The Five Principles in the Stonewall of Scissorsgate

The Five Principles in the Stonewall of Scissorsgate


The title sounds a bit like a fairy tale, doesn’t it? And in a sense, it was. In the summer of 1998, the media and the public were getting a story from the Dallas Cowboys organization that sounded much like a fairy tale. Indeed, the organization’s increased reference to itself as a “family” had the same tone as one of those “happily ever after” bedtime stories. However, the story, which was about the circumstances surrounding an incident that came to be nationally known as “Scissorsgate,” wasn’t being believed, and the apparent repeated stonewalling by Cowboys officials increased the media’s speculation over what had actually happened.

We were asked to read a handout of the PR case study, “A Scuffle, a Stonewall, and a Season: Football Superstar Fights Off the Field, But His Team Isn’t Talking,” written by Jaqueline J. Lambiase and John Mark Dempsey, which is in chapter 24 of Contemporary Media Ethics; editors Land, M. and Hornaday, B. (2006); Spokane, WA: Marquette Books. We were also asked to discuss the case and, in particular, how the five principles (stewardship, liberty and freedom, humaneness, justice and truth) and the two perspectives or approaches of utilitarianism and communitarianism were or were not applied to it.

Stewardship: This value or principle can manifest in many ways within corporate settings. For example, good stewardship of a company is not being wasteful of money and resources. Good stewardship can also mean protecting a company’s brand, reputation and profitability. All of this suggests that stewardship has long-term rather than short-term aspects to it.

With profit as a priority and a championship (or at least reaching the play-offs) as one of the ways to achieve that profit, the Dallas Cowboys organization needed its star players, including Michael Irvin, to be fully participating. Already on legal probation for drug offenses, Irvin could not be involved in another criminal matter or investigation because that would jeopardize profits and the team’s chances of making the play-offs. Therefore, preserving profit and play-off opportunities were some of the objectives that drove the organization’s stewardship style – a style that involved stonewalling and a near total silence on the scissors incident.”

Stonewalling is a textbook taboo in PR, but in this case, it worked. However, it can also be argued that the organization’s stewardship was lacking because it did not take into account that the Cowboys were further tarnished by the incident, nor did it take into account the long-term effects of that.

Liberty and freedom: Jerry Jones owns the Dallas Cowboys organization and he is free to pursue profit, and in this context, freedom has a utilitarian aspect. Because the organization is a monopoly, Jones does not have any of the concerns that a business might encounter with a competitor giving better value to consumers. The organization is literally “the only game in town” of its kind, which gives Jones and the organization an enormous amount of freedom in how business is conducted.

However, the media and the fans have the right to expect a certain amount of freedom of information. And because the organization is associated with Dallas – it is the Dallas Cowboys, not the Jerry Jones Cowboys – the reputation of the organization and the reputation of the city and its citizens are inextricably tied together. Dallas and its citizens cannot escape having some of the negative perceptions of the Dallas Cowboys also being attributed to them by association.

There is also the issue of the victim’s freedoms, which in this particular case, do not seem to have been given much priority. Offensive lineman Everett McIver received a significant cut on his neck, and one can assume that he would have liked to discuss the circumstances surrounding the injury, but it appears that he was not free to make any comments.

Humaneness: Humaneness is an aspect of communitarianism – greatest good for all parties – and it can be argued that the organization was not acting in a humane manner but was only interested in preserving its profits. However, it can also be argued that Jones and the rest of Cowboy management were protecting Irvin and were attempting to give him a chance to straighten out his legal problems without additional ones. The organization also took care of McIver’s medical needs, which was the least that it could do, and he likely received monetary restitutions.

The organization may have been acting in its own self-interest to avoid a scandal, but it may also have been acting to protect all of the players from the discomfort and distraction of media frenzy. Additionally, it may have also been trying to protect McIver from the scorn and potential danger posed by some of the more zealous fans who might have blamed McIver had a police report been filed and Irvin had been arrested, resulting in the loss of Irvin’s performance on the field and the team’s success.

From the information available though, it appears that real humaneness – applied across the broad to all parties – was lacking in this case.

Justice: Justice is also more an aspect of communitarianism, and it, too, appears to have been lacking in this case. Although the complete information is not available, it does not appear that McIver received very much justice. Irvin had greater standing and more clout in the ball club, and McIver did not have as much power. It appears a deliberate assault was committed and went unpunished, which is certainly unjust and also sends a bad message to young fans.

This case is also another example of many that a different set of standards and rules are applied to athletes than are applied to the average citizen who breaks the law or demonstrates anti-social behavior. All employees should be able to expect that they are going to work in a safe environment and that management is going to take reasonable steps to protect them. If McIver had been an employee in almost any other type of business or corporation and had been assaulted by a fellow employee, that dangerous employee would have been fired and probably arrested.

Truth: Truth is another principle that was lacking in this particular case. It appears that everyone within the organization was instructed to not speak the truth about what really happened, and what seems to have been an assault was referred to as “horseplay” and a “scuffle” and what would have been a police matter in most cases was referred to in this one as a “family” matter. Instead of openness and transparency there was silence and obstruction. The organization, which has enjoyed presenting itself to the public as America’s team and makes much of doing charitable and other types of work for the community allowed thuggish behavior to go unpunished. It can’t have it both ways.

It appears that this case was handled in a utilitarian manner that did not serve the greatest good of all members of the community. The organization had an opportunity to demonstrate that its reputation is more important than profit and that it expects its players to conduct themselves in a manner that brings credit to the team and to the community.