Saturday, February 11, 2012

TIm Thomas

Social media is public domain.  Once something is said on Facebook, Twitter, etc., it is now public domain and cannot be taken back.  You can delete it, but it's been seen by people, and if you're a public figure, it has probably been re-posted by others.  Parents are continually warning their children to be careful what you put on the Internet because it could come back to haunt you.

So it surprises me that Tim Thomas has apparently never received this message.  Or if he has, he hasn't adhered to it.  His snub of the President was explained by him on his Facebook page, and then recently he made a political comments in support of the Catholic Church.  Now, Thomas has been making political commentary for a while on his Facebook page and no one has taken notice, but it was the White House snub that brought all of this into the limelight.

Thomas is refusing to answer interview questions in regards to his most recent political comments. Watching his interview on Thursday in which he eventually storms off due to a reasonable and expected line of questioning made him look arrogant and unprofessional.  First of all, no members of the media condemned what he wrote, they're merely asking for clarification.  Rather than explain his comments that he posted in a public forum, Thomas states that it's his "personal life and has nothing to do with hockey or the Boston Bruins".  If anyone posts political commentary on their social media pages, they generally get questions for why they believe this, or attacked by those who disagree.  So why Tim Thomas is surprised by the fact he is being questioned about his comments is beyond me.

As for his White House snub, this is unacceptable.  It is fine Thomas disagrees with the government and the way they are in his words "out of control", but he doesn't represent Tim Thomas at the White House.  He is  a representative of the Boston Bruins organization.  I realize that the Bruins could have, and probably should have, made him go, but I don't believe that Thomas should have turned a routine White House visit into a controversy.  It's fine for athletes to have their political beliefs, but his behaviour has been very hypocritical.  Thomas plays in a building that is named after a financial institution, and the current economic situation was created by financial institutions being "out of control" and mismanaging their organizations.  But Thomas doesn't have a problem playing in this building, or earning a 5 million dollar salary while do so. 

It makes me wonder, if the Boston Bruins were scheduled to visit sick children in a hospital, and that hospital was performing stem cell research on a separate floor, and Thomas was against stem cell research, would he boycott visiting?  I highly doubt it.  Like it or not Thomas' political views are amplified by his public status as a member of a professional sports team.  And by that same token, he cannot expect to make political statement as a high profile member of a professional sports team without garnering media attention. 

1 comment: