(1) I wasn’t sure where to add the response to the section on “Intersections: Sport, Immigration, and Religion,” so will add it here as a link:

Rozaitul et al

(2) Below is the response to “Taking a Shot”:

The cinematic references are 42 (Jackie Robinson), The Express (Ernie Davis), Race (Jessie Owens), and Glory Road (Don Haskins). As Gailily asserts in “Shut up and dribble!,” sport is both a functionalist “apolitical space” while at the same time “does not operate in isolation from broader society.” These films speak to this dichotomy and the intersection of celebrity, athletics, and social justice.

What strategies do athletes employ to speak out?
In every case referenced – winning. Their loudest voices were their accomplishments, their speeches were their performances, their words their artistry. Had they failed their voices would have been hollow and turned against them and their communities. Nothing speaks as loud and clear as success.

What is the commentary on athletes using their voices in these shows?
In each film the main characters practiced quiet dignity, courage, and resilience. Their voices were restrained, limited and measured, preferring respect over confrontation and challenge, their messages referencing competition over politics. And in each case the general social commentary was as expected when social, cultural and political norms are threatened; few have the intellect and presence to comprehend challenge and see opportunity, the more common reaction is vitriol and acrimony. Sport brings out the best and worst in people, and race, religion, and gender are accelerators. Galily speaks to the power of celebrity athlete voices to enhance democracy by disrupting poltical homophily and echo chambers, however, in the mid 20th century this was not as culturally accepted and social media did not exist.

How do race and/or gender or other identities inform this representation?
In each case the films are historical, produced decades after the events transpired, and frame the cultural norms of two different moments in time. Each also merge three different themes: sport, race, and biography. The protagonists are viewed as powerful agents of change (“breaking barriers”) via their personal excellence (sporting, character, etc.). They each hold, and are presented as, possessing Christian ideals of stoicism, humility, inner strength, and integrity. These in turn “humanize” them into terms the greater white audience can consume and relate to.

How do these representations shape how we understand the sports themselves?
The sports are seen as abstract and pure and the real judge, jury, and court. Whereas the human element (the administrators, management, fans, and other supporting casts) are viewed as playing a different game. These two games (on and off the playing surface) are always contrasted against each other, and this dichotomy informs the viewers comprehension of the nature and realities of contemporary sport. Sport is presented as natural and pure, a framework, or general set of rules, devoid of politics, which becomes infused with more powerful sociopolitical constructs and messages (ancillary impurities and contaminants).

Reference:
Galily, Y. (2019). “Shut up and dribble!”? Athletes activism in the age of twittersphere: The case of LeBron James. Technology in Society, 58(Complete). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.01.002