If you don’t know who Albert Pujols is, you should: he’s probably the best hitter in baseball, a slugging first baseman whose career so far has already guaranteed him a spot in baseball’s Hall of Fame. Over the winter he left his original team and the city that worshiped him, St. Louis and its Cardinals, because, though the team he professed to “owe everything” offered him a deal that would guarantee that his great-grand children could be beach bums all their lives, a team in Southern California, the Angels, offered him even more, so he can light his cigars with C-notes and pave his driveway with gold.. I think elevating money over every other value to that extent is an unethical and culturally corrupting choice, and said so at the time.

Now Albert has re-endeared himself to me  by publicly objecting to the Angels’ pre-season promotional campaign calling him “El Hombre.” “What?” you say. “I thought you have been condemning political correctness in the discussion of athletes with ethnic identities! Don’t you think it’s ridiculous for Pujols, who is of Hispanic descent, to object to a nickname that plays on his heritage?” Indeed I have been condemning such political correctness and over-sentivity, and still do. But that isn’t why Albert is objecting.

Back in St. Louis, you see, they also tried to call Pujols “El Hombre,” in a deliberate evocation of the city’s most famous and celebrated slugger, the great Stan “The Man” Musial, one of the best and most admirable players in baseball history. Pujols put a stop to it. There was only one player in the city who could carry the title “The Man”, he said, and that was Musial, who is alive and in his 90’s. Just saying “the Man” in a different language didn’t change the fact that the honor was Musial’s, and shouldn’t be taken  away. Stan Musial was and is “the Man;” Pujols respected that, and defended it

He still does. Angels PR flacks are lamely arguing that “El Hombre” means something “different” on the West Coast, but the sport is the same, and Pujols does not want to be a part of what he sees as disrespect to one of his sport’s legends, a personal hero and role model. Imagine: modesty, integrity, and respect for the past from a sports superstar! Good for Pujols.

His is an attempt to control how he is described for ethical reasons, in sharp contrast to the outrageous and offensive effort by the Asian American Journalists Association to micro-manage future stories and commentaries concerning New York Knicks star Jeremy Linn, a Taiwanese American, or as, we used to call them, an American. The AAJA has issued “guidelines,” a.k.a. warnings, to sportswriters and commentators decreeing the correct and acceptable way to discuss Jeremy, with the clear subtext that violators will be labelled as insensitive, bigots or racists. They begin their “advisory”:

“As NBA player Jeremy Lin’s prowess on the court continues to attract international attention and grab headlines, AAJA would like to remind media outlets about relevance and context regarding coverage of race. In the past weeks, as more news outlets report on Lin, his game and his story, AAJA has noticed factual inaccuracies about Lin’s background as well as an alarming number of references that rely on stereotypes about Asians or Asian Americans.”

Allow me to retort: Shut up. I have followed sportswriting and sports broadcasts for many decades, and read or heard accounts of the exploits of Italians, Poles, Czechs, Germans, Irish, Greek, Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, black and more, not to mention women, gays, older athletes, kids, and players with handicaps. Also athletes who were fat, bald, ugly, eccentric, silly, vain, dumb and lazy. In the vast, vast majority of cases, the accounts were fair, accurate and tasteful, the occasional  uses of ethnic backgrounds or physical characteristics for humor or colorful writing were inoffensive, and when a mistake was made, it was handled by an editor, or the issue was vetted and debated afterwards with a working consensus the result. That’s how free speech is supposed to work, and not with self-appointed censors exercising prior restraint by issuing speech regulations.

I don’t know how the Asian American Journalists Association got the idea that they had this authority, but I can tell them right now that they changed my mind regarding the “chink in the armor” flap. Now I support the headline writer who made the intentional play on words. Yes, it was tasteless, and an attempt at cheap humor that crossed the line. But he shouldn’t have been fired. Free speech shouldn’t be that dangerous, not when something as trivial as sports are involved. And for a professional group to presume to tell journalists before the fact what they can and cannot write? That is a direct attack on free expression. If I were a sports writer, I’d announce that I’m refusing to write about Jeremy Linn at all until the Association retracts its intrusive advisory. Just look at this presumptuous garbage, from the release, which includes supposed offenses that nobody has written yet:

“DANGER ZONES”

“CHINK”: Pejorative; do not use in a context involving an Asian person on someone who is Asian American. Extreme care is needed if using the well-trod phrase “chink in the armor”; be mindful that the context does not involve Asia, Asians or Asian Americans. (The appearance of this phrase with regard to Lin led AAJA MediaWatch to issue statement to ESPN, which subsequently disciplined its employees.)

DRIVING: This is part of the sport of basketball, but resist the temptation to refer to an “Asian who knows how to drive.”

EYE SHAPE: This is irrelevant. Do not make such references if discussing Lin’s vision.

FOOD: Is there a compelling reason to draw a connection between Lin and fortune cookies, takeout boxes or similar imagery? In the majority of news coverage, the answer will be no.

MARTIAL ARTS: You’re writing about a basketball player. Don’t conflate his skills with judo, karate, tae kwon do, etc. Do not refer to Lin as “Grasshopper” or similar names associated with martial-arts stereotypes.

“ME LOVE YOU LIN TIME”: Avoid. This is a lazy pun on the athlete’s name and alludes to the broken English of a Hollywood caricature from the 1980s.

“YELLOW MAMBA”: This nickname that some have used for Lin plays off the “Black Mamba” nickname used by NBA star Kobe Bryant. It should be avoided. Asian immigrants in the United States in the 19th and 20th centuries were subjected to discriminatory treatment resulting from a fear of a “Yellow Peril” that was touted in the media, which led to legislation such as the Chinese Exclusion Act.

The advisory also cautions that  “when discussing Lin’s physical characteristics, particularly those that feminize/emasculate the Asian male (Cinderella-story angles should not place Lin in a dress)…In referring to Lin’s height or vision, be mindful of the context and avoid invoking stereotypes about Asians…Stop to think: Would a similar statement be made about an athlete who is Caucasian, African American or Latino?”

Well, yes, if we’re talking about the phrase that started this nonsense. By the group’s own guidelines, “chink in the armor” is only offensive with regard to Linn. So journalists are supposed to write about Linn like they would anyone else, except when they can’t. Got it.

Ridiculous.

{Thanks to Jeff Field for focusing my attention on this issue vis the Pujols story, which I has seen but hadn’t recognized the ethics angle. Jeff also periodically flags my typos, and I owe him big time. He is  a passionate and articulate Occupy supporter who endures my criticism of his movement with patience, respect and good humor. I am grateful that he Occupies Ethics Alarms.}