Red Nation: The NBA, China, Hong Kong, and the sounds of silence

I have been absolutely glued to this story over the past couple weeks.

It feels like an immense moment that is underappreciated.

A complex issue that is really quite simple.

A terrifying wake-up call and a breath of fresh air.

A cultural reckoning and a crisis communications case study.

An attack on American soil and an opportunity to bridge divides.

Admittedly, I’m primed to gobble this story up and overreact thanks to a few pre-existing conditions.

First, I am a freedom-loving US citizen. I have visited, worked and lived overseas, but am very much a product of western values. I also have a journalism degree and a corporate communications social media background. Basically, I believe in, advocate for, and generally try to practice principles of liberalism, free speech and smart communications.

Second, I’m a lifelong basketball nerd, occasional pickup hooper, Suns apologist, and a big fan of the NBA. I watch the games, and follow closely its superstars, influencers, trends and issues. Basically, I love this game.

Third, I’ve become fascinated with China over the past few years. In 2016 I visited China for a two-week international elective course with my MBA program at Arizona State University. In 2018 I saw the Art and China after 1989 exhibit at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York. Day to day, I read about China in The Economist, in the Sinocism newsletter, and in books. Basically, I probably take more interest in China than the average guy on the street.

Furthermore I just read two excellent books whose concepts I draw strong connections to in analyzing this story: 1) Maoism: A Global History, by Julia Lovell (a fascinating and terrifying course on the background and influence of Mao Zedong in China and across the world); and 2) Skin in the Game: Hidden Asymmetries in Daily Life by Nassim Nicholas Taleb (about the vitality and ethics of risk, among many other life-altering topics).

This post is self-serving in the sense that I really needed to organize my thoughts and get them off my chest. I also wanted to analyze, pull from, and bring together, the coverage I’ve been feeding off of over the past couple weeks. There’s been a lot of great reporting, and I’ll do my best to not overlap too much.

In this article we’ll dive into the aspects of the recent NBA-China conflict that I found most interesting and important.

We’ll look at the media angle, the players’ angle, the NBA commissioner’s angle, the US consumer’s angle, the values angle – so many angles – among other angles.

And we’ll conclude with some ideas for how I hope this SNAFU will make us stronger and better in the end.

To begin, I need to highlight the irony of this flare-up, and just how crazy and weird the timing was.

Red Nation

It’s probably safe to say that relatively few prominent people associated with the NBA (e.g. players, coaches, owners, leadership) have strong opinions one way or another about the protests in Hong Kong, and more broadly, the festering tensions between Hong Kong and China.

Don’t get me wrong: I imagine many people do have strong opinions on that topic. However, I’m guessing not that many are among those with the platforms in the spotlight.

It’s probably also safe to say that even fewer of those influencers have been commenting, or were ever planning to comment, on the topic publicly.

But of all the General Managers on all the teams in all the leagues, Daryl Morey, General Manager of the Houston Rockets, had to tweet “FIGHT FOR FREEDOM STAND WITH HONG KONG.”

Morey just so happens to be one of the most prominent GMs in the NBA. In my experience listening to his interviews, and following his moves with the Rockets, he seems smart, savvy, honest, passionate, analytical, and personable.

But his tweet touched a third rail in China.

The Rockets just so happen to be one of the most popular NBA teams in China thanks in large part to Yao Ming’s Hall of Fame career in Houston.

The Rockets colors just so happen to be bright red.

The Rockets nickname just so happened to be Red Nation, and maybe it still is?

Morey just so happened to post that tweet just before the NBA season was set to kick-off, when NBA hype really starts to ramp up.

Morey just so happened to post that tweet as some NBA teams, players, staff – including NBA commissioner Adam Silver – were heading to China to play preseason games in front of many of their millions of fans in the real Red Nation.

Morey just so happened to post that tweet as the US and China lock horns in a trade war, with foreign and economic policy tensions rising and falling with the tides.

Morey just so happened to post that tweet days after the October 1 National Day of the People’s Republic of China, a big Chinese holiday that this year celebrates the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the communist nation state.

And finally, South Park – god bless them, grand masters of timing and stomping on third rails – just so happened to have their new episode “Band in China” set to release the very same week Morey posted that tweet and sparked this prairie fire.

Sing Red, Strike Black

China’s heavy handed reaction to Morey’s tweet did not surprise me, and it shouldn’t have surprised anyone. Chinese authorities circled the wagons and threatened to essentially block the Rockets and the NBA from the Chinese market. To be sure, I don’t know what their actual demands or threats were. But it seems pretty clear that if China pulled out, it would cost the teams, players, owners, the league, and probably everyone associated with the league, a lot of money.

China has behaved this way in the past to US companies who touch on offensive topics. This time was different because sports are such a big part of US culture. Going after the Rockets and the NBA essentially put China’s bullying policies on a bigger stage with a brighter spotlight. It was much more difficult to ignore this time.

The crux of the conflict lies in the fundamental difference in values between China and the US. This excerpt from state-owned CCTV – which I copied over from Ben Thompson’s excellent Stratechery article, The China Culture Clash – sums up that contrast:

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver defended Morey. “I think as a values-based organization that I want to make it clear…that Daryl Morey is supported in terms of his ability to exercise his freedom of expression,” Silver said in an interview with Kyodo News in Tokyo Japan. CCTV did not agree with Silver’s remarks.

“We are strongly dissatisfied and we oppose Silver’s claim to support Morey’s right of free expression. We believe that any speech that challenges national sovereignty and social stability is not within the scope of freedom of speech,” CCTV said in its statement in Chinese, which was translated by CNBC.

That response from China and their attempt to punish Morey, the Rockets and the NBA for not adhering to their contingencies on free speech changed the scope of Morey’s tweet.

The issue is no longer about the complex Hong Kong vs China issue.

Instead, now it’s about the much more simple contrast between free speech and censorship. Or, in other words, do you agree or disagree with Morey’s freedom to voice his controversial opinions without reprisal from authorities?

But just because it’s simple doesn’t make it easy.

Expose errors and criticize shortcomings

The NBA, its superstars, figureheads, leadership and mouthpieces, risk losing millions of dollars by saying the wrong (or right) thing.

They’ve got jersey sales, shoe releases, TV deals, millions of fans, powerful business partners, and personal safety to think about.

They face a major tradeoff and they’re only human.

However, these same guys are also in powerful positions, and have the opportunity to use this tough situation to show their true colors and embrace the responsibility – to champion core values of what they believe in.

This was a big moment for a league that is thriving, thanks in no small part to their endearing, woke, influential, superstar, celebrity players. These guys are politically active business owners, who are inspiring pillars of their communities. They criticize the government, travel the world, and speak out on social issues. They are much more than just guys dribbling a basketball. That’s how they’re positioning themselves anyways.

“Skin in the game keeps human hubris in check.”

Nassim Taleb, Skin in the Game

Much of their success is made possible by the fact that they live in a country where everyone has a right to freedom of expression without fear of retribution from government.

So how did our NBA superheroes respond when China dropped the hammer and attacked US freedom of speech?

They caved, played it safe, and prioritized the money.

They needed to take some time to learn more about this confusing issue before weighing in. This issue just so happens to be too complex to comment on. I find this complexity cop-out insulting.

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that they were telling the truth, and they really wanted to take a few days to learn about the Hong Kong situation.

That’s great! I wish everyone always took time to think through issues and events before passing judgement.

It follows that: a) they didn’t know about a volatile issue facing a market where they have immense commercial interests and exposure; b) they didn’t have a China expert on staff to advise them in a hurry and give them enough information to form an opinion; and most importantly, c) after they educate themselves, we should expect them to comment.

It’s now been over a week and they – these guys who claim to be outspoken and principled and fighting for causes – the large majority of them at least, are still not touching the third rail.

Let’s take another approach and assume that they have advisors on staff and are moderately educated on the basic intricacies of their business’s most important growth market, China.

Given their “too complex, don’t know enough to comment” responses, they probably were advised that if you want to maintain access to the China market, don’t comment on the situation – but try not to look like a bitch either.

In both cases, the response is disappointing and the hypocrisy disgusting.

I’m not saying that they should have been out there tweeting alongside Morey in support of the Hong Kong protests. But when the incident turned into an attack on US freedoms, it turned into a test of fortitude. They should have recognized the weight of that threat and leveraged their powerful platforms and brands to carry the responsibility, take the risk, and put their values first.

The responsibility in that situation was not to be an expert on China, Hong Kong, or US foreign relations.

Rather, the responsibility in that situation was to stand up for your boy, Daryl Morey, and stand up for the values of freedom that we all hold so dear.

This is assuming that these players all value free speech.

The flip side of this coin would be if these players valued, instead, CCP authoritarianism – and in that case, they should have voiced strong support for CCP censorship.

I doubt the latter case is true, which makes their sell-out response in the former, still disgusting.

To be fair, this is all easy for me to say, because I’m not in their shoes and I don’t have the same exposure or commercial interests in the China market. So I recognize that I have far less skin in the game than they do, and I have no idea how I would have reacted if I was faced with the same tradeoff under pressure.

But I do feel compelled to weigh in on this, primarily because of the three pre-existing conditions I laid out at the start of this post. In the grand scheme of things, I want the NBA to keep being awesome, I want to keep learning about China, and I want free speech to remain a core value and pillar of the US.

With that said, here’s how these guys should have responded.

Ideally all these guys – Lebron, KD, Steph, Steve Kerr, Popovich, Harden, Westbrook, Steve Nash, Bill Russell, Charles Barkley, et al – should have signaled solidarity and rushed over to pick Daryl Morey up off the floor.

Solidarity not necessarily for Hong Kong – solidarity for free speech.

They should have posted something like: “I love and appreciate all our friends and fans in China! We live in different countries with different values and it’s awesome that basketball brings us together! I think it’s really important that we all stand up for what we believe in – to me this means supporting my bro Daryl Morey, and standing up for our rights as US citizens to free speech. I understand if you disagree.”

Or something like: “We’re in a tough spot over here, and the situation in Hong Kong and China is super scary and complex. BUT we have a right to freedom of expression and that’s something we should all defend – unconditionally. FIGHT FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH STAND WITH DARYL MOREY.”

Or something like: “I know this may cost me big time, but I need to defend what I believe in: please join me in standing with Daryl Morey and supporting free speech.”

Or even something like: “Real talk: I DGAF about Hong Kong. But I do GAF about free speech. Don’t tread on me bro”

Otherwise, if they don’t want to take the “lose a ton of money free speech hero route,” then the secondary option that would have been way better than the complexity cop-out would be to just say, “No comment.” Or, just literally say nothing at all for a couple weeks. Go dark. Hunker down and let the storm blow over.

Granted, I don’t like this response, but it’s better than lying to people about the complexity they can’t seem to get their collective head around.

Also, saying nothing, in this case, says a lot. In one sense, to be fair, it says they’re really concerned about the ramifications (like personal safety) of saying the wrong thing. In another sense, to be more critical, it says they have a lot of money that depends on maintaining a mutually beneficial commercial relationship with China, and they don’t want to risk losing all that, so they’re not going to rock the boat.

And that’s really what most of them did.

The Anaconda in the Chandelier

Aside from the handful of complexity and ramifications cop-outs, not many players were tweeting about it for the most part.

I felt like I was kinda losing my mind: very few people I follow online were talking about this issue as it was unfolding. It was like the censors had won. It was like being in China, where stuff that you’re pretty sure exists, or used to exist – like Gmail, Facebook, the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, and the Uigher concentration camps – all of a sudden just doesn’t appear.

ESPN, the worldwide leader in sports – which spends days dissecting what Lebron had for breakfast – is owned by Disney and thus is massively popular and exposed in China. So ESPN effectively duct taped its reporters’ mouths shut for this story. Keep in mind this is the biggest story in sports right now, and arguably one of the biggest NBA stories ever. The void of ESPN coverage as it all unfolded was eerie and glaring.

Bill Simmons, my favorite NBA analyst, who normally gets this stuff right, seemed a bit off on this one. His coverage was fine – even good – I just expected more. Simmons’ website, The Ringer, published articles on the topic (here’s a good one by Brian Phillips). Simmons talked about the issue on multiple podcasts, and at length on this episode.

But it seemed to me like he held back a bit because he was really concerned for people’s safety over there, and also concerned about offending his Chinese audience. Understandable.

I also think he should have been more transparent about his close friendship with Daryl Morey, and should have said whether or not he had spoken with Morey.

Most importantly, I really didn’t like when he flippantly said in one podcast episode that one of the lessons learned is essentially: don’t tweet. He may have been partially joking when he suggested this, but I didn’t find it funny or appropriate. Advising people not to tweet about sensitive topics is exactly what censors want. It’s the opposite of championing free speech, which is what he should have been doing in that moment.

On the other hand, I’m not above the hypocrisy either. And probably none of us are.

I know friends and nice people from China and don’t want them to be upset if they disagree with the critical views I express here.

The laptop I’m typing this article on was made in China.

The iPhone is the most popular device in the US and it’s made in China.

China supports, owns or invests in some of our most impactful institutions like universities, and Hollywood, and real estate, and manufacturing, and energy. Huge swaths of the US economy have been bending over backwards to gain access to the Chinese market for years.

Here’s a great excerpt from one of Bill Bishop’s excellent articles on Sinocism, that puts it perfectly:

The “anaconda in the chandelier”, as Perry Link wrote in 2002, has gone global:

the Chinese government’s censorial authority in recent times has resembled not so much a man-eating tiger or fire-snorting dragon as a giant anaconda coiled in an overhead chandelier. Normally the great snake doesn’t move. It doesn’t have to. It feels no need to be clear about its prohibitions. Its constant silent message is “You yourself decide,” after which, more often than not, everyone in its shadow makes his or her large and small adjustments—all quite “naturally.” The Soviet Union, where Stalin’s notion of “engineering the soul” was first pursued, in practice fell far short of what the Chinese Communists have achieved in psychological engineering.

If you touch a third rail, the Anaconda in the Chandelier may snap down from above and try to gobble you up. This is what happened to Daryl Morey, the Houston Rockets and the NBA.

Silver lining

And despite the mess, and the tangled web we’ve weaved, there were some bright points.

I’m really proud of how NBA league commissioner Adam Silver responded, ultimately making it crystal clear that the league stands for freedom of expression and defends their right to free speech. He signaled that they choose values over money, and that they’re prepared to suffer the potential ramifications. It’s such a tough spot, and he’s setting nice example for other executives and leaders.

I’m also pleased to see the criticism the league received from some folks in the US and NBA communities for not taking their tough (and in my opinion admirable) stance for values sooner. For example I am inspired by this letter from US politicians from both sides of the aisle pressuring the NBA to take a stronger stance against China’s intimidation tactics.

Along those same lines, this issue was refreshing because, for the most part, it didn’t get dragged down into the gutter of partisan point-scoring. In one sense, that non-partisan angle probably worked against the greater good because it made it less satiating for the bases, and thus, less talked about. But in another sense, it supports my belief that it’s usually the under-hyped, non-partisan, somewhat esoteric issues that get results and warrant my time, energy and attention.

The best coverage during this timeframe came from Ben Thompson on Stratechery and Bill Bishop on Sinocism – two writers who I already had an immense amount of respect for, and to whom I happily pay for access to their newsletters.

Their nuanced, thoughtful and timely coverage of this topic – and their appreciation for its immensity – boosted their stock greatly in my eyes. I’m also grateful for the citations and references they provide from other credible sources, such as The Athletic’s Ethan Strauss, and his excellent article that I chewed on a lot before laying out my points (that echo many of his).

The foam is gone but the beer remains

The situation is still pretty fluid, but most of the dust seems to be settling.

China has returned to its regularly scheduled NBA broadcasts and, for now at least, and the anaconda has resumed its stoic position in the chandelier overhead.

But shots have been fired. The message has clearly been sent.

Nobody in the NBA is going to even think about talking about China now, right?

And if so, and nobody is willing to test out third rails, then the censors won and freedom lost.

By remaining silent, and not commenting on sensitive – really sensitive, skin in the game sensitive – issues, then we’re signaling that we will abandon our values if the price is right.

It will be fascinating to keep the events of the past couple weeks in mind as the season unfolds – alongside the trade war, and the Hong Kong protests – over the coming months.

Are reporters going to ask players and executives about these issues?

If the Hong Kong situation erupts will the NBA celebrities weigh in?

What’s their responsibility?

What’s our responsibility?

I imagine it will be complex, and difficult, but pretty simple in the end.

My hope is that this incident serves as a rallying cry that unites us.

Also, I hope this incident compels people to take the following actions:

  1. Support free speech, unconditionally
  2. Take an interest in, and learn about, China
  3. Ask questions and hold leadership accountable
  4. When faced with the tradeoff, choose values over money
  5. Subscribe to independent, non-partisan writers, whose business models do not rely on advertising; (see Sinocism and Stratechery)

Resources and further feeding