I view the the vilification of Joe Pa as a witch hunt, encouraged by the media. This is why: Let's us assume the worst - that Joe Pa - knew Sandusky was shady, also knew about the rape AND knew Sandusky was still running camps for boys on the Penn State campus AND therefore knew it was probable that Sandusky was still raping little boys. And he turned a blind eye. Why did he need to be fired at the peak of the media hysteria? If he is guilty of these things, time won't change it. There will be plenty of time for his legacy to be forever tarnished and the proper punishment to be applied. But no. The demand is that he be fired IMMEDIATELY without deliberation, without knowing all the facts, without calm, civilized, orderly thinking.
Look, a similar thing happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein. They rushed to trial and execution and while it is without question Saddam deserved the death penalty, the process was uncivilized. The ends don't justify the means and we don't even know what Paterno knew. It is simple what is going on - people are worked up into hysteria and damaging the lives of individuals not because they are guilty of crimes - but because we are looking for people to blame, whether they are guilty or not.
UPDATE: Okay, two more things...Megan McArdle has an article up about the rumors Sandusky was pimping out little boys to doners.
At least it offers a motive. And yet . . . it seems completely implausible. How does one go about marketing one's alumni relations department as a potential procurer of underage boys for wealthy pedophiles who perhaps also happen to be fans of the Nittany Lions? And how do you make sure that no one--in the department or elsewhere--tells the police? I find these rumors basically impossible to believe.
Yeah, this idea sounds like an incredibly over-the-top episode of Law & Order SUV. Impossible to believe. I think I need to stop writing and thinking about this story. There without a doubt, should be an investigation to figure out what happened. But let me be clear - I don't give two shits about Paterno as a legend or a fatherly figure - I have no investment in Penn State or big time college football except as a casual fan. And from that perspective, I have no grudge or axe to grind about "paternalistic" organizations or societies, nor a particular love or hate of college football. I view Paterno as a man and a person who most likely has some moral failings and administrative problems running a large organization. Penn State football could disappear tomorrow and my life would be no different. So all that said, as a person, Paterno does not deserve the wrath of hatred directed toward him. He may at one point, but not right now. Not based on rumors and speculation. Not based upon American instinctive distrust of the powerful. Not because we find it ironic when squeaky clean people fall off their perch. And not because of the sicko factor of child molestation, which we all know exists and happens.
3 comments:
1) The evidence in the grand jury report, which Joe Pa did not dispute, is certainly enough for me to send him on his way. Serious question: what more facts do you need? This isn't the Duke lacrosse case, as he said/she said. There is clearly documented evidence of Joe Pa being unconcerned about the sexual abuse of a minor, and the result of that lack of concern led to several other children being abused. Joe Pa could have used his power to stop that predator in his tracks, but he chose to look away.
2) Even if one disagrees with what I've said above, the larger problem with this whole mess is that the football program, and Joe Paterno, gave all appearances of being more powerful and important than the university. Letting him stay would confirm this impression, and this would have killed the Penn State brand as being a serious academic institution. Joe Pa had to go for that reason alone. Each day he stayed, each day the Penn State name gets a new coast of slime.
1) Let's be clear - at this point - no one knows what Paterno knew and when. This is the problem with assigning blame. If it were clear, it would be clear. It is not clear. The media gets people to click on the stories by the degree of outrage and incredulity they are able to express on the page. And this is unfair to Paterno. Like I said before, if it becomes clear that Paterno knew and covered it up, there is plenty of time for his legacy to be tarnished, lose his job, suffer legal consequences, and all of that. The rush to judgment based on rumor and innuendo and speculation demonstrates there is something else afoot that has nothing to do with justice for the victims or punishment of the perpetrators.
2) This argument, if you think about it, makes no sense. If a football program were concerned with its reputation, it would fire and prosecute a child molester. What institution would think - you know what - we just found out we got this child molester working for us - why don't we cover it up and hope he rapes a few more children and keep covering it up - so we don't sully our reputation? And then the minute our legendary coach who is the moral pillar of our community is just suspected of not doing "enough," we are going to fire him straight away? None of this makes any logical sense.
1) Most people are not saying Paterno covered anything up. You can link to people who are saying that, but most are not saying that. It's the looking away part that made him have to go.
You seem to be saying: "We don't know anything for sure yet. Let's wait until we know all the facts before we judge Joe Paterno."
Those of us who called for Joe Pa to go are saying: "While we don't know all the facts about the case, the few facts we do know are damning enough."
2) You have a lot to learn about big-time college athletics if think these programs have no incentive to keep things in-house.
Post a Comment