Why They’re Really Mad at LeBron: Powerful Black Males in the Media

by Jean-Claude Sinclair
They burned his jerseys. They removed the painted mural of his likeness in Cleveland. They cursed him. The owner of the Cavs placed a hex on him. Media outlets have crucified him. The question that begs to be asked is “Why?”
People have envied James from the start. In fact, some people still refuse to give the man his due. James became a global icon faster than most media figures. How he broke into the game, however, is still controversial. The typical poor-single-mother-growing-up-in-a-slum sob story did not resonate with all fans and critics—James and his mother were lambasted for their materialistic exploits.


Most do not deny the overwhelming talent running down in rivulets over James’ long, taut limbs. America (and some would say the world) has realized James’ unmistakable calling. James revitalized Cleveland and energized the NBA. His amiable attitude has been repeatedly cited. So why, then, was James’ decision to make the move to Miami so censured? He is one of the most recognizable faces in sports and one of the most successful athletes ever. Why the visceral attacks on his character? How could people who claimed to love him turn on him so quickly?

The combination of Blackness and status can be lethal. Combine Black maleness and status, and raging fires could rise from Earth and swallow continents into oblivion. Throughout history, White America (as well as the media) has tried to control Black maleness as well as contort it. We can look at books, magazines, film, and newspapers published in the early 20th century that painted Black men as avaricious, animalistic rapists who satiated themselves by attacking White women and engaging in thievery and other crime. During slavery, there were three major stereotypes of Black men that were perpetuated—Jack, the slave that worked hard but still asserted his autonomy, the slave who constantly rebelled and killed Whites (inspired by men like Nat Turner and Denmark Vessey), and Sambo, the slave who was docile and compliant. Though these traits are not overtly (in most cases, at least) promulgated in contemporary media, such stereotypes and imagery still remain entrenched in the fabric of America. Contemporary stereotypes of Black men emphasize hyper-masculinity, criminality, and sexual prowess. The point is, the imagery of the Black male must be controlled and disseminated by Whites, so that the “insatiable Black man” can be contained. James acquired status and power and was propelled into the upper echelons of success. However, when he chose to take the power loaned to him and acquire autonomy, a sense of being and self-definition, he was promptly eviscerated by the press. He was even reprimanded by Air Jordan, one of America’s most loved sports figures. Michael Jordan, a Black man, was able to finesse White America and soothe and calm their fears about Black maleness reigning unchecked. He strode a political tightrope with an effortlessness and grace that perhaps can never be replicated. However, even America’s most beloved superstar tripped up a few times. Jordan was criticized intensely for his refusal to dine with former President George H.W. Bush. According to cultural critic Helán E. Page, “his un-embraceable decision not to show was construed as unpatriotic. Media outlets blasted him for having insulted the president.” The few media voices that supported Jordan’s decision were muted. In 1992, Jordan “denied the NBA and the Olympics any right to use his likeness on clothing sold to fans.” He was accused of behaving greedily by detractors. Even superhuman, otherworldly Mike fell out of favor at times with the media, and, by extension, the American public.

LeBron James is being berated because he made his own decision. A Black male public figure can have power, if they act in the interests of the dominant group. When they do not, however, they can be publically castigated, rebuked, and refuted. In some cases, the power and status they once reigned with can be rescinded altogether. James and Jordan are not the only Black sports figures to “use their powers for evil.” We need only look at athletes like Tiger Woods and Michael Vick to examine the relationships between Black male public-ness, power, and their ties to the establishment. What I think we should recognize is that even though it can be argued that progression has been achieved, racial imagery continues to play a large role in shaping public opinion. We should also realize the power that imagery has on worldview and search for ways to address contemporary problems via this ever-evolving, perennial medium.

Further Reading:
“‘Black Male’ Imagery and Media Containment of African-American Men.” Helán E. Page
The Slave Community by John Blassingame
The Assassination of the Black Male Image by Earl Ofari Hutchinson
Only Skin Deep: Changing Visions of the American Self, edited by Coco Fusco & Brian Wallis