NYT and the NFL: Ends Justify the Means
On the front page of The New York Times March 24 issue was a groundbreaking article titled “The N.F.L.’s Flawed Concussion Research and Ties to Tobacco Industry.” The article was a public accusation that the National Football League had been falsely documenting the concussion records of over 100 players over the last 13 years. The statement was apparently supported by evidence acquired by The Times researchers who broke into the NFL system, although the article did not display any of the evidence they found. In addition, the article claimed that the NFL had been conspiring and sharing lawyers, consultants and lobbyists with American Tobacco Companies for years.
Only a few days later, The Times received a six-page letter from an NFL law firm that demanded the retraction of the article, saying that it was “false and defamatory.” The firm denied any ties to the tobacco industry and the letter claimed that the NFL gave the reporters evidence before publication that disproved the article’s central claims. “By publishing the story, fully aware of the falsity of the underlying facts, The Times recklessly disregarded the truth and defamed the NFL,” according to the letter from attorney Brad S. Karp of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP.
The NFL also requested that the reporters and editors involved in the investigation preserve all of their notes and correspondence related to the issue. Oops, too late. The Wall Street Journal covered a story of the NFL’s letter, which also ran front page on March 29. Despite the NFL’s attempt to throw a blanket over released information, there was no withdrawing what has now been rewritten by papers all over the country.
The headline was incredibly shocking to me. To think of the number of human lives intentionally omitted from medical records (which are essential to the players’ future health) is preposterous. The fact that it was done to make the company look good is even worse to think about.
This has not been the first accusation of ties between lobbyists or CEOs of different national industries. It has been seen between the FDA and Monsanto (a U.S. genetic modification company) and been called “a revolving door” where officials can pass information between their fluctuating dual jobs. It makes perfect sense that the tobacco industry could be in close relation with the NFL, solely because of all of their similarities. If the evidence spoken of in the Times article is valid, then it is true that the two corporations both have a history of falsely marketing their product in order to dismiss health concerns. This would make perfect sense, but of course the NFL has denied all of these ties.
The method of acquiring this evidence is not explicit public information, yet based on the NFL’s six page rebuttal, I know it was not at all consensual. The New York Times took the liberty to hire decoders who broke open the NFL database. Whether or not the search was lawful is not for readers like me to know, but after watching this fiery feud unfold, I have found myself juggling a larger and more fretting question.
At first my chief concern was with the reality of the lies that the NFL supposedly made that disregarded the injuries of several players in the league to conserve their own reputation, but the means by which The New York Times crossed private property just to publish a juicy story was also appalling. The actions of both the NFL and the publication have been unethically selfish, which leaves me contemplating which is the lesser of two evils.
After much thought (and grief), it only makes sense to declare the actions of the NFL more corrupt, harmful and wrong than the process by which The New York Times stole this information. However, it deeply saddens me that the actions of the newspapers have been no more than disregarded by the media. Journalistic integrity was undoubtedly relinquished in this scenario, and it is about time that people take dishonest journalism with a grain of salt. Corporations in this country shouldn’t be able to pardon these behaviors of trespassing with a bigger bait: in this case, the NFL scandal. It’s like the Kirkpatrick Doctrine in war or offsetting fouls in lacrosse. Both sides are wrong, but only one can receive the punishment.