Cancel vs. Consequence in the Sports Industry – Work In Sports podcast - a podcast by Brian Clapp - Work in Sports

Hey everybody, I’m Brian Clapp VP of Content and Engaged Learning at WorkinSports.com and this is the Work In Sports podcast.







So, I want to rant for a little bit - it’s my show, I get the soapbox and I’m deciding to use it. 







There is so much anger and division on cancel vs. consequence, and I want to try and have a meaningful conversation with you through the lens of Mike Milbury’s recent comments on the NHL on NBC Stanley Cup Playoff coverage. 







For those of you not in the know, during a recent game Milbury and analyst Brian Boucher were discussing the benefits of the NHL's playoff bubble.















Boucher: "If you think about it, it's a terrific environment with regard to -- if you enjoy playing and enjoy being with your teammates for long periods of time, it's a perfect place," Boucher said.







And then Milbury added: "Not even any woman here to disrupt your concentration,"







Since the comment, Milbury has announced that he will not be part of NBC Sports' broadcasts 







"In light of the attention caused by my recent remark, I have decided to step away from my role at NBC Sports for the remainder of the Stanley Cup Playoffs," the 68-year-old Milbury said in a statement released Saturday.







"I do not want my presence to interfere with the athletes as they try to win the greatest trophy in sports.”







There was and is outrage on both sides of the subject -- some say it’s an overreaction, and Milbury’s comments were just the truth and this is another example of cancel culture. 







Others say this is the same tired cliches minimizing women, their impact and value, degrading them to a distraction and fodder for men to ogle at...and that this is an example of there being consequences because words matter, and what you say matters.  







Let me start by saying this -- analysts have a tough job of trying to speak off the cuff in a fast-paced game and when they try to be irreverent, get off-topic, play for a laugh line, or teeter out of their lane -- things get out of control fast.  







But, the best at it, don’t seem to run into this problem -- because they have focus and they know their job is to talk about the game in front of them, not seek out high fives from adoring fans who think they are witty and on the edge.  







Let’s get into the comment itself in the most simple way possible --  is it fair? or is it cliche? 







Look, I’m a white straight married male, the most privileged class in our society, and I’m so fricking tired of the stupid, old, cliched tropes like this toward women. This is the most banal, boring observation about the human condition -- women are a distraction and men are just prey to their seductiveness.







This is the slippery slope of irreverent commentary -- it may look harmless or funny to some when isolated -- “ah, what he said wasn’t so bad, loosen up!”   But put it in context, weigh it down with the history of misogyny, put yourself in someone else’s shoes who has battled inequality and hasn’t been fed privilege throughout their life… and maybe you’ll hear things differently.







To be honest, I’d be offended if I was on either side of this narrative -- of course, it’s more insulting to women, who surely don’t deserve to be relegated to “distraction”. But if I was a player, in the frickin Stanley Cup finals, and some dude was assuming I couldn’t hold my focus and...

Further episodes of The Work in Sports Podcast - Insider Advice for Sports Careers

Further podcasts by Brian Clapp - Work in Sports

Website of Brian Clapp - Work in Sports