Amazon.com Inc

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares199 Views

    What to Know About Kyrie Irving’s Antisemitic Movie Post and the Fallout

    by

    Irving, the Nets guard, has faced backlash since he promoted an antisemitic film on social media last month.Nets guard Kyrie Irving is facing backlash for posting a link on Twitter to an antisemitic film last month.For a week, he declined to apologize or say that he held no antisemitic beliefs, prompting the Nets on Nov. 3 to suspend him indefinitely. He has since apologized, but the fallout continues: On Nov. 4, Nike condemned hate and antisemitism, and suspended its relationship with Irving immediately.Irving, a seven-time N.B.A. All-Star, has been with the Nets since 2019. He won a championship with the Cleveland Cavaliers in 2016, but over the past few years he has often been discussed more for his off-court views. In a 2018 interview with The New York Times, he suggested that the Earth might be flat, and over the past year he had refused to be vaccinated against the coronavirus.Here is what you need to know.Here’s what you need to know:What did Irving post on Twitter?When did the backlash start?How did Irving respond?Why did the Nets suspend Irving?What did Irving say in his apology?Why did Nike cut ties with Irving after he apologized?Will Irving play for the Nets again?What did Irving post on Twitter?On Oct. 27, Irving tweeted a link to “Hebrew to Negroes: Wake Up Black America,” a 2018 film driven by antisemitic tropes about Jewish people lying about their origins. Among its false and outlandish claims is the assertion that the Holocaust never happened.Irving also made an Instagram post with a screenshot of the film’s rental page on Amazon, which he had linked to on Twitter. Neither post included a caption or comment from Irving.The Instagram post was part of a story, a format that expires after 24 hours; the tweet was deleted Oct. 30.In a letter dated Nov. 4, the Anti-Defamation League and the Nets called on Amazon to take down or add explanatory context to the film and a related book, writing that they were “designed to inflame hatred and, now that it was popularized by Mr. Irving, will lead directly to the harm of Jews.”When did the backlash start?On Oct. 28, Rolling Stone magazine reported on some of the film’s antisemitic messages. Many other news media outlets began reporting on the article and Irving’s tweet.That night, the Nets’ owner Joe Tsai posted about the situation on Twitter, adding that it was “bigger than basketball”:“I’m disappointed that Kyrie appears to support a film based on a book full of anti-semitic disinformation. I want to sit down and make sure he understands this is hurtful to all of us, and as a man of faith, it is wrong to promote hate based on race, ethnicity or religion.”On Oct. 29, the N.B.A. released a statement condemning hate speech, but it did not name Irving. On Nov. 1, the N.B.A. players’ union, the National Basketball Players Association, issued a statement condemning antisemitism, but like the N.B.A., it did not name Irving, who is one of the union’s vice presidents.Antisemitism in AmericaAntisemitism is one of the longest-standing forms of prejudice, and those who monitor it say it is now on the rise across the country.Perilous Times: With instances of hate speech on social media and reported incidents on the rise, this fall has become increasingly worrisome for American Jews.Kanye West: The rapper and designer, who now goes by Ye has been widely condemned for recent antisemitic comments. The fallout across industries has been swift.Kyrie Irving: The Nets suspended the basketball player after he defended his support of an antisemitic movie. His behavior appalled and frightened many of his Jewish fans.Midterms: No major contest this year has been shaped by concerns of antisemitism more prominently than the Pennsylvania governor’s race.How did Irving respond?Irving addressed his posts publicly for the first time Oct. 29, after the Nets lost to the Indiana Pacers at Barclays Center. During a contentious news conference, Irving doubled down on his support of the film and an antigovernment conspiracy theory promoted by the Infowars host Alex Jones.“History is not supposed to be hidden from anybody,” Irving said. He added: “I’m not going to stand down on anything I believe in. I’m only going to get stronger because I’m not alone. I have a whole army around me.”Irving accused an ESPN reporter of trying to “dehumanize” him as he and the reporter argued about whether Irving had “promoted” the film by posting about it.The Nets played the Pacers again Oct. 31 at Barclays Center and faced the Bulls in Chicago on Nov. 1, but the team did not make Irving available to reporters after either game. General Manager Sean Marks said the team did not “want to cause more fuss right now, more interaction with people.” (The Nets, who have struggled on the court, also fired their head coach, Steve Nash, on Nov. 1, but Marks said the move was not related to Irving’s situation.)On Nov. 2, Irving announced with the Anti-Defamation League that he would donate $500,000 to anti-hate causes. The Nets said they would do the same.“I am aware of the negative impact of my post towards the Jewish community and I take responsibility,” Irving said in a statement. “I do not believe everything said in the documentary was true or reflects my morals and principles.”Why did the Nets suspend Irving?Irving last played for the Nets in a Nov. 1 game against the Chicago Bulls. He scored just 4 points in 33 minutes.Dustin Satloff/Getty ImagesBy Nov. 3, Irving had not apologized, and he had not been clear about what content he disagreed with in the film. N.B.A. Commissioner Adam Silver said he would meet with Irving soon.“Kyrie Irving made a reckless decision to post a link to a film containing deeply offensive antisemitic material,” Silver said in a statement. He added: “I am disappointed that he has not offered an unqualified apology and more specifically denounced the vile and harmful content contained in the film he chose to publicize.”About 30 minutes after Silver’s statement, Irving spoke to reporters at a Nets practice: “I didn’t mean to cause any harm. I’m not the one that made the documentary.”When asked what specific points in the film he did not agree with, Irving responded vaguely. “Some of the criticism of the Jewish faith and the community, for sure,” he said. “Some points made in there that were unfortunate.”When Irving was asked if he had any antisemitic beliefs, he said he respected all walks of life. “I cannot be antisemitic if I know where I come from,” Irving said when he was asked to answer the question with a “yes” or “no.”Within hours, the Nets suspended him for at least five games, saying he was “unfit to be associated” with the team. “We were dismayed today, when given an opportunity in a media session, that Kyrie refused to unequivocally say he has no antisemitic beliefs, nor acknowledge specific hateful material in the film. This was not the first time he had the opportunity — but failed — to clarify,” the Nets said in a statement.“Such failure to disavow antisemitism when given a clear opportunity to do so is deeply disturbing, is against the values of our organization, and constitutes conduct detrimental to the team.”Marks, the general manager, said Irving would need to meet with Jewish leaders, go through counseling and meet with the team, among other measures, before he would be allowed to return.What did Irving say in his apology?Hours after he was suspended Nov. 3, Irving apologized in an Instagram post, saying he “had no intentions to disrespect any Jewish cultural history regarding the Holocaust or perpetuate any hate.”“To All Jewish families and Communities that are hurt and affected from my post, I am deeply sorry to have caused you pain, and I apologize.I initially reacted out of emotion to being unjustly labeled Anti-Semitic, instead of focusing on the healing process of my Jewish Brothers and Sisters that were hurt from the hateful remarks made in the Documentary.”Why did Nike cut ties with Irving after he apologized?Nike condemned antisemitism on Nov. 4 and suspended its relationship with Irving “effective immediately.” The company had produced his signature sneakers since 2014.Omar Rawlings/Getty ImagesIrving’s apology seemed to come too late for Nike, which suspended its relationship with him “effective immediately” on Nov. 4 and announced it would not launch his next signature sneaker, the Kyrie 8.“At Nike, we believe there is no place for hate speech and we condemn any form of antisemitism,” the company said in a statement. “We are deeply saddened and disappointed by the situation and its impact on everyone.”Nike had produced Irving’s popular signature sneaker line since 2014; his contract expires in October 2023. One marketing expert said brands have become more conscious about their values in recent years.Will Irving play for the Nets again?The Nets said his suspension would last at least five games, meaning he cannot return until at least Nov. 13, when the Nets face the Lakers in Los Angeles.Marks, the general manager, said Irving’s apology was a “step in the right direction” but “certainly not enough.” It’s not clear if Irving will agree to meet with Jewish leaders or fulfill other mandates from the team. He has not spoken publicly since his apology.Some fans may not be ready to welcome him back, if that time comes. More than one million Jews live in New York City, and roughly 60 percent are in Brooklyn, where the Nets play at Barclays Center on Atlantic Avenue.Ben Berke, a Nets fan who lives in Astoria, Queens, told The Times that Irving’s apology was an “improvement.”“But I don’t want him on the team anymore,” he said.Marks said Nov. 4 that the Nets had not considered dropping Irving from the team.Reporting was contributed by More

    More stories

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Soccer

      As France Chases Title at Euros, Its League Faces a $400 Million Hole

      by

      French soccer teams could face economic disaster after a television partner said it would refuse to honor its contract. Transfers, salaries and budgets hang in the balance.French soccer’s new television deal was supposed to save the league and its clubs from a financial meltdown.Instead, it may have made a bad situation worse.Soon after France’s top soccer league, Ligue 1, announced this month that it had enticed Amazon to become its lead broadcaster, its longtime television partner, Canal Plus, reacted with fury.Canal Plus would neither pay for nor broadcast the two games per week it owned the rights to, the company said. Not at the premium price in its contracts, at least. And certainly not when Amazon was paying roughly $100 million less for four times as many games.“Canal Plus will not, therefore, be broadcasting Ligue 1,” the company said in a statement.The implications of the Canal Plus threat for the cash-strapped French teams could not be more serious. Already reeling from the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and the collapse last year of their league’s $1 billion television contract, clubs across France that had been planning to trim their budgets now face an urgent crisis.While Amazon has agreed to broadcast eight games a week for little more than $300 million per season, Canal Plus was on the hook to pay almost $400 million for the two games a week it had picked up in a previous rights auction. Now that it is refusing to pay, many clubs have entered the summer player-trading market worried less about sales and signings than about the possibility of bankruptcy.And they may have only weeks to find a way out.The chaos behind the scenes at the French league is in sharp contrast to the international image of French soccer, burnished by the success of its World Cup-winning men’s team. France started its quest for the European championship last week with a serene display against Germany, tied Hungary on Saturday in Budapest and remains the favorite to lift the trophy next month.Benjamin Pavard and France were held to a draw by Hungary on Saturday but the team remains a favorite to win Euro 2020.Pool photo by Bernadett SzaboMost of the players on France’s Euro 2020 roster play for clubs outside of France, but nearly all got their start with French teams. Now those same clubs are trying to plan for a future they cannot predict.Can they afford to sign new players to strengthen their squads? Can they even meet the payrolls for the ones they have? Or is it wiser now to be sellers — even in a depressed pandemic market? The answers may determine how many teams enter the season with their financial futures in doubt.“If you are not able to renegotiate player salaries you are risking bankruptcy — it’s as simple as that,” said Pierre Maes, the author of “Le Business des Droits TV du Foot,” a book on the soccer rights market.The deal with Amazon came as a shock to many who thought that a monthslong rights-fee dispute between the league and Canal Plus — a league partner since the network’s inception in 1984 — would be resolved by a win at auction for the French network. But Amazon was picked over a joint offer from Canal Plus and its Qatari partner, beIN Sports.Canal Plus executives have publicly expressed concern about Amazon, with Maxime Saada, the network’s chief executive, telling the business publication Challenges that the power of Amazon posed the “biggest danger” to the business model of Canal Plus. “We have to dodge them permanently,” he said. Perhaps underlining that power, a top French soccer official said the league was not prepared to turn down an agreement with a company as significant as Amazon, believing that a bet on the e-commerce giant was a bet on the future.But the outcome has introduced yet more uncertainty for a league that has been in a tailspin since it announced in 2020 that it would not be able to complete the 2019-20 season because of the pandemic. France was the only one of Europe’s top leagues to take the measure.Almost as soon as it returned to the field for a new season, though, the league was quickly convulsed by a second — and perhaps far more serious — crisis. Late last year, Mediapro, the Chinese-backed company with which the league had signed a record-breaking television contract, announced it could not meet its commitments. Less than three months after the start of its three-year deal, Mediapro surrendered the rights to French soccer and walked away.Canal Plus picked up the pieces, taking over Mediapro’s games at a discount, but it soon found itself in its own dispute with the league.The Canal Plus chief executive Maxime Saada, who said the company would not pay a multimillion-dollar rights fee or even broadcast French soccer games.Pool photo by Thomas SamsonAfter learning that the price Amazon had paid for the rights to its matches was lower than the one Canal Plus was contracted to pay for fewer (and less high-profile) games, the network argued that it should no longer have to spend 332 million euros ($394 million) for the rights that it sub-licenses from the Qatari broadcaster beIN.“Canal Plus will not pay 332 million euros for 20 percent of the matches, when Amazon broadcasts 80 percent for 250 million euros,” Saada told L’Équipe.While in many ways the situation in which Ligue 1 finds itself is particularly French, the collapse of the rights market in the country is only the most recent example of the plummeting value of soccer rights in Europe more generally. In recent auctions for television rights in Italy and Germany, the leagues in both countries ended up getting less than in their previous deals.England’s Premier League, the world’s richest domestic competition, required special government dispensation to roll over an agreement with its current partners to avoid a risky auction. And Spain’s top league will change the way it sells its rights to mitigate against what is likely to be a major drop-off in the price it can command.“My conclusion is that in France the bubble has burst and it’s actually what I’m forecasting to become a reality in other countries, too,” Maes said.The value of the Canal Plus rights is substantially lower since the collapse of the Mediapro deal, Canal Plus argued before the latest auction. It demanded that the league renegotiate the price or include its rights in the auction to find Mediapro’s replacement.The league refused and a court in France sided with it, saying Canal Plus had failed to demonstrate how it had been harmed.But while the network is preparing new litigation, and contends it can make its case, Amazon and the league are looking forward.“Ligue 1 football has a new partner and an exciting future,” Alex Green, the managing director of Amazon’s sports programming for Europe, said after the company’s biggest soccer deal to date was announced. “We won’t let you down.”For France’s top-flight teams, the joy of having a new, deep-pocketed partner has been quickly tempered by the potential loss of hundreds of millions of dollars from Canal Plus.Some French club executives, like the Olympique Lyonnais president Jean Michel Aulas, predict that Canal Plus will back down. “I do not see at all how Canal can deprive itself of having access to Ligue 1,” said Aulas, a member of the French league’s television rights committee.But, according to senior Canal Plus executives, the company is standing firm. Its first payment is due Aug. 5. At the moment, it has no plans to pay it.The rupture is significant. The relationship with Canal Plus — which has overcome previous disputes — has underpinned the economics of the French league for decades. The strain of the pandemic even led to intervention from government officials, including President Emmanuel Macron, who called on the network to play its role when the league’s finances started to teeter.Lille won the French club championship this season even as it moved to trim its budget.Denis Charlet/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesLigue 1’s president, Vincent Labrune, met with Canal Plus’s Saada several times before the auction, and warned him that a lowball bid for the broader rights package on offer could lose out should a rival emerge. Saada, and Canal Plus, considered that unlikely after the league failed to sell the rights in a January auction in which neither Canal Plus nor beIN participated. But the bad blood between the league and its main partner started to escalate.The bitterness, according to many commentators, clouded the negotiations and led to an outcome in which the only winner appears to be Amazon, which through the deal secured majority rights to a top European soccer league for the first time.“It’s very opportunistic because Amazon has profited from a very emotional situation,” Maes said.A league board member involved in the decision said Ligue 1 was confident Canal Plus would have to honor its contract, and that under French law action could be taken within 15 days if the money is not paid.But for French clubs who need to decide now on budgets, players and plans for next season, that may be too late. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Football

      N.F.L. Signs Media Deals Worth Over $100 Billion

      by

      The new deals with broadcasters and streaming services pave the way for team owners to add a 17th regular season game to the schedule and to recoup revenue lost with reduced fan attendance in 2020.The N.F.L. signed new media rights agreements with CBS, NBC, Fox, ESPN and Amazon collectively worth about $110 billion over 11 years, nearly doubling the value of its previous contracts.The contracts, which will take effect in 2023 and run through the 2033 season, will cement the N.F.L.’s status as the country’s most lucrative sports league. They will also set the stage for the league’s owners to make good on plans to expand the regular season to include a 17th game and charge more for broadcasting rights.The league’s soaring revenues will aid far-reaching plans for the next decade, a period when team owners hope to expand the N.F.L.’s already robust calendar, make deeper inroads into overseas markets and increase the football audience via streaming services. The N.F.L. is poised to more than recoup the roughly $4 billion in losses wrought by not having maximum capacity attendance at games in 2020.“Along with our recently completed labor agreement with the N.F.L.P.A., these distribution agreements bring an unprecedented era of stability to the League and will permit us to continue to grow and improve our game,” Commissioner Roger Goodell said in a statement.According to four people familiar with the agreements who requested anonymity because they were not authorized by the N.F.L. to speak publicly about the deals, CBS, Fox and NBC will pay more than $2 billion each to hold onto their slots, with NBC paying slightly less than CBS and Fox. ESPN will pay about $2.7 billion a year to continue airing Monday Night Football, but also to be added into the rotation to broadcast the Super Bowl beginning in 2026. The agreement with ESPN starts one year earlier, in 2022, because its current contract expires one year earlier than the others.Each of the broadcasters’ deals include agreements for their respective streaming platforms, while Amazon will show Thursday night games on its Amazon Prime Video service.“Over the last five years, we started the migration to streaming. Our fans want this option, and the league understands that streaming is the future,” said Robert K. Kraft, owner of the New England Patriots and chairman of the N.F.L.’s media committee.The N.F.L. has not yet announced who will broadcast Sunday Ticket, a subscription service that lets fans watch out-of-market weekend games that are not broadcast nationally. DirecTV has the rights to that service through 2022.The jump in revenue will not initially change the fortunes of players, who are locked into a 10-year collective bargaining agreement narrowly ratified in March 2020. Under the terms of that labor deal, players will see a bump in their share of the N.F.L.’s revenue, up to 48.5 percent from 47, while team owners negotiated the option to add a 17th game to the regular season schedule in 2021, something players had long opposed.It will be the first major expansion to the N.F.L. season in more than four decades, when teams began playing 16 games, up from 14, in 1978.Player salaries in the next few years will rise moderately because most media agreements are graduated, with the first year of a new deal worth only marginally more than the last year of an expiring deal. N.F.L. team owners are expected to formally approve the additional game at their annual meeting in late March, when there is likely to be little dissent. Once the additional game is approved, players and team owners will work out the calendar logistics, which could include eliminating one of the four preseason games teams are required to play and adding a second bye week to each of the 32 team schedules.Many other competitive issues will also have to be resolved, as extending the regular season by one game could also affect other fixtures in the N.F.L. calendar that were adjusted last season because of the coronavirus pandemic. The owners voted on Dec. 16 to make the extra game an interconference matchup so as to not affect playoff tiebreakers. But still unresolved are the timing of off-season workouts, the start dates of training camps and the regular season’s start and end dates.The league was able to fully complete its 2020 season on schedule in part because it worked hand-in-hand with the N.F.L. Players Association to hammer out Covid-19 protocols and a raft of other rules.The union’s executive director, DeMaurice Smith, has said that no decision would be made “without an eye to what we’ve learned this year.” “March and April of 2021 is not going to look like March and April of 2018 and 2019,” he added.The labor deal also included an expanded playoff format, with an extra team added in each conference, more limited training camps and a relaxation of the rules governing the use of marijuana.Many players initially balked at the idea of a longer regular season, which they said increased their chances of injury. But the team owners were eager to expand the regular season as a way to entice the league’s national television partners to pay more for broadcast rights.All of the N.F.L.’s national media agreements — which together have an average annual value of nearly $8 billion — were set to expire over the next two years. ESPN’s deal to show Monday night games was scheduled to end after the 2021 season, while agreements with CBS, Fox, NBC, DirecTV, Verizon and Amazon were in place through the 2022 season.Before the coronavirus pandemic, many television and digital media executives said the N.F.L. had the upper hand in negotiating major increases in rights fees because the league had a long-term labor deal in place and because its programming took less of a ratings hit than other broadcasts of U.S.-based sports during the pandemic. Ratings for regular season football fell just 7 percent, compared to 20 percent for prime time broadcast television and even larger declines for other marquee sports events like the Masters, the N.B.A. finals and the Stanley Cup finals.N.F.L. games are also the most watched programming on television by far, making up 76 of the 100 most watched television programs in 2020.Other leagues have also signed new agreements with big increases during the pandemic. The Southeastern Conference received nearly a sixfold increase in money for its marquee college football games, while the N.H.L. will almost assuredly see its media payments double when it finishes selling its rights. More