Storify for Mass Media and NCAA
Mass Media and its affect of the NCAA's sanctions
What is the NCAA?
The National Collegiate Athletic Associ
ation, also known as the NCAA, “is a membership-driven organization dedicated to safeguarding the well-being of student-athletes and equipping them with the skills to succeed on the playing field, in th
e classroom, and throughout life (“Who We Are,” n.d.).” The organization first started in 1906, under Theodore Roosevelt, and with only football coaches from the national universities at the time. Through their infrastructure and collaboration with member schools, $2.7 billion in scholarships are awarded to student-athletes nationally. Other necessities such as health care, academic support and elite training opportunities are also provided (Treadway, 2013). The NCAA is similar to a government. It has three many divisions, its own regulation and p
rocedures, and its own appointed and elected officials. Just like government many questions have arose regarding the ethics, operations, and regulations of the organization through scandalous and controversial stories covered in the media.
Media and the NCAA
In today’s society we can usually find a collegiate game televised at any point of the day, headlines filled with praise and scandal of student-athletes or universities, and even business promotional regarding universities they support. With media becoming more prevalent around student athlete and members, the NCAA has placed restrictions on its members in regards to interaction with the media. For example, bylaw 12.5.3 regards how athletes and members are to interact with media in and out of season and their activity on social media as well. These restrictions only relate to recruiting and endorsement problems, but others speculate there could be additional restrictions in the future as media becomes more advanced and essential to daily life.
Aside from this only restriction, the mass media and NCAA work together in a two way relationship. The media needs the teams in the NCAA in order to charge and receive more funding from advertisers and to attract and maintain audiences, while the NCAA teams and coaches need the media coverage to gain recruits, scout attention, and sponsors. The media can both hurt and harm the NCAA. The media can frame and select the features of a sporting event or scandal so that it can either affect the university as a whole, the sports program, or the individual athlete themselves. On the contrary, the media can also frame stories to highlight universities, programs, and players as “standouts” or “powerhouses”, bringing attention from spectators, scouts, and recruits (Danielson, 2010).
Impact from media, then vs. now
- Southern Methodist University vs. Penn State Football Sanctions
There have been major infractions since the start of the NCAA. One of the worst offenses came in the 1980’s by Southern Methodist University. It was found that this football program paid athletes to commit to SMU and continued to pay them throughout their years of eligibility. The NCAA found that 13 different football players had received $61,000 from a booster “slush fund.” Due to the university’s various infractions over a 5 year period, the NCAA gave SMU the “death penalty.” The sanction was called the “penalty” because SMU football’s 1987 season was cancelled and they were not allowed to host any home games in the season to follow. Without any home games in the year to follow the university knew they would lose money so they tried appealing the home games sanction. Upon appeal, the NCAA cancelled SMU’s 1988 season altogether, banning the team for two years. This ban cost the school funding and revenue. The media coverage has changed significantly from the 80’s and while this was not covered like the way it would be today, today’s media has brought it back to life to compare the violations and penalties with today’s football scene. In the recent decade, Penn State has faced a comparable punishment, possibly even a worse punishment than SMU (RealClearSports, 2010).
In 2011, the Sandusky Scandal leaked into the mainstream media. Every day after the story broke there were constant news banners, updates, and new information fed to the public audience until the sentencing in late 2012. The NCAA placed sanctions on the entire Penn State Football team, despite the media’s negative coverage and attack of the university and program. The team was sanctioned to a fine of $61 million, vacation of 112 wins, and a four-year-ban on any post season activity (no playoffs or bowl games), scholarship reductions, and five year probation period. The media coverage of these players during post season games is usually what gets athletes to the professional and national leagues. With the ban, many talented players’ rights were violated and appeals denied to the players without due process or explanation (Brown, 2012).
- NCAA vs. Tarkanian
Another issue that is continuously brought up with the NCAA is if the organization is following federal regulations and trial procedures. This issue was highlighted in the case of the NCAA vs. Jerry Tarkanian in the 70’s and 80’s. In this case the NCAA placed the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) on probation for two years and threatened to issue larger penalties if they did not remove Jerry Tarkanian from his coaching position. According to the NCAA, UNLV had 38 recruiting violations, but only 10 involved Jerry Tarkanian. The NCAA issued the university a preliminary inquiry but never informed Tarkanian. After two years, the NCAA issued an “Official investigation,” which they again failed to notify head coach Tarkanian. After a short time of investigation, the NCAA went to the president of UNLV with allegations of violations but not concrete evidence. They threatened to place penalties on the university if they did not cooperate. Tarkanian appealed the restrictions and sued the NCAA for the violation of his 14th amendment (FindLaw, 2015). After Tarkanian’s lawsuit the NCAA would continue to investigate teams that Tarkanian was involved with for 20 years, until the NCAA made a settlement of $2.5 million and severance of any allegations to Tarkanian in 2012 (Prisbell, 2015). Again from that time period this story was not picked up like it would be with ESPN today, but through Twitter and other media platforms players and coaches pay tribute to the now late Tarkanian and other coaches look to his case in regards to issues involving themselves and the NCAA now. Without these platforms Tarkanian’s battle would go unnoticed and fewer coaches would challenge the NCAA.
Investigations attacking specific coaches for lengths at a time are becoming more and more common with the NCAA and the media. It is no surprise to people that head coach of Syracuse Men’s Basketball, Jim Boeheim, is known to be quite harsh and blunt. The media covered that and social media picked up memes of Boeheim’s technical foul freak out, during a game against rival Duke University. Boeheim also has a reputation for putting down and calling out reporters on how they report on his coaching and details of the game (O’Neil, 2015). Currently, Boeheim is facing a similar situation to Tarkanian’s. It is believed that preliminary investigations like the one Tarkanian faced have been occurring behind Boeheim’s back. Due to the Tarkanian case, the NCAA changed regulations that only made it mandatory for them to send a letter to the universities as a courtesy in the preliminary inquiries. After the 10 years of “inquiry,” the NCAA filed a 96 page Infraction report against Boeheim, suspending him for 9 ACC games. The NCAA has warned that more punishments could result after the full investigation. An appeal is also likely to come from Boeheim should the NCAA penalize further (Keeney, 2015). This story has been followed and reported on excessively by the media. More so than Tarkanian’s case. It could be because of Boeheim’s rough relationship with the media, or that the NCAA is not following federal hearing procedures. The audience’s perception depends on how the reporters cover and frame the stories.
Conclusion
Media and the NCAA have a two way relationship. Sure one may survive without the other for a period of time but the two together are stronger. However, even with its dominating strength, the media can cause harm to individuals under the NCAA. Through selection, presentation, and other biases the media can significantly decrease funding, air time, and the prestige of a program, player, or university with just one story. Some stories can cost the player, universities, and programs millions of dollars or their eligibility, but at the same time it can earn them fame, fortune, and recognition like no other. Just like any other form of government, the media helps keep the NCAA on their toes, and just like any other form of government, the NCAA is not always transparent with the media.
Reference List
Reference List:
Brown, Nick. (Jul. 24, 2014). SMU 'Death Penalty' Walk in the Park Compared to Penn State. Bleacher Report. Retrieved from: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1270032-smu-death-penalty-walk-in-the-park-compared-to-penn-state.
Danielson, Richard R. (2010). Ch. 12- Sports and the Media: Could they survive without each other? Retrieved from: http://www.realclearsports.com/lists/infamous_ncaa_sanctions/smu_football.html.
Keeney, Tim. (Feb. 4, 2015). Syracuse basketball self-imposes postseason ban due to NCAA investigation. Bleacher Report. Retrieved from: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2354178-syracuse-basketball-self-imposes-postseason-ban-due-to-ncaa-investigation.
NCAA vs. Tarkanian. (2015). FindLaw. Retrieved from: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/488/179.html.
O’Neil, Dana. (Mar. 6, 2015). Jim Boeheim's legacy forever altered. ESPN. Retrieved from: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12432907/syracuse-coach-jim-boeheim-never-viewed-same-ncaa-sanctions/.
Prisbell, Eric. (Feb. 11, 2015). UNLV's Jerry Tarkanian, rebel with a cause vs. NCAA, has died. USA Today. Retrieved from: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/02/11/jerry-tarkanian-obituary-unlv-mens-basketball-coach-ncaa/2064683/.
RealClearSports. (May 17, 2013). The Death Penalty. RealClearSports. Retrieved from: http://www.realclearsports.com/lists/infamous_ncaa_sanctions/smu_football.html
Treadway, Dan. (Aug. 6, 2013). Why does the NCAA exist? Huffington Post. Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-treadway/johnny-manziel-ncaa-eligibility_b_3020985.html.
Who Are We. (n.d.) NCAA. Retrieved from: http://www.ncaa.org/about/who-we-are.
Victoria Beckham & Celebrity Endorsements
From her singing abilities, to fashion clothing line, and exceptionally good looking husband, she is world renowned. Victoria Beckham started her fame as a member of the well-known female group, the Spice Girls, as Posh Spice. The Spice Girls fame ended in 2000, as members of the group pursued different interests. After marrying world soccer star and model David Beckham in the late 90’s, she turned her focus to her emerging family. From 1997-2011 the model, singer, and fashion designer added mother to her resume, with a household total of 3 children. After that she turned toward her fashion line called VB Rocks, launched in 2004 (biography.com).
Along with Beckham’s numerous talents, she has her hands in many different charities and gives generously to even more causes. The total on looktothestars.org says that she is a major contributor in 14 different charities and has been involved/apart of 23 other causes. As a mother of four, the majority of Beckham’s charities are about helping children and the betterment of children. Other charities involve AIDS, Sport, and Cancer foundations. Her and husband David have their own charity that is available to initiatives that look to improve the health and well-being of children. Most of the charities she is a major contributor of only have 40-50 members associated with the cause. The fund that her and her husband created only has 2, themselves.
I think that this celebrity image has benefited the organizations rather than hindered it. She and David Beckham are rarely seen in any tabloids for any kind of scandals. Most of the time, when either she or her husband are mentioned in a magazine, they are either feature models or they are featured in the candid’s sections of major magazines with at least one of their four children. The present their image as a strong and supportive family, and she is a major contributor to children’s charities they wouldn’t be a bad face of an organization. Also with her and her husband’s popularity worldwide, if the name ‘Beckham’ were to be associated people would most likely pay attention. The model, singer, fashion and mother was even asked to design a charm for the “Charms for Charity” campaign that the Cancer Research UK did. Along with that in 2009 she was given the “Mothers who make a difference” award from the Love Our Children USA foundation ( looktothestars.org/victoriabeckham). In my opinion, if her image was harmful for her organizations they would not award her nor ask her to design a major piece for that organization either.
VB Endorsement PPT
Political Cartoon Analysis
Obama Pinocchio Description –
This political cartoon draws a comparison between the President Barack Obama and the classic fictional character Pinocchio. Pinocchio is famous for his growing knows that extends every time he tells a lie. Similarly in the cartoon President Obama is pictured with large ears, common in most of the cartoons of him, as well as a Pinocchio nose. Above the nose are different statements the president has made, pointing to where the nose has grown with each statement. I do think the message that this cartoon is trying to get across is quite obvious to the audience. The message I interpreted from the cartoon was that President Obama has told lies just like the children’s character Pinocchio. This cartoon is an example of Explicit and Unintentional content. The content is explicitly political, however there does not seem to be any intent to persuade or change the audiences’ political views. The target of this political cartoon is primarily President Obama since he is the only thing pictured in the cartoon. The focus of this cartoon is the lies or empty promises that the president has told throughout his presidency. I do think that this cartoon is probably on a more acceptable level than other cartoons. While it does make a statement or bashes the president the childlike comparison to the fictional children’s story character makes the cartoon seem more humorous. The presentation of this cartoon was online with several other political cartoons, and the link to the site where this cartoon was found is http://dodocanspell.blogspot.com/2012/11/cartoons-us-presidential-election-35.html .
CNN's Domestic and Foreign Affair Coverage
We constantly use CNN to find articles and current event in Mass Media and Politics so I figured that’s where I usually find/consult news. The website link is http://www.cnn.com/. The only problem with the online link, is that CNN posts breaking news frequently so headlines can and do change frequent or as they get more information. I consulted this news source on Friday, November 13, 2015 at approximately 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time, so the headlines in this essay coincide with that time.
On CNN there were 12 major headliners, also called “Top Stories” on their website. I found that of the twelve headliners four of them related more too foreign matter. Some of the foreign matter headlines include: ’Jihadi John’ likely killed in an air strike, Kim Jong Un’s top official disappears, Police converge on restaurant in central Paris, and Bergen: ‘End of beginning’ for ISIS?
Twelve minus four gives us eight, eight domestic headlines. There were more, recent, headlines that related here at home. Some of those main headliners include: Supreme Court to weigh abortion law in Texas, Romney: The answer is still ‘no’, Trump: How ‘stupid’ are lowans, and Woman falls off cruise ship. Those are just four of the eight domestic headlines, but the first domestic headline that appears on the “Top Stories” section reads heavy and hard hitting.
Comparing the two matters, foreign and domestic, I am not sure why there is more domestic than there is foreign. On any given day the news can sway from one way to the other depending on what CNN chooses to cover, or what is receiving more attention in the media globally. At times we can care more about the current events here in the U.S. or overseas depending on the headlines of the stories. For example in the foreign affairs, we are all familiar with Kim Jong Un, however his top official being missing most really does not immediately impact the people within the U.S. However in the domestic section the Supreme Court weighing a universal law within one of the states is a big deal. This case could change the lives of millions of people within the U.S. We as U.S. citizens care more about the results of the case than finding Kim Jong Un’s top official. The headlines can sometimes just be click bait too. When you click on today’s Kim Jong Un’s disappearing official, you get a video segment that you have to watch and a small blurb under the video box, telling you to watch more from the CNN reporter. If you click on the Supreme court abortion case there is a video and a huge write up, including testimonies from both sides, key statistics behind abortion hearings in the state of Texas, and links to more articles about the projection of the Supreme Court for the 2016 year.
How CNN covered these stories helps facilitate the public opinion. There is not a lot of information known to go with the Kim Jong Un story, and if there is CNN intentionally left it out. This can cause the public to care less about this matter or make them put this lower on the priority list. With the Supreme Court abortion hearing, there was plenty of information as well as reporter speculation that can also help shape public opinion. There is a full story and a familiar anchor’s face to help this story stick with the public. The more information the public is given the more they have to support their stances in conversations, already existing beliefs, and maybe political values. This hearing is a major deal and the way that CNN covered the story shows the public that this story and any stories to follow have high priority.
Political and Scientific Poll
The poll I chose for this assignment is the poll that was conducted three days after the recent GOP debate on CNN. The sponsors for the poll were CNN however the pollster for this poll is ORC International. CNN went on to write a news story on the rise of candidate Carly Fiorina, a significant jump above former second place holder, Ben Carson, and right behind the controversial Donald Trump. They also make a note that it’s good that Republicans say they are enthusiastic to vote. If I were talking to someone interviewing me about politics I would probably say the same thing, since voting is also part of our civic duty. This poll also highlights the problem that many people have with polls and surveys. It is the idea that sponsors of these polls correlate their findings to a significantly larger groups based on a relatively small sample size. Based on the type of questions asked during this interview I would say that this was a choice or lean poll. A majority of these questions provided by CNN and ORC International pollsters have ask the interviewee rank the names of the candidates by (a)Favorable, (b)Unfavorable, (c) Never heard of, (d)No opinion. The pollsters were searching for Favorable or Unfavorable responses as they listed the candidates but if they didn’t choose either of those responses the interviewees commonly selected No opinion. This poll is focusing on the Republican candidates moving up or down in the polls before the primary elections. This ranking of these candidates change with multiple interviews, action, and speeches these candidates give along their campaign trails. I believe that this poll is an example of “One-Shot” effect. With this poll being taken very shortly after the debate and this being one of the biggest debates, it’s possible that the ratings for these candidates might be the highest they’ve ever been or will ever be during the race. This poll is considered a telephone poll because it was conducted by calling the correspondents over the telephone or cell phone. The correspondents were selected based on a random digit dial method. The pollster chose the respondent in each house hold by whose birthday was most recent. The sample size for this particular Gallup Poll was 1,006 random adults above the age of 18. The margin of error for this poll was ±3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level. The news report for this poll is http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/20/politics/carly-fiorina-donald-trump-republican-2016-poll/index.html and the immediate link for this poll and the results is http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/09/20/rel10a.pdf.