Tweet
Does anyone think Michael Vick is getting treated a little on the harsh side? Now that he has entered a plea of "guilty" and thereby admitted allegations against him, he's going to get hammered.
I take no position on what is happening to Vick other than to comment that it seems he is receiving harsher treatment than he would have received just a few years ago (let me repeat: I take no position on whether it is too harsh or too lenient). I think we are witnessing a shift of public opinion on its 'celebrities' and how they should be treated when they behave badly.
In September of 2004, prosecutors dismissed rape charges against Kobe Bryant when the alleged victim was reluctant to go forward. Remember nearly a year earlier when Bryant was arrested for rape? He played ball while the charges hung over his head. Many voices reminded us of the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". Bryant was in the middle of a media storm. His wife got a huge diamond out of the deal. That storm surrounding Bryant was not as intense as the storm that surrounded Michael Vick. Vick, charged with dog fighting, not rape, was told to stay away from the football practice field. Few were talking about "innocent until proven guilty".
Okay, dog fighting is a terrible thing (I'm a dog fan...I am currently owned and trained by a Golden Retriever and was trained by two before her) but, compared to rape? Interesting. Now that Vick has pleaded guilty, we know he admits doing some pretty terrrible stuff.
A year ago, society was quick to condemn the Duke Lacrosse players...fortunately, the system struggled along and bounced the players out of court after recognizing a prosecutor was out of control. In that case, a great coach lost his job. Young men lost their team and were kicked out of school. All that happened while they were presumed innocent. Not many of us were sympathetic to those Lacrosse players (just a buncha spoiled rich kids playing an odd game: off with their heads!).
My point is this: In the past two to three years, I detect a shift in the common thinking. While there has always been a tendency to snicker when a big shot gets his due, today we're outright cheering as they lead the big shot to the guillotine. [Sometimes I'm in the front row of the cheering section.]
And it isn't just big-time athletes who are at risk when they behave badly.
When Don Imus was creamed for his 'nappy-headed ho's' comment, I was a little surprised there weren't a few supporters of the bum. I assume he had a few but they were silent in the face of the tidal wave of "throw the creep out". I have never been an Imus fan -- actually, I've always ignored the guy and I suppose one could say I was neutral on him. I had heard him say things ten times worse in the past. What happened that suddenly everyone thought the bum should be thrown out of his shock-jock chair?
How about the Hollywood bimbos right now? Brittney, Lindsay, et al. When their names pop up on the TV, I change channels. If they each fell off the edge of the earth, I'd cheer. When Anna Nicole Smith kicked the bucket, I was relieved, knowing that name would soon fade from the public stage. When Paris went to jail, many of us were happy.
The pendulum is swinging a different direction, retreating from where it had been more a few years ago when Kobe Bryant was in trouble.
I contend that if Michael Vick had been arrested on the same charges in, let's say, 2000, this would be a minor blip on the screen. He'd be given a stiff fine, ordered to not own dogs for several years, and get some probation. He would not have been asked to stay off the practice field based on what at the time had been rumors. I think that if this happened in 2000, Vick would miss a couple games but would be playing football most of the season. Dog fighting is a low-brow, base, disgusting habit that says much about one's cultural background. In many societies, it is not a crime at all.
Yeah, I have heard some of the facts and they make me want to throw up. But my point is simply this: The pendulum of public sensibility is swinging a different direction these days. There are clear signs that any "celebrity" who steps out of line will be treated more harshly today than, say, five years ago. Those who are not getting the message risk losing it all.
I take no position on what is happening to Vick other than to comment that it seems he is receiving harsher treatment than he would have received just a few years ago (let me repeat: I take no position on whether it is too harsh or too lenient). I think we are witnessing a shift of public opinion on its 'celebrities' and how they should be treated when they behave badly.
In September of 2004, prosecutors dismissed rape charges against Kobe Bryant when the alleged victim was reluctant to go forward. Remember nearly a year earlier when Bryant was arrested for rape? He played ball while the charges hung over his head. Many voices reminded us of the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". Bryant was in the middle of a media storm. His wife got a huge diamond out of the deal. That storm surrounding Bryant was not as intense as the storm that surrounded Michael Vick. Vick, charged with dog fighting, not rape, was told to stay away from the football practice field. Few were talking about "innocent until proven guilty".
Okay, dog fighting is a terrible thing (I'm a dog fan...I am currently owned and trained by a Golden Retriever and was trained by two before her) but, compared to rape? Interesting. Now that Vick has pleaded guilty, we know he admits doing some pretty terrrible stuff.
A year ago, society was quick to condemn the Duke Lacrosse players...fortunately, the system struggled along and bounced the players out of court after recognizing a prosecutor was out of control. In that case, a great coach lost his job. Young men lost their team and were kicked out of school. All that happened while they were presumed innocent. Not many of us were sympathetic to those Lacrosse players (just a buncha spoiled rich kids playing an odd game: off with their heads!).
My point is this: In the past two to three years, I detect a shift in the common thinking. While there has always been a tendency to snicker when a big shot gets his due, today we're outright cheering as they lead the big shot to the guillotine. [Sometimes I'm in the front row of the cheering section.]
And it isn't just big-time athletes who are at risk when they behave badly.
When Don Imus was creamed for his 'nappy-headed ho's' comment, I was a little surprised there weren't a few supporters of the bum. I assume he had a few but they were silent in the face of the tidal wave of "throw the creep out". I have never been an Imus fan -- actually, I've always ignored the guy and I suppose one could say I was neutral on him. I had heard him say things ten times worse in the past. What happened that suddenly everyone thought the bum should be thrown out of his shock-jock chair?
How about the Hollywood bimbos right now? Brittney, Lindsay, et al. When their names pop up on the TV, I change channels. If they each fell off the edge of the earth, I'd cheer. When Anna Nicole Smith kicked the bucket, I was relieved, knowing that name would soon fade from the public stage. When Paris went to jail, many of us were happy.
The pendulum is swinging a different direction, retreating from where it had been more a few years ago when Kobe Bryant was in trouble.
I contend that if Michael Vick had been arrested on the same charges in, let's say, 2000, this would be a minor blip on the screen. He'd be given a stiff fine, ordered to not own dogs for several years, and get some probation. He would not have been asked to stay off the practice field based on what at the time had been rumors. I think that if this happened in 2000, Vick would miss a couple games but would be playing football most of the season. Dog fighting is a low-brow, base, disgusting habit that says much about one's cultural background. In many societies, it is not a crime at all.
Yeah, I have heard some of the facts and they make me want to throw up. But my point is simply this: The pendulum of public sensibility is swinging a different direction these days. There are clear signs that any "celebrity" who steps out of line will be treated more harshly today than, say, five years ago. Those who are not getting the message risk losing it all.
Comment