PLANK DECEMBER 5, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
In an excerpt from his 2011 book An Accidental Sportswriter, published on Deadspin, the legendary Robert Lipsyte described how his feelings toward Bob Costas had evolved over the years. The NBC sportscaster had once told Lipsyte, who often wrestled with sports’ political implications, “In the sixties and seventies the issues were more clear-cut—gays, women, Ali—and you were on the right side.” But, Costas added, “Now the prevailing tone is so mean you have to play it straight. It’s not clear-cut, black and white. There needs to be more nuance. There’s more of a need to celebrate”—a defense, perhaps, of his own instinct to err on the side of affirmation. Lipsyte came away with the impression that Costas is half-journalist, half-shill, albeit somebody with the talent to do great work as a pure journalist—if he would only decide to.
Costas’ latest attempt to tackle “the issues” has drawn as much attention to him as anything in his impressive four-decade career. Last Saturday, Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Javon Belcher shot and killed Kasandra Perkins, his girlfriend and the mother of his three-month-old daughter, and then drove to the Chiefs’ practice facility, where, in sight of his coach and general manager, he shot himself in the head. During his traditional Sunday Night Football halftime editorial the following evening, Costas seemed to press firmly on a hot-button issue when he quoted columnist Jason Whitlock: “Handguns do not enhance our safety. They exacerbate our flaws, tempt us to escalate arguments, and bait us into embracing confrontation.” He (and Whitlock) added, “If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a handgun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”
Some on the left praised him for raising the point at all, and the right, of course, pilloried him for supposedly attacking the rights of gun owners. (Lipsyte was thrilled.) The sports-fan community, meanwhile, accused him of talking down to viewers and, in the words of Deadspin writer Sean Newell, being “another angry old guy yelling from his porch” (the post was titled, “Here Is Bob Costas’ Sanctimonious, Horseshit Editorial on Jovan Belcher”). Tuesday night on "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell," Costas clarified his remarks, saying, “Do I believe that we need more comprehensive and more sensible gun control legislation? Yes, I do.” Which, of course, makes you wonder why he didn’t just say that at first—in the middle of the highest-rated show of the week, rather than during the ten-spot on MSNBC.
Should Costas have just offered up a few bland, milquetoast words, as he did when controversial former NFL owner Art Modell died earlier this year? Or should he have taken an even stronger stand—for starters, by writing his own words rather than quoting somebody else’s, and more to the point, by actually advocating sterner gun control, which he now claims to support, on network television? One thing is clear: choosing the middle route was entirely in keeping with Costas’ career-long quest for more “nuance.” The way sports are consumed in 2012, though, makes this route less tenable than ever.
Costas has emceed a record nine Olympics, called major events in all of the Big Four sports (he was an analyst during the most recent Super Bowl), and even used to fill in as a Today Show host. His sprightly mischievousness and slightly self-aware tone—his young looks and outer-borough accent help in that respect—seem intended to ward off accusations of self-seriousness, but he is a sports whiz with real chops. Among his historic interviews were the 1994 sit-down in which Mickey Mantle openly discussed his alcoholism and, last year, the first interview with former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky after accusations of child sex abuse surfaced. “It seems that, if all of these accusations are false, you are the unluckiest and most persecuted man that any of us has ever heard about,” he famously told Sandusky during a masterful interrogation that was appropriately harsh and prosecutorial. (Then again, nobody was going to accuse Costas of being too tough on a child molester.)
Growing up in Queens with a father who constantly had gambling debts, Costas learned to love sports and loathe risks. “I think the best line ever written about me was, ‘He’s reverent and irreverent at the same time,’” Costas once said. As an opinionmongerer, he is known for his traditionalism and purism. He was initially against allowing wild cards to enter Major League Baseball’s playoffs, for example, and last year delivered a commentary (during halftime on Sunday Night Football, like this weekend’s gun remarks) against excessive celebrations of touchdowns, saying, “True style is in decline, while mindless exhibitionism abounds.” Though not everyone agrees with him, Costas rarely fails to be congenial and magnanimous—he even admitted later he was wrong about wild cards—and besides, the grounds for contention remain firmly within the foul lines.
Lipsyte, that great cynic, was the representative sports journalist of the long decade, from the moment in 1964 when Cassius Clay became Muhammad Ali until the advent of free agency in the mid-‘70s, when sports came to be seen like any other business. But in recent years, baseball’s steroids scandal and revelations about the long-term neurological effects of football have raised the dicier question of whether sports are less moral than most other businesses. Costas, a creature of the post-Ali, pre-steroids landscape, has increasingly found himself behind the times. For example, his book Fair Ball, a manifesto for baseball traditionalism, was published in 2000—after Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa’s home-run-derby-of-a-season in 1998—and did not deal with steroids. “I was talked out of it,” he said later, “and I regret that now.”
Since then, Costas has treaded the sports world’s churning waters through a mix of clarifications and equivocations. Costas said NBC was wrong to neglect to highlight that a diving gold-medalist was also the only openly gay athlete at the 2008 Olympics—after neglecting to highlight it himself. This year, he admirably noted that many felt the Opening Ceremony should acknowledge the 40th anniversary of the massacre of Israeli athletes, and then split the difference when it was gametime, continuing just to note that many felt that way. In 2008, Costas’ harsh words for sports bloggers (“a high-tech place for idiots to do what they used to do on bar stools”) garnered little attention. What became a story was when he hosted Deadspin editor Will Leitch and sportswriter Buzz Bissinger on his HBO show, Costas Now, and let Bissinger call Leitch “full of shit” and rant about how blogs are “dedicated to dishonesty.” Leitch tried to stay polite. Costas tried to stay passive, and afterwards said to a reporter of Bissinger, his friend, “I knew more or less where he stood, but we did not speak beforehand.”
Sunday night, he was going for a similar type of plausible deniability. In the wake of an historic sports event, and with 20 million viewers watching, Costas said a few meaningless sentences about “perspective” and then effectively outsourced the rest of his commentary to Whitlock. He hedged in order to try to make himself inconspicuous.
He did this even upon clarification: Tuesday night, he insisted, as though trying to exculpate himself, “I never mentioned the Second Amendment, I never mentioned the words gun control.” What seems evident is that Costas did not want to mention these things at the moment when everyone was watching. He did enough to please the pro-gun control partisans and plenty to piss off the anti-gun control partisans, but not enough to convince the great middle or even make it clear exactly where he stood. Some of us felt his editorial, even in its compromised state, was somewhat worthwhile, but his interview with O'Donnell gave us little evidence to rebut the case that it was “sanctimonious” and “horseshit.”
The sports world has evolved beyond a place when you can stay above the fray, particularly when you are as ubiquitous as Costas is. In 2012, we discuss human ugliness manifested in sports, as we did when Lipsyte was tweaking Ali’s detractors as barely hidden racists. But, having learned from Lipsyte that sports is a sort of civic religion, we use it as a launching pad to discuss broader issues like, say, the prevalence of handguns in this country—and we do it without equivocation or apology, and in our own words. Today you can be a great sports journalist, but you have to get your hands dirty. You can also be a great shill, although you may have to sell your soul. What you can’t be anymore is Bob Costas.
11 comments
My problem with Bob Costas is that he is a sports journalist who knows nothing about the sport he covers--he hosts one of the most highly visible football programs in the country (NBC's "Football Night in America"), and yet, he knows absolutely nothing about football. Nada. Zip. In fact, he and Peter King (who also knows squat about the game) ruined what was perhaps the most knowledgable (and longest running) football program on TV. Ever. HBO's "Inside the NFL" (which is now on Showtime). One might argue about whether a sports journalist should be more of a journalist, and speak with authority about the larger issues of the day, but, at a minimum, a sports journalist should be able to speak with authority about the sport he supposedly covers.
- BenNevis
December 5, 2012 at 12:49pm
Well, he was right to at least mention guns. In the case of domestic arguments in particular, or even simple accidents, the presence of a gun can result in death. An enraged person with a frying pan can still do plenty of damage but it's a lot harder to actually to kill somebody - with a gun it's all too easy, too quick and then - that person is lost forever and your life is ruined too. We need to address this fact: people kill people and people with guns kill people easily, on impulse, in the heat of the moment and purely by accident. Costas is right too about our current meanness. This isn't just in the sports world of course - that distasteful person Ted Nugent thinks people on welfare should lose the right to vote and spending on Social Security and Medicare should be "slaughtered." I have seen comments on blogs discussing Walmart to the effect that poor working people shouldn't have children. Something really bad has happened to America and however this is addressed, by whomever, on whatever channel, it's vital to discuss it. PS I think they're nuts to limit end zone celebrations.
- Sophia
December 5, 2012 at 1:33pm
From the article: "He (and Whitlock) added, “If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a handgun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”" The issue with Costas' statement is that it ignored the numerous other factors. Alcohol abuse, history of violence over girlfriends, prior arguments with girl friends that were so loud the cops had to be called. Hours before this happened, Belcher had been out to dinner with another woman. He arrived home at 6:45 AM and got into an argument. This was a troubled man with anger issues knee deep in woman issues. He was capable of killing her with a single punch. He was capable of killing her with a kitchen knife or Stiletto (OJ's alleged weapon of choice). He unloaded an entire clip on her. This was a man out of his mind with rage. Such a sad story. But blaming it purely on the gun would be like blaming it on his fists if he opted to beat her to death. Or blaming it on a knife if he decided to do an OJ on her. That was the mistake of Costas.
- seattleeng
December 5, 2012 at 3:29pm
I suppose it was appropriate that this young man shot himself in the head since he most likely already suffered brain injury. I separate college sports and pro sports, in the latter case I don't really care what the participants inflict on themselves. In college sports the participants don't have the maturity to know better while the "grownups" (i.e., the colleges) reap the rewards. College sports is an oxymoron. Not that the grownups are going to do anything about it, not while they reap the rewards. Fortunately, economics will take care of it for us. Big time college sports requires a certain critical mass, a critical mass of current students and alumni. With college degrees losing value relative to the cost, fewer will choose to make the "investment". And when enough make that choice, the critical mass required to support big time college sports will no longer be attainable. Good riddance.
- rayward
December 5, 2012 at 3:30pm
I remember when Costas started out on national TV. Didn't like the guy. Seemed like a bit of a phony. He's gotten better, although, as BenNevis notes, he doesn't know much about football. He does know baseball and has a good interview show on MLB Network called Studio 42. He's mostly a fence-sitter on social issues, but that's because of political correctness. One misstatement and he's gone. Jimmy the Greek was supposedly canned for making a true statement--that blacks are often better athletes than whites because slave owners bred them to be better physically. What the slave owners did was ugly, but it shouldn't be ugly to talk about it. What was ugly was firing the Greek for telling the truth (can you tell I hate political correctness?). I agree with seattle (which I've done a few times, although the sun will burn out before he agrees with me). Belcher was determined to kill his girlfriend; he was lying in wait for her as a predator; and he was going to do her in by any means at hand. A tire iron from his car would have served the same purpose as a gun. I grew up in gun country (Michigan), and I strongly support the right of citizens to own guns. What I object to is the worship of guns that has overtaken large segments of our population--Right-wing whites and inner-city blacks and Latinos. Guns are like money (often they ARE money). Guns are not the problem per se. The LOVE of guns is. And Belcher obviously loved guns. He is supposed to have shot his girlfriend nine times. Happiness is a warm gun--when you're disturbed beyond repair, as so many millions of Americans are.
- magboy47.
December 5, 2012 at 6:13pm
I can't judge how much Costas knows about football not knowing enough myself to assess that about Him. But in the seedlings of the lines of argument starting to sprout on this thread I'm with Sophia's down to earth, practical post. Good for Costas for saying as much as he did. I've always enjoyed Costas's broadcasting. He's smart, articulate, lively and fair minded and interesting to listen to, whenever I do, which isn't often. But to judge him by criteria applicable to a different kind of "let er rip" commentator, say Bissinger, is misplaced, I'd argue. So he plays it safer than he might in his commentary: that's who he is and what his mainstream broadcasting style is. By the way great broadcasters/entertainers--I'm thinking of Letterman, Chelsea Handler, Bill O'Reilly, Costas, even Howard Stern; there are of course legions of them---know in their bones where to draw lines given their broadcasting context--which is why there is variation in raucousness and shock amongst the few I've listed. For me a great broadcaster simply compels attention in a way different from a terrible roadside accident, think Rush Limbaugh, from which one can't turn away. A great broadcaster fundamentally merges knowing interestingness and interest in a final synthesis of provocative entertainment apt for his or her medium.
- basman
December 5, 2012 at 11:27pm
P.S. I'm now boycotting watching football because of the pervasive violence so clearly maiming and slowly killing its participants.
- basman
December 5, 2012 at 11:29pm
Guns don't kill people. Brain damaged athletes kill people. Otherwise, you are perfectly safe. As a child, before video games were invented, I vigorously (and totally incompetently) played "sandlot" football, basketball, baseball (and a few other activities. One day my three best friends and I were playing a vigorous game of tacklet football on a school field. I still remember how a kindly elderly gentleman (about my age now) spoke to us, "If you play tackle football without equipment, you are very likely to break your neck and paralyze youself, or cause some other serious injury. Just play flag football. It's much safer." We listened politely (as kids often did to adults in the 1950s and played flag for a few minutes. After the gentleman was gone, we looked at each other, said, "That's no fun," and went back to knocking each other down and rubbing each other's faces into the sod. Of course, even though he didn't know anything about concussions, the gentleman was right on. I have no idea where Frankie, Scotty, or Kenyon is today, or even if any is alive, but here I am at 68. My left arm is sore, and a urologist is going to examine the plumbing next month, but who knows, I might live until 80 or 90. And of course, the knocks on the head did nothing to my brain brain brain brain. By the way, did Costas ever compete in any sport, or just babble about it?
- skahn
December 5, 2012 at 11:49pm
The Unbearable Lightness of the NEW New Republic.
- arnon1
December 6, 2012 at 12:11am
Skahn: I've been away from here for a while. Good to know some things don't change: namely your self absorbed, mindless, impertinent drivel.
- basman
December 6, 2012 at 12:20am
Basman, agree on Costas. I've always liked him. His old one-no-one non-sports interview show (called "Later," which came on after the old Carson-Letterman lineup on NBC) is a great, underappreciated classic in the annals of broadcasting. I'd love to see someone put out some best-of episodes on DVD. As for this article, I'm with arnon. Not only does it seem that many of the featured posts these days are on the lighter side, but the argument seems muddled -- more like impressionistic musings than sharp commentary of the Chait school. As with the two recent posts vaguely and speciously defending the tabloid press (Alex Massie's piece on Fleet Street and the recent post on the New York Post's grotesque page 1 exploitation of the subway death), I can't quite make out what precisely this post is trying to say or persuade me to think. I get that it's basically critical of Costas, and I guess that it's saying that he should have taken a yet stronger stand on the gun issue in his comments. But Tracy doesn't really explain why he should have, nor does he coherently defend his thesis that there's no room anymore for the likes of Costas -- that is, I guess, someone who is neither a purely objective, distinerested observer on the one hand, nor a thoroughly opinionated commentator (or bloviator) on the other. Yeah, but why not? I like the combo that Costas brings to the table. He's got authority and commands respect precisely because he's not constantly expressing his opinion, or expressing it in the most pushy, extravagant fashion. I liked Olbermann's show on MSNBC, but for anyone not in the choir, it was easy to dismiss his commentary as just liberal ranting. (Even Aaron Sorkin's show gives the Will McAvoy character a Republican background and history of bland objectivity in order to bolster his credibility as he turns into an Olbermann type.) By being circumspect and careful, Costas is able to preserve his credibility and, in turn, give more weight to the viewpoint he's expressing or the considerations that he's introducing. Far more than Olbermann, who adopted Murrow's "good night and good luck" sign-off, Costas recalls for me the old CBS school of (non-sports) journalism that ended with Dan Rather's exile and Mike Wallce's death -- news guys not above getting specific perspectives and considerations out into the public discussion, while studiously cultivating the authority of a widely trusted journalist. It's a fine line, but simply because Costas is one of the few who still act in that spirit is no argument against it.
- JakeH
December 6, 2012 at 2:54pm