news organizations have social media policies in place as a means to try to provide guardrails for a mostly unregulated, constantly available, nonstop temptation to create content.

I am not going to weigh in on whether I think the reporter should have been fired aside from saying that, in my time working as an editor for newspapers, I have fired people for less when their actions reflected poorly on the organization. At a minimum, the reporter should have been reminded of the expectations for conduct expected of journalists representing the news organization.

I am also not going to give oxygen to the questions about whether the use of the word “bruh,” as well as the firing, were racially motivated.

What I will say is, I do not see any circumstance where anyone in a position of authority should be called “bruh” by a journalist on social media.

Taking it a step further, I would go so far as to say that a journalist should not call anyone “bruh” on social media.

There is enough mistrust and lack of respect circulating against the field of journalism without reporters scoring an own goal by making the point for people who claim that all journalists are bad.

Long before computers replaced typewriters in newsrooms, journalists have needed to balance what they say and how they say it when it comes to reporting the facts in the best way for their readers. Social Media has blurred many of those lines and led to scenarios where reporters try to get too familiar with public figures.
Photo R. Anderson

Again, this is not about the word “bruh.” It is about the lack of respect and the familiar tone being used with a public official. There are myriad other words that could have been substituted for “bruh” and the result would have been the same.

It should be noted that the reporter in Dallas is not the first journalist to get too “familiar” with a public figure on social media. Nor are they likely to be the last.

In many ways, the rise of social media and its relaxation of societal norms is partly to blame for the lowering of the bar in terms of communication expectations.

It also doesn’t help the argument when some politicians and other public figures are equally guilty of lowering the communication bar on social media through their own posts.

Still, members of the media should be held to a higher standard of conduct. This standard covers what they say on social media, as well as what they count as truth found there.

As I have noted before, social media posts should not be the sole sources for any article written by a real journalist. That is just lazy reporting and opens up the reporter to all kinds of scrutiny.

The use of social media posts as “sources” is a column for another day.

The reporter’s defense of using the word “bruh” was that as a millennial that is just the way she talks.

Anyone who knows me, knows that I have long had issues with certain things that millennials have brought to the table compared to other generations.

However, this is not a column about millennials.

Despite recently celebrating a birthday, this proud Gen-Xer is still far too young to be the guy standing on the porch shouting at the “kids” to get off of his lawn. Still, I am old enough to know that respect should be given by journalists to the people they cover.

Respecting someone’s position does not mean that you have to agree with everything they say or do, or that you necessarily have to like the person you are covering on a personal level.

It also doesn’t mean that as a journalist you stop doing your job of speaking truth to power and holding people accountable for their actions.

However, it does mean that while doing that job you do not call a mayor “bruh,” or anything other word that does not show respect for the position.

Again, there is a difference between respecting an individual, versus respecting the position they hold.

Long before computers replaced typewriters in newsrooms, journalists have needed to balance what they say and how they say it when it comes to reporting the facts in the best way for their readers. Social Media has blurred many of those lines and led to scenarios where reporters try to get too familiar with public figures.
Photo R. Anderson

In my years covering school boards and city councils, there have certainly been officials that I have disagreed with. However, whenever I was writing about them, I would state the facts and let the voters draw their own conclusions.

I also know that there have been people who did not like how persistent I was in covering certain issues.

Although they likely wished I was reassigned to a different beat, they always understood that I had a job to do and that I would cover them respectfully and fairly.

My respect for a person’s position has been a standard throughout my educational career as well. Even though I have had professors younger than some of the t-shirts in my closet, I still respect their role and address them accordingly.

I am sure that I take that to an extreme, but I would rather err on the side of respect than to try to be informal and cute on social media by de-formalizing language while blurring the line between reporter and source.

Going back to the Dallas incident, even if I was not directly involved in covering the political beat, as a representative of the newspaper, I would respect both my colleagues and the mayor and give them both the respect they their positions warranted.

Common courtesy used to be pretty easy to find.

Unfortunately, lately it seems like it is not as common as it once was.

By the time I am that old man standing on the porch shouting at the kids to get off of my lawn, I shudder to think how far the lack of respect within society will fall.

It may force me to be tempted to stay inside.

At the end of the day, there are certainly bigger issues facing the world than whether a reporter who hopefully was taught better in Journalism school used informal speech to address a person elected by a majority of voters.

However, if one stops calling out troubling things, than they become societal norms.

I am often reminded of a paper I wrote 30-years ago during my freshmen year of college about this wonderful thing called the internet and the Information Superhighway that was going to connect the world and put vast amounts of knowledge at our fingertips as a means to make a better more united society.

I misplaced that paper a few years back, and have looked for it off and on ever since. Something tells me that were I to locate it now, I would be sorely disappointed by what was predicted and what came to pass.

Instead of bringing us together, in many ways the technology continues to sow division and turn us into a society of silos where no one really knows how to talk constructively and work together.

If we are not careful with how we control social media, we may discover it is a “memes” to an end.

Now if you’ll excuse me, all of this talk about “bruh” has me in the mood to watch some old surfing movies.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

Killing of Orlando Reporter is Latest Salvo in War on Journalists

Leave a comment

When an Orlando television reporter was killed, and his cameraman wounded while covering a story about a shooting last month, they became the latest victims in what has become an increasingly violent time for journalists.

Despite the First Amendment of the United States Constitution specifically citing a freedom of speech, and of the press, attacks on journalists, both verbal and physical, have been on the rise over the past few years.

To be fair, the recent attack in Orlando may have been an attack of opportunity, and not a targeted attack on journalists. Accounts of the crime state that the vehicle that the journalists were in was not emblazoned with the logos and tell-tale signs of news vans in the past.

Advances in technology have created a world where journalists reporting live from a scene do not need the large satellite trucks that they once did. As a result, journalists now have a lower profile on many news scenes.
Photo R. Anderson

Still, regardless of whether the two journalists were targeted because they were journalists, or if it was just a matter of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, one cannot argue that in recent years attacks on journalists have become more frequent, and, in many cases, deadlier.

In 2015, a reporter and photojournalist in Roanoke, VA were fatally shot while conducting a live television interview.

In 2018, five employees were killed, and two injured when a gunmen entered the Annapolis, MD offices of The Capitol newspaper.

The above incidents of journalists killed while doing their jobs is just a small fraction of the overall picture of journalism in the cross hairs.

According to the Columbia Journalism Review, in 2021 alone there were 142 assaults on journalists.

On January 6, 2021, many journalists were attacked and thousands of dollars of equipment was damaged at the United States Capitol.

It is too easy to place the blame on the war on journalists on politicians who encourage their followers to call journalists the “enemy of the people.”

It is also too easy to blame the war on journalists on individuals who shout “fake news” whenever they disagree with a story reported on by a journalist.

No, the attacks on journalists cannot be blamed on a single individual or group.

Instead, the increase in attacks on journalists is the result of a combination of factors ranging from a rise in violence against all groups, as well as a failure of local, state, and federal governments to take action to ensure proper mental health and gun reform measures are in place.

For years, journalists from the United States and elsewhere have voluntarily put themselves in harm’s way in order to report from various war zones.

Last year, I wrote a column about the history of war time journalism. In that column, I noted that one of my earliest memories of CNN involved watching the “Boys of Baghdad,” Bernard Shaw, Peter Arnett and John Holliman broadcasting live when the first missiles of Operation Desert Storm were fired. That broadcast represented the first time, Americans were seeing live video in the middle of a war zone.

In the years that have followed that first live from the battlefield report, countless journalists have reported from war zones and other areas of unrest around the globe.

Even now, hundreds of journalists are in Ukraine and other hot spots risking their lives to report on the battles going on there.

War correspondents sent off to cover conflict, know going into the situation that there is a high probability that they will be shot at covering the story.

Some have even been killed while on assignment.

However, based on the rise in attacks on journalists in non-combat zones, it is not hyperbole to say that all journalists can now be considered war correspondents, since there is definitely an active war going on against the press.

Throughout my career in journalism, I have often worn a press pass, or other identification on a lanyard or clipped to a belt loop identifying me as a member of the working media whenever I was covering an event.
Photo R. Anderson

Throughout my career in journalism, I have often worn a press pass, or other identification on a lanyard or clipped to a belt loop identifying me as a member of the working media whenever I was covering an event.

My identification as a member of the press was not always worn on my person, however.

Back when I worked as the sports editor for a daily newspaper in Texas, I had a sticker on the windshield of my car that was provided by the Texas Daily Newspaper Association as a way to identify me as a member of the working press.

I took great pride in that sticker and what it stood for. The sticker was so important to me that when I was cleaning out my car after someone ran a light straight into the side of my car and totaled it, I removed the sticker from the windshield.

Part of the reason I removed the sticker was because it was a symbol of my commitment as a journalist.

The other reason for saving the sticker was that I did not want someone else taking the sticker and using it to pose as a journalist.

I still have the sticker to this day.

Back when I worked as the sports editor for a daily newspaper in Texas, I had a sticker on the windshield of my car that was provided by the Texas Daily Newspaper Association as a way to identify me as a member of the working press.
Photo R. Anderson

With the rise in violence against members of the press in recent years, I now question whether I would still proudly have that sticker on the windshield of my car, or if I would fear that having a Press sticker would act like a target that could be used by an individual who had it out for the press for one reason or another.

Would a sticker on my car invite someone to scratch the paint, knock out a window, or in an extreme case plant a bomb under it because some had told them that as a member of the press I was their enemy?

This is the reality facing many journalists today.

Despite the rise in attacks, I am convinced that dedicated journalists will continue to go to work each day to tell the stories that need to be told in order to inform their readers and viewers.

After all, based on what the average journalist makes in salary, individuals join the field of journalism out of dedication to the craft versus seeking financial gains.

Unfortunately, thanks to events outside their control, many of those journalists will likely be looking over their shoulder and wondering whether their commitment to reporting the truth will get them killed.

It may also become common practice for journalists to wear Kevlar vests whether they are covering a war zone overseas, or a city council meeting around the block.

In journalism school we are taught to report the story and not to become the story.

Unfortunately, the war on journalism and journalists is making it harder to stay on the side lines of what is quickly becoming a life-or-death battlefield in the name of speaking truth to power and providing an eyewitness account of history in real time.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I am off to go remember a simpler time before journalism was under attack.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

Remembering former UCF President John Hitt

Leave a comment

The other day I was saddened to hear about the passing of former University of Central Florida (UCF) president John C. Hitt.

President Hitt, who was 82-years-old when he died, became UCF’s fourth president in 1992 and retired from the post in June 2018. He was a transformational figure at UCF. Over the course of his 26-years at the helm, President Hitt ushered in an era of explosive growth and opportunity both in terms of facilities and enrollments.

While many buildings were added to the UCF campus during President Hitt’s tenure, perhaps the most visible one is the on-campus football stadium affectionately known as the “Bounce House.”
Photo R. Anderson

President Hitt, transformed the UCF campus on the Orange and Seminole County lines from a commuter school withering in the shadow of larger universities like Florida State University and the University of Florida, to the second largest university by enrollment in the country.

UCF’s enrollment tripled from 21,000 students to more than 66,000 by his retirement.

Enrollment was not the only thing that grew during President Hitt’s tenure at UCF. Under his watch, UCF opened a College of Medicine and created momentum for the ultimate construction of an on-campus football stadium.

To celebrate his 20th year leading UCF, the on-campus library, which was the first building on campus that was open to students, was renamed in his honor.

The oldest building on the UCF main campus open to students, was renamed the John C. Hitt Library to celebrate former college president John Hitt’s 20th anniversary at the school’s helm. Hitt, who died February 21, 2023, went on to serve as UCF president for 26 years.
Photo R. Anderson

While much will be said over the coming days about President Hitt’s legacy, my association with him is a little more personal.

During my time as an undergraduate at UCF, I created a student newspaper called Knight Times, which I ran for three years with the help of some very dedicated staff and friends.

Eight months after forming the paper, I wanted to do something that both set the paper apart from our better funded competitors, and also showed that we were not afraid to go to the top.

To accomplish that goal, I decided that I wanted to interview President Hitt.

In 1997, I had the opportunity to interview President Hitt for a two-part series of articles for Knight Times, the student newspaper I founded and operated while enrolled as an undergraduate journalism student at UCF.
Photo R. Anderson

To my surprise and delight, he accepted the offer and a two-part series about his vision for UCF’s future was created.

For President Hitt, the interview was likely just another appointment on his calendar that day.

However for me, it showed that not only had Knight Times arrived in terms of being taken seriously, but I had shown that I could score big interviews as a journalist.

I have interviewed thousands of people in my journalism career. I even had some pretty high-profile interviews during my time as editor in chief of my high school newspaper.

However, my interview with President Hitt was the first time that I felt that I had scored the interview through my own efforts and was being taken seriously as an equal to journalists who had been in the field longer than I had.

Knight Times lasted an additional two years after my interview with President Hitt ran.

The visions President Hitt outlined in that interview have lasted much longer.

At the time of my interview, President Hitt was in his fifth year at the helm. However, even then it was clear that he had a strong sense of where things were headed as noted by the quote from the interview below.

“If I had to look out and see what my fondest dream 15-20 years from now it would be that we would be recognized as the premiere metropolitan university, that we would be a Research One according to the Carnegie Commission’s classifications, and that we would still be regarded as having a lot of concern for an excellence in undergraduate education,” Hitt said.

That desire became a reality in the years that followed drawing attention from some pretty powerful figures along the way.

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush once said that it was his belief that, “Walt Disney and John Hitt have done more to transform Central Florida into a vibrant, dynamic place than any two people.”

In addition to being focused on growth, President Hitt knew that it was attention to the students that really mattered as referenced in another quote from that 1997 interview.

“A lot of people around the country see campuses where faculty members won’t cooperate together or with the administration. We don’t have that here,” Hitt said. “We have a real good community atmosphere here. We have got a pretty darn good situation here at UCF and we are proud of it.”

Two and a half years after my interview with President Hitt, our paths crossed once again as he handed me my diploma on the graduation stage inside the UCF Arena signaling the end of my time at UCF, and the beginning of the next phase of my professional journalism career.

Speaking as one of the thousands of Knights who benefited from your leadership, we are pretty proud to have called you our president. Charge On, President Hitt, and thank you for granting me that interview so many years ago.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I am off to read some more articles from the Knight Times archives.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson

Beyond

Shooting at Michigan State University Shows How Vulnerable College Campuses Are

Leave a comment

Earlier this week a 43-year-old man killed three people and injured five others on the campus of Michigan State University.

The shooting, which occurred on the eve of fifth anniversary of the Parkland school shooting, marked yet another example of what appears to be a uniquely American problem related to the use of guns to create mass casualty events on soft targets like schools, places of worship, grocery stores, parades, and a slew of other events where people gather.

As of February 14, 2023, there have been more mass shootings in America than there have been days of the year.  In January 2023 alone, there were 52 mass shootings that left 87 dead and 205 wounded.

Let that sink in for a moment.

This is not a column about repealing the Second Amendment, or creating a movement to take away people’s legally obtained firearms.

This is not a column about the move in some states to loosen laws that seem to make it easier for individuals to gain possession of guns and ammo.

Following a shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, TX in 2019, instead of cracking down on guns, Texas made it easier for people to get guns by eliminating burdensome gun permitting and training requirements that had caused citizens to have to wait a few days to get their guns and also show that they took a course to know how to responsibly use them.
Photo R. Anderson

This is also not a column about lawmakers who fail to act to pass simple legislation that could make it harder to get and use guns to kill citizens just trying to go about their daily lives.

No, this is a column about the sad fact that everyday people are unprotected from falling victim to senseless gun violence in the most prosperous country in the world.

While no one is immune from falling victim to the plague of mass shootings, for this column my main focus is mass shooting events on college campuses which represent a small fraction of the hundreds of mass shooting events that occur in America each year.

Since 1966 when a gunman killed 15 people and injured 31 at the University of Texas in Austin, in what many consider the first mass shooting event in America, there have been 12 mass shootings on college campuses where over three people were killed leading to 99 deaths.

Prior to the Michigan State shooting, the most recent college shooting was in 2022 at the University of Virginia where three people were killed and two were injured.

Colleges and universities from sea to shining sea serve as both institutions of higher learning, as well as soft targets for would be mass shooters to prey upon.

Last year, while visiting the University of Florida to be inducted into an Honor Society, I found myself on high alert looking in the shadows for potential threats as I walked the sprawling campus.

Like many other colleges and universities, UF is a large campus that acts like a mini city surrounded by various homes, businesses, and infrastructure with no walls or gates to funnel visitors through central entry and exit points to control who comes and goes.

Like many other colleges and universities, the University of Florida is a large campus that acts like a mini city surrounded by various homes, businesses, and infrastructure with no walls or gates to funnel visitors through central entry and exit points to control who comes and goes. The same is true for Michigan State University making it nearly impossible to fully prevent mass shooting events from occurring on campus.
Photo R. Anderson

The same was true for Michigan State University where it appears the gunman entered a publicly accessible building on the edge of campus and opened fire before opening fire in another publicly accessible building full of students.

It is impossible to fully secure a college campus. So, the blame for the shooting does not fall on Michigan State University.

During my tenure as the Public Information Manager for a college, I constantly drilled myself on how I would respond to a crisis communication event on campus. Many of my colleagues thought I was crazy to spend so much time cooking up responses to scenarios that they assured me would never occur.

Then the attacks of September 11, 2001 occurred and we found ourselves faced with the need to evacuate the campus for fear that the highly explosive oil tanks that surrounded the campus would be the next target of the terrorists.

Although, the oil tanks and the campus remained unscathed, from that moment on, my “hope for the best but always plan for the worst strategy” did not seem so farfetched to my previously doubting colleagues.

Although the campus I worked on was small, it was spread out with numerous unsecured entry points. It also lacked armed security officers. While thankfully it never happened, it would have been very easy for someone to walk in off of the street and start shooting.

Unfortunately, like many campuses both then and now, there is really no way to prevent an individual from bringing a gun inside a classroom and creating a mass casualty event.

Of course, in Texas and other states, the response to mass shootings by some lawmakers would be to say that the armed good guys in the classroom would take out the armed bad guys.

There is so much wrong with that statement, but I will leave that for another column on another day.

Like I said, this is also not a column about lawmakers who fail to act to pass simple common sense legislation that could make it harder for people who should not have access to firearms from getting and using guns to kill citizens who are just trying to go about their daily lives.

Since it appears most are unwilling to take proactive steps to prevent gun violence, that leaves us in the category of reacting. Throughout my career in public affairs and strategic communication, I have always held firm to the practice of being first on the scene to deliver credible information while also being transparent about what I do not know during a fluid situation.

There is nothing wrong with saying, “I don’t have that information right now, but I will bring it to you as soon as I do have it,” in the heat of communicating in a crisis.

It is a far worse crisis communication blunder to say nothing at all as a scene unfolds leaving unqualified experts on social media to fill in the voids left by the silence of the official sources.

Based on what I have seen so far, the Michigan State University response to the shooting should be hailed as a textbook example of how to respond to an event.

Multiple jurisdictions worked in harmony with a clear command structure to secure the scene and protect all people on campus. Additionally, regular updates were provided to the media and other concerned individuals while the scene was still active.

That is a stark contrast to what occurred during the 2022 Robb Elementary shooting in Uvalde, TX. The Robb Elementary response should be added as a case study to every crisis communication and law enforcement practitioner as a prime example of what not to do during a mass shooting.

As great as the response at Michigan State was, the simple fact is something needs to be done to stop these mass shooting events from happening.

As a crisis communicator, I was pleased to see the transparent way that the incident at Michigan State was handled.

I will be more pleased if a day comes when crisis communicators and law enforcement personal do not have to respond to calls of shots fired at campuses where people are just trying to learn, or stores where people are just trying to bring home some groceries to feed their families.

America has twice as many firearms per 100 residents as the next country on the list of Top 10 gun owning countries.

We should be better than this.

And yes, I know that there are people who may not know anything else that is in the United States Constitution, but they use the Second Amendment as their lodestar allowing them to collect an arsenal of firearms.

Again, I am not suggesting that the government come and take away everyone’s guns. However, we should not be willing to just accept mass shootings as a way of life and pray that we and those we love are never the victims.

We should demand that politicians make common sense changes to gun laws to make it harder for people to use guns in mass shootings and easier for people to get the mental health resources that they need.

That can be done while still protecting people’s Second Amendment rights as well as all of the other rights outlined in the Constitution.

The real question is whether any politicians are willing to take those steps, or if they will remain content to putting on their shocked and outraged face for the cameras every time someone takes an easy to obtain firearm and kills a bunch of innocent people while crying “lone wolf” to anyone who will listen.

Students of all ages from preschool to grad school should be able to learn in their classrooms without living in constant fear that someone is going to barge in with a gun.

Likewise, people should feel safe going to see a parade, going to their house of worship, or picking up some groceries on the way home without wondering if the sound they heard was a car backfiring or someone firing a gun.

How many innocent people must be killed before politicians acknowledge there is a problem with gun violence in America and take common sense steps to prevent future attacks on everyday citizens?

The number of victims of mass shootings is already in the thousands. Will it have to reach the tens of thousands before people take proactive steps?

Or, will American society be left in a constant state of reaction where praise is given to the first responders who do things right, criticism is heaped upon those who botch the response, and thoughts and prayers are sent out to the victims along with prayers that the violence stays away from the people sending out the thoughts and prayers?

I guess this was a column about urging elected officials to do something about the unacceptable rise in gun violence and mass shootings after all.

Now if you’ll excuse me, as I said during a column last year following the mass shooting at Robb Elementary, I am off to see if I can make sense out of that another senseless act of violence and see what steps I can take to prevent another one.

Copyright 2023 R. Anderson