It is rare to find topics regarding morality and societal values in the news.
What is even more rare is finding such topics on ESPN, where depth and heavy thinking aren’t necessary and emojis are apparently substitutes for words when describing sporting events.
The story I am referring to is of the lowly Los Angeles Lakers — specifically two of their players, D’Angelo Russell and Nick Young. Last week, a video surfaced of Young talking about women, specifically the 19-year-old with whom he cheated on his fiance, Iggy Azalea.
As it turns out, the video, which appears to have been covertly shot with an iPhone and without Young’s knowing, was filmed by his own teammate, rookie point guard Russell.
ESPN and the entire sports media world did what any respectable journalism outlet would do and pounced on this juicy story like lions on a fattened gazelle. It’s not often TMZ-caliber stories like this arise in the sports world, and you can’t blame ESPN for milking as many clicks as it could from it.
However, the intriguing part is found in the way this entire fiasco has been presented and spread. Every story has seemingly been about the dramatic divide in the Lakers locker room, with one side being Russell and the other being everybody else.
Stories began to arise about how poorly Russell was being treated by fans and teammates. From other players leaving when he sat down at their table to eat (the stuff of middle-school cafeterias), to having his own "fans" boo him into oblivion at a home game, Russell had a rough week.
Maybe he deserved it, but the share of shaming from Internet elitists has disproportionately been sent in Russell’s direction, as if Young was only an innocent lamb caught in the crossfire.
Are we just going to pretend Young’s part of the story didn’t happen? A man admits to cheating on his current fiancée, yet most people spend all of their efforts shaming the person who got it on tape. Both players are at fault here, but I think ESPN, players and NBA fans have completely lost sight of the big picture.
When two people commit immoral acts, can one be greater than the other? If both are revealed at the same time, is it inevitable that one will take priority over the other?
Think about each side as if it were in a vacuum, happening independently.
Russell getting caught jovially recording his teammate while they hang out doesn’t make ESPN’s front page.
Young cheating on his celebrity wife does.
But no, in the NBA, being a teammate trumps remaining faithful to your partner.
Apparently, fidelity to teammates is superior to that of women, and based on the behavior of the Laker’s locker room, being a snitch is worse than cheating.
Imagine an NBA in which Young is isolated/polarized for infidelity to his fiance. In this scenario, I’m not sure what the reaction toward Russell would be. Praise him for revealing the truth? Or would we still shun him for not being a good teammate?
All in all, this whole story is just two professional basketball players finding themselves in a nasty situation gone public.
Both parties are wrong, but that does not play into the media’s need for a good guy/bad guy dynamic. The media and most consumers gravitate toward stories with defined sides: a hero to sympathize with and a villain to be upset at.
The reality, however, is that sometimes this is not the case and is instead just a fabricated rule the media feels can apply to 100 percent of situations. It is entirely possible, as this story shows, for both parties to be at fault and, frankly, it would be nice if the media would portray it this way.
Andrew Hall is a UF economics sophomore. His column usually appears on Thursdays.
