Earlier today, Chris Peterson, athletic director for University of Arkansas-Little Rock, resigned. Why? Because he was basically busted for locker room banter on an open microphone. That’s right, an open microphone listening in on a private guy conversation sacked an athletic director’s career.
First off, a private conversation is just that–private. It amazes me that so many people feel the need to make private thoughts and conversations public. Depending on where the conversation was recorded, the person who recorded it could have committed a criminal act (e.g., bathroom, locker room, etc.). However, if Peterson made the comments in a public space then he would not be able to argue he expected complete privacy. Yet, still, should not a person despite his position within an organization or university expect private conversations to stay between friends or colleagues?
With all of the private conversations being made public these days–Donald Sterling, Peterson, Gordon Gee, and so forth–it is amazing that those who are making such comments public are not being looked into for criminal prosecution. At the very least, why are these individuals not being sued? Is it due to society’s desire to maintain an image of political correctness? Are we in the United States today oblivious to the impact of invading another’s privacy? Supreme Court Justices Brandeis and Warren were not in 1890 when they wrote a piece on why privacy was a right in the Harvard Law Review. If Peterson was in Great Britain, an inquiry may have already be in process . . . remember the Murdock scandal which is still being legally pursued both criminally and civilly. Perhaps, citizens of the United States are not as sensitive or private as their British cousins who believe in keeping a stiff upper lip.
Should Peterson be reprimanded? Perhaps, he does need to be reminded that no one can relax in today’s society where everyone feels they have a right to know everything about you. He could even be educated on political correctness. At the worst, he should be suspended. It isn’t like Peterson went online at work and picked out an obnoxious date for a coworker without her consent, because she did not share her private life with him. Yep, that really did happen, and the perpetrators where rewarded with popularity and promotions while the reporter of the incident was penalized for years with lies of mental illness despite leaving the legal information company.
Either way, Peterson should not have had to resign his position as athletic director for comments anyone could hear if they walked into a locker room. He is still a man, and guys talk. Women talk for that matter. Depending on the sport, what comes out of the mouths of women could make some men blush. No one should have to be politically correct in a locker room, on their travel bus or in their own athletic facility. That is the equivalent of their home. Now, that does not mean one should be totally disrespectful or rude to one’s guests in that environment. However, some latitude should be given to athletes, coaches, directors regarding privacy and freedom of speech within those confines as it is their house just like anyone else would expect within the confines of her own house.
How could any of this be better stated? It cotund’l.