Reading Time: 3 minutes
An article criticizing the on-court behavior of WNBA star Caitlin Clark sparked major backlash today.
And the discourse surrounding the controversial USA Today piece has spread well beyond the world of sports.
The article — written by sports columnist Nancy Armour — starts with a simple enough premise:
Armour argues that Clark has engaged in strategic “flopping” and has argued with refs with the goal of receiving undeserved fouls.
The article was originally titled, “Caitlin Clark’s reaction to non-calls puts other players at risk,” but the headline now reads, “Caitlin Clark’s flopping isn’t just annoying — it’s becoming dangerous.”
“The irony of the WNBA’s All-Star Game is that it’s happening this weekend in Chicago, the hometown of Emmett Till, who became an icon of the civil rights movement after his tragic murder,” Armour writes in the piece, adding:
“The local art gallery is currently hosting an exhibit imagining his life if he hadn’t been lynched.
“While it’s incumbent on the WNBA to do more to protect its players, there also should be an expectation on Clark to recognize the broader implications of her actions being weaponized.”
The use of Till’s name sparked outrage, but the claim that Clark is being supported by white supremacist groups created an even bigger uproar:
“It seems there is a white nationalist faction to Clark’s fandom that is deeply, deeply problematic, made even more so because the WNBA is made up predominantly of Black women, many of them queer,” Armour writes.
“When Clark claims fouls that don’t exist, when she goes on profanity-laced tirades at referees, those racists see her as a white woman in need of saving and take matters into their own hands.”
That assertion may be entirely true, but Armour should support such a bold claim with substantive evidence and not a mere “it seems.”
In the hours since it was published, the article has received significant criticism.
“I honestly cannot believe this made it past the editor. And I’m a Democrat. This is literally nonsense,” author Amy Siskind wrote of the piece on X (formerly Twitter).
“Even as a fan, I believe CC does complain too much and she can be overly dramatic. But that is not where Nancy Armour took this nonsense,” another commenter wrote.
“Instead, she connected two debatable basketball plays, a disgusting racist message, and the murder of Emmett Till to argue that Clark is somehow putting other players in danger. That is an enormous and irresponsible leap.”
That commenter concluded: “This article is disgusting and so is Nancy for writing it.”
The situation prompted Armour to post an explanation, reading:
“In my recent column, I made an inartful comparison with the murder of Emmett Till. I intended to connect the issues the WNBA is currently facing with its All-Star Game being hosted in Till’s hometown of Chicago.
“I obviously did not provide enough context for that. However, this point stands: There is a history in this country of perceived threats to white women being weaponized against African-Americans, and the danger that poses to Black players in the league.
“Players have been abused online and have reported receiving death threats. That has to be taken more seriously.
“I sincerely regret that my lack of appropriate context is overshadowing that important conversation and the action that needs to be taken by the WNBA to address it directly – for the benefit of ALL players.”
The current version of the article begins with disclaimer explaining that the piece has been “updated to provide further context and clarity.”
Caitlin Clark has not yet publicly responded to the controversy.
Leave a Reply