Criticizing Amateur Athletes

By Michael Schneider and Kirk Gholson
We are looking at the dilemma of the media criticizing amateur athletes' character rather than just issues pertaining to their performance. Is the media intentionally trying to embarrass the athletes? If that is the case, what are their motives for doing so? When does this criticism cross the line to personal attacks that could affect the athlete's personal life and possibly even the athlete's family? In a post-game press conference Oklahoma State head coach Mike Gundy defends his player, quarterback Bobby Reid, from what he calls a personal attack by journalist Jenni Carlson. Even though he didn't handle the situation professionally, he had a valid point in protecting his player. He points out that, if you want to criticize an amateur athlete, it should be an athlete that doesn't do the right thing. Furthermore, you shouldn't downgrade the athlete. It is fair to make constructive, analytical criticism from the sport's perspective , but it is not fair to attack the athlete's character. The athletes are not professionals and are not getting paid for their abilities. Some might have the opportunity to take their ability to the professional level, but some might be simply trying to earn an education. The motive for criticizing an amateur athlete might start by simply trying to increase readers. When does that turn into the unethical dilemma of possibly attacking an amateur athlete's character and damaging his reputation?