The NFL has once again found itself embroiled in controversy, this time regarding its decision to move Commissioner Roger Goodell’s annual Super Bowl press conference to Monday and make it invite-only. This move has drawn comparisons to the tactics of former President Donald Trump, who often used similar methods to control media narratives.
Sports journalist Mike Florio reported the news, stating that attendance at the press conference is typically at its lowest on Monday, and making it invite-only further restricts access. This decision has raised eyebrows and led to speculation about the league’s motives.
One possible reason for this move is the fear of accountability. Last year, journalist Jim Trotter questioned Goodell about the NFL’s lack of diversity in decision-making positions. Trotter’s contract with NFL Media was not renewed, and he later filed a racial discrimination/retaliation lawsuit against the league. His questions struck a nerve, and it seems that the NFL is now taking measures to avoid a similar situation this year.
The issue of diversity in the NFL is not a new one. Despite the recent hiring of three Black head coaches, the league still struggles with diversity at the highest levels. Trotter’s question last year highlighted this ongoing problem, and it seems that the NFL is now trying to silence any further discussion on the matter.
The league’s decision to move the press conference and make it invite-only sends a clear message – they do not want to address the elephant in the room. By limiting access and controlling the narrative, the NFL is avoiding any uncomfortable questions or criticism regarding its diversity efforts.
It is important to note that the NFL has denied any wrongdoing and is currently attempting to have Trotter’s lawsuit dismissed. They have hired Loretta Lynch, the first Black woman to serve as U.S. Attorney General, to defend them. However, the optics of this move are concerning, as it appears that the league is attempting to use a Black woman to defend against allegations of racial discrimination.
The NFL may have managed to remove the elephant from the room, but the issue remains unresolved. The league’s actions only serve to further highlight the ongoing problems with diversity and accountability within the organization. It remains to be seen if any reporters will have the opportunity, or the courage, to address this issue at the press conference. The lack of diversity among the attendees may further discourage any discussion on the matter.
In the end, Trotter’s initial question about the NFL’s difficulty in hiring Black people into decision-making positions still stands. The league’s attempt to control the narrative and avoid accountability only adds fuel to the fire. It is crucial for the NFL to address these concerns and take meaningful steps towards diversity and inclusion. Until then, the elephant in the room will continue to loom large.
