The controversy over the Washington Redskins nickname has been a hot-button topic on and off again for decades in the United States. However, it is now reaching international levels, as the team is set to play a game in London this fall.
Taking issue with “Redskins” has prompted two members of the British Parliament to pen a letter to the NFL urging a change of the “offensive” name or pick a different team to play at the famed Wembley Stadium this fall.
According to the ESPN.com report, Ruth Smeeth and Ian Austin, members of the British Labour Party, co-authored the letter, dated Feb. 2, noting that the Redskins’ name is a racial slur and against the values that British people have worked hard to instill in its people.
“We were shocked to learn the derivation of the term ‘R*dskin,’ pertaining as it does to the historic abuse of native Americans,” read the letter, a copy of which was obtained by ESPN. “The exportation of this racial slur to the UK this autumn, when the Washington team is due to play, directly contravenes the values that many in Britain have worked so hard to instill.”
Native American culture isn’t necessarily familiar to many in England or the whole of Great Britain today. Yet Smeeth believes the term has no other meaning than to be demeaning to Native Americans.
“We’re quite clear that sport is a vehicle for cultural change and celebration of what’s best about society rather than hate and division,” Smeeth said in a telephone interview from London last Friday. “That’s why bringing in new racial slurs to Britain is unacceptable. This is not the way we would want Native Americans introduced to our country.”
As for the NFL, its stance is long known. However, the league has gone from publicly backing Snyder and his choice to being silent on the matter altogether. The official policy appears to be that the nicknames of its teams are a wholly club-specific matter.
“A team’s name is a club decision,” Brian McCarthy, the NFL’s vice president of communications, replied in an email. “We recognize there are strong views on both sides of this.”
Smeeth and Austin’s position can be better understood with the knowledge that they met in January with a group known as “Change the Mascot.” It’s a group with leadership provided by Ray Halbritter, the leader of the Oneida Nation in upstate New York and clearly has an agenda against the use of the name “Redskins” as a nickname for this team.
What will be interesting is the strict anti-racism laws on the books in the U.K. regarding sports. It’s all part of the Football Offences Act of 1991.
However, the bigger problem for the NFL could come in terms of broadcasting rights fees, as the games are scheduled to be broadcast by the BBC in England and they are a publicly owned company.
“Given it’s taxpayer-funded, if we believe it’s a racial slur, then that means problems for the BBC in terms of coverage of the event,” Smeeth said. “There is going to come a pressure point. The last thing the NFL wants — after putting so much behind its brand in the UK — is a good number of us to begin putting pressure on the BBC in terms of what they’re showing and how they’re showing it. This is not the image the NFL wants portrayed in the UK. “
Given this knowledge, it is a curious choice to bring the team across the pond and stir up this controversy again. It would also be wholly ironic if anti-racism laws in a foreign country ultimately forced Snyder’s hand — choosing between economic gain or a nickname.
[ESPN]
