Jai Narain, Miguel Cornejo, and Zachary Dolgoff on April 17, 2023

The game of basketball has eclipsed the thinking of itself as just simply a game and has transcended itself into a global spectacle that mirrors the ebbs and flows of modern society. Within the sport, there exists an implicit racial hierarchy in terms of ability, talent, and skill that seems to oppose the apparent racial hierarchy that exists in society. In society, it seems to be White dominant, with White men at the pinnacle of power and perceived ability. In basketball, Black individuals tend to be stereotyped to be at the pinnacle of ability and skill. This stereotype holds true at every level of the game, from childhood to pick-up games, to even the highest level of play in the National Basketball Association (NBA). However, within the NBA, a racial hierarchy mirroring society shows less of its face on the court, and rather off of it.

The NBA advertises an image of diversity. With more than 80% of their players being Black, the NBA is a league ripe with differing backgrounds, ethnicities, beliefs, and cultures. According to Jay Coakley and his idea of “the great sports myth,” sports in general are considered to be good and pure, and thus societal problems fail to infiltrate sporting industries. Thus, you would expect the NBA to be devoid of racist ideology and action. At the minimum, one would expect that the sport has been framed in this way by the media and other physical cultures. However, the NBA accommodates a robust racial hierarchy and racialized image, one used by media to perpetuate the need to keep athletes as athletes and grounds keep their image to “protect” a larger white-centric population from an alternative minority culture.

A white leadership structure boasts a diverse image, while both explicitly and subconsciously looking to create a white image. This also holds true in the fact that every NBA commissioner has been white. In addition, only two non-white majority owners exist in the league, Michael Jordan and Vivek Ranadivé. This is a far cry from the majority Black player population that is reflected in the NBA’s image. Furthermore, white individuals are often trusted more with overall positions of leadership such as coaches, general managers, etc. Despite the fact that about ¾ of the league are players of color, amongst the 30 teams, there are only three black presidents of basketball operations and ten black general managers.

In regard to image, owners, and leaders are quick to hide behind their motif of diversity in regard to their players, while also holding a strong racial bias themselves. In some cases, the rhetoric used by owners can have racial undertones. In 2014, Los Angeles Clippers players had to protest against their own owner, Donald Sterling, after he made racist comments about African Americans. Even though he proudly displayed the Black players on the team, he had issues having those close to him associating with Black individuals. Although eventually forced to sell his team, this behavior lasted decades behind the scenes. This idea comes forth as well in the NBA’s 2005 dress code which lasted almost 15 years. Afraid of “Blackness” becoming synonymous with the NBA, then-commissioner David Stern created a whitewashed dress code at the behest of an all-white owners group. A majority black population of players leapt from their role of players to become cultural icons.  However, the majority-white ownership reminded them of their place as athletes under the influence of their leadership by limiting their ability to self-express through clothing.

The desire from both media and owners to keep NBA players as athletes and strip away their larger cultural impact reflects larger society’s notion to segregate into distinct groups. Society, as well as the NBA, has the tendency to sort its individuals into desirable and undesirable. This desirability can come through many facets, such as race, gender, economic status, physical and cognitive ability, or religion. In the NBA, individuals often see Blackness as desirable because of the majority player population of color. However, when more closely examining power structures, we see Whiteness is the focal point of desirability for head coaching and front office roles. This focus on whiteness perpetuates nepotism, reinforces biases, and in turn, maintains the racial discourse that exists across basketball and society in regard to who truly has the power. Similarly to the NBA, the world as a whole continues to function with a small minority in power.  In the way the NBA landscape functions to keep athletes in their “place” and maintain peace, society functions in a similar way, where those in power look to continue a longstanding history of partitioning as a way to keep themselves in power. For decades, the United States use policies such as the three-fifths compromise, segregation, and a dynamic definition of whiteness to reaffirm power for those who have it. For some, they believe that having a league in the US such as the NBA, with a majority full of Black and Brown bodies, leads to the ability to create social change, as it is a platform to be used for advancement. Rather, the hierarchical nature of the NBA mirrors society, with white leadership controlling the lives of the Black and Brown bodies, and resembles the traditional racial hierarchy and power dynamic within the United States. Furthermore, it reinforces ideas that focus on the physical tools of Black and Brown men, while focusing on the mental acuity of White individuals.

Even though the league’s revenue is mostly produced by players of color, the vast majority of people in decision-making positions are White. This overarching white leadership leads to whitewashing across the industry, both in player images, coaching staffs, and leadership positions. This dichotomy housed under a shield of diversity makes this issue crucial to examine, one that is apparent the more one researches. This is especially crucial when the NBA is framed in its global impact. The NBA strives to broaden its impact across the globe, as it now has expanded to NBA academies across four continents. The NBA Cares program looks to create events that show the power of sports in social issues. Children around the world view these players as role models, cultural icons, and major influencers on their development. An industry that could be used to inspire change, and equality and overcome political influence is instead susceptible to longstanding racial biases, and racial barriers and its players being told to “shut up and dribble.” Instead of being told to express their feelings or beliefs, many players in the NBA are criticized for commenting on social/political issues. However, the NBA has looked to respond to these issues. In 2020, in response to the outright protest of the players in response to the George Floyd murder, the NBA created the NBA social justice coalition. A committee of players, coaches, chairmen, and NBA leadership, this coalition looks to promote a positive message toward voting, policing, and criminal justice in the United States. However, the coalition demographics again illuminate a subconscious racial hierarchy in the NBA. All four players are Black, with one being of mixed race, as well as both head coaches are Black. However, all of the chairmen are White, with one exception, the Sacramento Kings’ Vivek Ranadivé. The coalition is also all men except for one, NBPA’s director Tamika Tremaglio. Although directly positive in looking to improve societal policies as a whole, it creates a concentrated representation of the imbalance of power between the different races and genders within the NBA.

Outside of the NBA, the WNBA has also experienced issues with race and gender inequality through the game of basketball. Similarly in the history of both society and basketball, women seem to be considered stereotypically secondary in regard to ability when compared to men. The majority of the ownership is also white men, with many financially treating their teams as secondary to their other businesses or teams. This leads to WNBA players dealing with less pay, worse travel and accommodations, worse facilities, and negative media ramifications. In terms of gender inequality, one common misconception is the idea that female professional basketball players expect to make the same money as male professional basketball players. A common counterargument to this misconception is that the WNBA does not make the same profit as the NBA. According to Las Vegas Aces star Kelsey Plum on The Residency Pod, the problem WNBA players share is that they do not receive the same percentage of league revenue as NBA players, who receive 50% of league revenue if all goals are met. Another factor is the amount of media coverage that the NBA receives in comparison to the WNBA. The lack of nationally televised games for women excludes them from the bulk of sponsorships, brand deals, and exposure to public audiences. The lack of viewership disables the WNBA from generating higher revenue and supporting their athlete’s salaries. An additional factor that stymies the overall gains of female basketball players is the rule on when college athletes can declare for the draft. For men, talented players tend to play one season in college and head to the NBA, but women are required to spend four seasons in college, limiting them from professional contracts at an early age. In an article from the Associated Press, WNBA legend Sue Bird speaks on the current rule, mentioning breakout college stars Paige Bueckers (Uconn) and Caitlyn Clark (Iowa) as women athletes who deserve an earlier chance in the WNBA. This inability to enter the professional ranks earlier is not due to a talent deficit or a physical deficit like with the National Football League (NFL). This is due because of the limited roster spots available in the WNBA, as only 12 teams have been created and funded. It is also implicitly due to the need to have a career following one’s professional career.  By not having sufficient pay to last into retirement, many players are forced to have a secondary career. This holds true across women’s sports, as even one of the U.S. soccer legends, Abby Wambach was quoted as saying, “And I got pissed because I look to my counterparts across the aisle — résumes aside, the Ronaldos, the Messis, and the Landon Donovans get to leave the sport battered and bruised and not have to worry about what they’re going to do next.” She earned many of the same athletic accolades as these counterparts, but due to the unequal nature of pay, still has to be concerned with long-term financial stability whereas the male players do not. In fact, in the WNBA, it was reported that NBA superstar Stephen Curry makes more in just two-quarters of pay than the highest-paid WNBA player makes in a year.

In conclusion, our blog touched upon the topics of the overall racial hierarchy that exists in the NBA and how it contributes to whitewashing across the industry. In addition, it examined the detrimental effects of a lack of exposure and support in regard to the WNBA. However, more work continues to be necessary in order to combat these issues at hand. Systematic and disparaging attitudes can be examined, as well as long-term solutions to work toward equality. Sports will continue to follow the overarching sentiment within society as a whole, and thus neither basketball nor social issues on race, gender, etc. can be considered mutually exclusive.

About the Authors

Jai Narain is a senior majoring in psychology as well as studying to follow a career in medicine. He will be pursuing a medical degree following my time as an undergraduate at the University of Michigan.

Miguel Cornejo is a freshman interested in majoring in economics. He also hopes to pursue a business degree following his time as an undergraduate at the University of Michigan.

Zachary Dolgoff is currently a sophomore majoring in economics. He plans on minoring in business and going into the finance field in the future.