{"id":983,"date":"2018-06-04T17:19:33","date_gmt":"2018-06-04T21:19:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/engagingsports\/?p=983"},"modified":"2018-06-11T13:55:23","modified_gmt":"2018-06-11T17:55:23","slug":"for-nfl-players-social-media-is-key-to-winning-pr-battle-over-anthem-protests","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/engagingsports\/2018\/06\/04\/for-nfl-players-social-media-is-key-to-winning-pr-battle-over-anthem-protests\/","title":{"rendered":"For NFL Players, Social Media is Key to Winning PR Battle Over Anthem Protests"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
Members of the San Francisco 49ers kneel during the national anthem before an NFL football game against the Los Angeles Rams Sunday, Dec. 31, 2017. (AP Photo\/Mark J. Terrill<\/a>)<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

As the furor over NFL players taking a knee<\/a> during the national anthem rekindles, the full power of the players themselves has not yet come into play. Presidential politics and U.S. culture wars combined to make the issue a dominant subplot of the 2017 NFL season<\/a>. In late May, the league\u2019s team owners reopened the debate by deciding to create a policy requiring players on the field during the playing of the national anthem to stand, under penalty of fines and on-field penalties, though players can also stay in the locker room.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The policy was made and passed unilaterally, without consultation of the players<\/a> or their labor union, the NFL Players Association. Unusually, the owners didn\u2019t even conduct a formal vote, and at least two owners abstained<\/a> from the informal vote that was taken. President Donald Trump responded favorably and injected fresh criticism into the process by suggesting that NFL players who choose to stay in the locker room during the anthem \u201cmaybe \u2026 shouldn\u2019t be in the country<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Having made their moves, the teams and the president have three months before the 2018 season begins, in which to wait for players to respond. What happens next is uncertain, but my background as a sports and social media researcher<\/a> tells me it could be both surprising and unexpected for those who have traditionally wielded the most power in the NFL.<\/p>\n

Why is this happening now?<\/h2>\n

The timing of the owners\u2019 move is both calculated and politically savvy for the NFL. The announcement did generate significant backlash from many sports media commentators, as well as current<\/a> and former players<\/a> and the players\u2019 union<\/a>. The long Memorial Day holiday weekend didn\u2019t do much to blunt those criticisms<\/a>, but it\u2019s likely that the most negative reactions will dissipate by the middle of the summer.<\/p>\n

If and when the issue is reignited, it will likely be viewed as the players creating the issue, rather than the owners. For instance, the players\u2019 union is considering whether and how to respond \u2013 including potentially claiming violations of the collective bargaining agreement<\/a> under which football players work.<\/p>\n

How effective their actions are will depend largely on how the players present themselves on social media \u2013 what communications scholars call \u201cframing<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Framing the controversy<\/h2>\n

The controversy began in the 2016 NFL preseason with San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick protesting structural and institutional racism and bias<\/a> in the U.S., particularly in American police practices.<\/p>\n

The NFL\u2019s initial reaction supported Kaepernick\u2019s right to protest, saying \u201cPlayers are encouraged but not required<\/a> to stand during the playing of the national anthem.\u201d The 49ers organization was even more direct: \u201cIn respecting such American principles<\/a> as freedom of religion and freedom of expression, we recognize the right of an individual to choose and participate, or not, in our celebration of the national anthem.\u201d<\/p>\n

There were initial complaints about Kaepernick\u2019s choice not to stand for the anthem \u2013 including feedback that led to him taking a knee rather than just sitting on the bench<\/a>. But the protest didn\u2019t become a public lightning rod until President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence created a new frame around Kaepernick\u2019s kneeling<\/a> in protest against injustice. They proclaimed he was disrespecting the country and its military<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The effect was immediate and stunning. Before Trump objected, more than 60 percent of his supporters viewed the NFL \u201csomewhat or very favorably.\u201d In less than a month after he first spoke out against the NFL for allowing Kaepernick\u2019s protests to continue, that plummeted to near 30 percent<\/a>. That drop no doubt played a part<\/a> in the NFL owners\u2019 recent action to block on-field protests.<\/p>\n

Regaining control of the narrative<\/h2>\n

As the players determine how to respond, they\u2019re starting from a difficult position. Historically, NFL owners have almost always won their public relations battles, whether against players in collective bargaining negotiations<\/a> or against government watchdogs<\/a> in public stadium funding battles.<\/p>\n

However, the players have a tool they can use to try and reframe the protests, and keep the focus on their message: social media. With Instagram, Facebook and Twitter, they can communicate directly with fans and provide sports media observers nationwide with cogent and reasoned justifications for their actions.<\/p>\n

https:\/\/twitter.com\/JOEL9ONE\/status\/999408653445795840<\/p>\n

Some players have already began to reframe the protests as a First Amendment issue<\/a>, which current Philadelphia Eagles defensive lineman Chris Long did on May 23. In general, Americans support free speech<\/a> and object to attempts to limit it \u2013 even in the workplace<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Other players have pointed out that having players stand on the field for the national anthem is a relatively new phenomenon in the NFL<\/a>, dating from 2009. That point could also connect with a growing backlash against payments from the U.S. Department of Defense<\/a> for overt displays of national pride on the football field, such as staged family reunions<\/a> for soldiers returning from overseas.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

The answer to this kneeling issue is to leave teams in the locker room. We were always in the locker room during the anthem before 2009 with the exception of a MNF game the week after 9\/11 in Green Bay.
Nobody had an issue that they weren\u2019t out on the field for it before 2009.<\/p>\n

— Sage Rosenfels (@SageRosenfels18) May 23, 2018<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n