I have yet another post from Slick to recycle - this one concerning the same WSD debate that garnered 35+ comments when I posted on it. If you're just checking in for the first time in while skip this one and go to Sarah's post (next one down). It's original and much more important.
The Show
For those of you who haven't listened to the show, it was clearly the best show of its kind in the U.S. and in many parts of the world. The show would broadcast for 2 hours everyday about the sport, offering news, opinions, taking calls, and in general, educating people in this country about the sport. The show had world-class guests and talked almost on a daily basis to leading members of the global media, international star players, first team managers from European teams, and even referees. The show was one of the most downloaded sports podcasts on iTunes. In short, this was no amateur show. It was the authority in this country and largely responsible for growing the game in the U.S. after 7-odd years on the air.
The Controversy
About five months ago, the founder and host, Steven Cohen, made some very controversial and in some cases, incorrect statements about the Hillsborough Disaster on or around the time of its 20th anniversary. For those of you who don't know, the Hillsborough Disaster happened in 1989 and resulted in 96 people being crushed to death (from compressive asphyxia)...all Liverpool fans. However, although he half-heartedly recanted his incorrect statements, as a life-long Chelsea fan (and despiser of Liverpool) he still maintained the simple point that 'he feels that anytime - not just at Hillsborough - when people are crushed to death by their fellow man, those who were part of the crowd must accept some measure of responsibility' (taken from Matt's summary of his stance on his blog). Matt has crafted a wonderful post on this topic, and I'd suggest you read his blog if you'd like even more information on this controversy. Even though an investigation (The Taylor Report) into this tragedy concluded that 'failure of Police control' was the primary cause, I completely agree with Steven's simple point or opinion. In fact, I don't see how any reasonable person could disagree with that statement - it's common sense and fairly obvious.
The Death Spiral
'It's not what you say, it's how you say it'. In my opinion, the show would still be on the air if not for what happened next. Instead of sincerely apologizing for his factual misstatements and dropping the issue, Steven, the host, continued to add fuel to the fire. He was insensitive, he went on rants, he published emails and disparaged those who disagreed with him on the air...so much so that I stopped listening for a few weeks when it all happened. However, Steven isn't the only one to blame. More often then not it was in response to angry calls or emails to the show from people that were wound too tightly. At first, it was in response to his original comments but it quickly got out of control to a point where people were arguing about the previous argument and not really about the point at hand. My point is, both sides continued the debate until it escalated into a dangerous, irrelevant, 'pissing contest' involving the FBI (threats to people's safety) and many people boycotting the show. There were a few groups that went after the show's sponsors, but in the end the show stopped airing due to Steven's concerns for his and his family's safety.
The Conclusion
Although I'm not really going to offer up my opinion on who I think was right and who was wrong (because both sides were both right and wrong at the same time), I'll offer up my one observation. This weekend I had a lot of time to think about this issue while painting my fence and ultimately I concluded it was a classic example of the following:
- Sometimes it's better to do the right thing rather then to be right
As many people have experienced, I feel that both sides in this argument were blinded by their desire to be right at the expense of doing the right thing. Neither side took the high road. If, at any point, either side would have chosen to do the right thing in the way they handled this situation, it would never have gotten this far. In addition, there were many cases where people on both sides of the debate thought they were doing they right thing but lost sight of the bigger, more important picture. As a result, one side was victorious but everyone (both sides, the listeners, the sport, the sport in this country) ended up losing. How neither side could see that coming can only be attributed to one factor: pride.
While searching for Proverbs 16:18 at the start of this post, I stumbled across a blog called 'Sheri's Thoughts On God'. In June of this year she made a post about a sermon given on the topic of pride. Quite frankly, the story she tells is eerily similar to this one. Her pastor 'reminded us that much of the world is in conflict, and for one single reason: pride. Peace, he said, requires humility. But pride demands justice - or what we individually decide is justice.' I couldn't help but be reminded of Jesus' silence from the time he was captured in the garden to his crucifixion.
It's funny...in the end what struck me is not who was right or wrong, who won, or whether or not the show is still on the air. What I'll take away from the situation is a profound lesson learned by observing other people's (thankfully) mistakes. Or, to put it more simply, a reminder of the old saying 'pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall' (Proverbs 16:18)."
Excellent post. I too am missing my daily WSD fix this week. However, I think it's fair to say that Steven Cohen did make sincere attempts to reconcile (taking the high road if you will). Refer to the following summary written by Mark Sawyer, the professor of Political Science at UCLA that attempted to mediate things between the two sides:
ReplyDeletehttp://socceruniverse.ning.com/profiles/blogs/liverpool-supporters