Opinion: 20-year old allegations against Peyton Manning a non-story
David Bradford explains why he believes Peyton Manning’s sexual assault investigation from 1996 is a non-story.
Photo courtesy of creativecommons.org. No changes made.
[title_box title=”Opinion: 20-year old allegations against Peyton Manning a non-story”]
Peyton Manning’s perceived squeaky-clean reputation has taken a couple of blows over the past few weeks.
First were the HGH allegations at the end of 2015, where Al Jazeera America reported that Manning’s wife received HGH in the mail from Charlie Sly, a pharmacist who had worked at the Guyer Anti-Aging Clinic in Indianapolis during the fall of 2011. This of course transpired while Manning was recovering from his fourth neck surgery, thus creating a link between him and the HGH his wife received.
While that investigation is ongoing, Manning is now receiving heat for a sexual assault investigation that took place in 1996 while he was still attending the University of Tennessee.
The investigation that took place 20-years ago has gained relevance thanks to a New York Daily News article by Shaun King, who titled the article “Peyton Manning’s squeaky-clean image was built on lies, as detailed in explosive court documents showing ugly smear campaign against his alleged sex assault victim.”
This story is a perfect example of a non-story and an unfair attempt at character assassination. Any individual who feels any form of outrage towards Manning because of King’s outrageously pointless article need to gain perspective on the situation.
Ultimately, mistakes were made in 1996 by Manning and his father. For lack of a better term, what Manning did to the victim, trainer Jamie Naughright, can be summed up as an act of immaturity. An act that Manning later tried to get out of by lying simply because he had so much to lose. Manning was clearly in the wrong, as documented by statements made by his teammates that recant his statements, as well as statements made by Manning himself that contradict his initial statements.
However, what is being said about this incident today that was not already said in 1996? What relevance does this article have today? What is the point of bringing this up when Manning has clearly shown himself to be a model citizen since this incident occurred?
King’s articles relies on the notion that nobody criticized Manning for his actions. There was considerable media coverage. There was a $300,000 settlement. Manning was scrutinized by the media and his own teammates about the incident. However, like any story, it eventually fades over time.
Other athletes have been forgiven for transgressions in their past, so why does Manning have to suffer?
Maybe he has to suffer because the media is running out of stories. Maybe the media needs to continue its practice of building up athletes only to tear them apart.
That is what happened with Cam Newton. The MVP was beloved all season by most media members, but as soon as he abruptly left a press conference after a devastating Super Bowl loss, the media jumped all over Newton as if he had committed a serious crime.
It also has done the same repeatedly with the New England Patriots organization. The Patriots organization has been a model of consistency and have gone through the greatest stretch of success in NFL history, but that is simply too boring to write about. Instead, the media decided to label the organization as “cheaters” due to two controversies where nothing all that outrageous transpired (Spygate and Deflategate).
Now Manning is going through the same treatment. His career is more than likely coming to a close. The fairytale-ending headlines are becoming old. Now, it is time to attack Manning.
However, Manning, like any human being, improves through experiences and mistakes. Manning does not deserve a pass for what he did, but this story is ultimately a non-story because it serves no relevance to the 2016 version of Manning.
The opinion of our writers/bloggers are not a reflection of the opinion of the Tennessee Journalist as a whole.
Featured image by Jeffrey Beall
Edited by Cody McClure
Follow me @DavidJBradford1 on Twitter, email me at dbradfo2@vols.utk.edu for any questions.
Amen brother. Well said.
We’ve all done something very stupid & immature during our younger years. But, unlike Manning, we don’t have to deal with a holier-than-thou mob attacking us for that act of stupidity 20 years later.