Branding, Culture, Politics, and Everything in Between

I thought I’d add my thoughts on this. The debate around the study of NBA referees and racial bias still hasn’t died down. The NBA has been in full propaganda mode since the study was reported in the New York Times a week or so ago.

In short, two grad students compiled box score data from 1991 all the way till 2004 and crunched the numbers. They found that white referees called fouls on black players at a higher rate, and vice versa (although the disparity was smaller with black referees). Naturally, it caused a major ruckus and cries of racism.

The NBA promptly slammed the study claiming it was “junk science” (conveniently forgetting that the study had gone through proper academic scrutiny and was peer approved). NBA personnel and even some players attacked that study with Bulls forwards P.J. Brown saying it’s just a case of “somebody having too much time on their hands”. The NBA then released their own “study” that used a smaller sample size and when reviewed by experts was found “incomprehensible”. Just yesterday, by sheer coincidence, ANOTHER study was released that praised the NBA for incorporating minorities in VP positions, showing that the NBA PR department has been working overtime these past few days.

The Times has been on the defensive as of late, but has stood by the grad students and the integrity of the study. The guys at Freakonomics agreed that the study is properly done and the science is sound. Other experts have lined up to defend the study as well, a major inconvenience for the NBA.

As you might expect, everybody has an opinion on this, but relatively few have actually taken a look at the results of the study to see if the findings warrant any reaction or not. ESPN’s John Hollinger was one of the only experts to actually take a look at the study (Insider subscription required, sorry) and evaluate it. He had this to say:

But the bigger point that everyone is missing is that, in fact, this study showed remarkably little bias as well. Maybe I’m a cynic here, but I had expected there would be some level of bias by both black and white officials — refs are human too, after all, and when they step on the court they unwittingly bring their life experiences and values with them.

Yet the affect is almost totally insignificant. The study reports that a black player will rack up an added 0.16 fouls per 48 minutes with an all-white officiating crew, as compared to an all-black one.

0.16 fouls more per 48 minutes.

That’s one extra foul every six games, not an awful lot. The odds of that “racist” foul occurring in a critical junction of the game is basically irrelevant, I’d say an individual player’s reputation has 99% more relevance on whether a foul is called or not. As Hollinger puts it, I think the referees do almost exceptionally well when you put things in perspective.

If you’ve read “Blink” by Malcom Gladwell you’d find that the referees are almost borderline phenomenal in hiding their racial bias. Basketball is a fast paced game, probably the hardest game to officiate because the rules are so strict compared to the speed of the game. For the referees, this means a lot of “snap judgments”, as Gladwell calls them. And with snap judgments, your subconsciousness takes over. Even if you are by nature “not racist”, your subconscious mind will start tapping into racial stereotypes and experiences. For a white NBA referee it means that in a split second your sub-conscious mind asks your brain “QUICK! WHOM DO YOU RESEMBLE MORE: PAT BURKE OR RASHEED WALLACE?” Don’t believe me (or Gladwell, for that matter)? Take the IAT test and see how well you’ll be able to cheat your subconsciousness.

I’m really surprised that Blink hasn’t been brought up more when this topic has been discussed. I think the study validates much of Blink’s findings and actually puts the referees in a good light compared to the rest of us. I guess it goes to show you how sensitive a topic racism is in America.

It’s kinda sad that the aftermath of the study revealed more about race relations in America than the study itself.