TIME
Because of Pete Rose’s recent confession that he bet on baseball while managing the Cincinnati Reds from 1984-1989, Time Magazine has received an influx of editorials and personal opinions regarding the scandal. While it may seem a quite petty and trivial issue, the situation has larger implications on American societal ethics as well as the treatment of role models in today’s culture. Is Pete Rose a role model? Can we learn anything from studying his behavior both pre-betting and post? Does he ultimately deserve to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown? Printed in this week’s issue in response to a Time editorial by former Baseball Commissioner Fay Vincent are two of the most compelling arguments we received, covering a broad spectrum of perspectives on a seemingly narrow issue. The viewpoint held by Vincent strongly denounces the notion of allowing Rose back into baseball, arguing for the significance of letting Rose into the Hall of Fame against such strong historical precedence in the Black Sox Scandal of 1919. He further argues that Rose’s arrogant personality and money driven ways leave little room for mercy. Until he redeems himself, he is unworthy of such a pristine honor. The second article, constructed by the elderly John Ericson, formerly involved as a scout with the Boston Red Sox, agrees with Vincent’s fundamental points, yet differs on the reasons why Rose remains invalid for Hall of Fame contention. As a grandfather, he views the persuasive influence the media wields over his grandson, and worries what values he is learning from the continued coverage of this scandal. He strongly condemns Rose’s character, claiming he is in no way a role model, and argues passionately through adherence to his moral values. Finally, we added a completely alternate perspective from a current college athlete, Leland Will Winh, who feels that we should celebrate what Rose did while playing and allow him into the Hall of Fame. His baseball credentials clearly support this notion, and Leland argues why we should merely forget about Rose’s sins when remembering him in future generations. We hope you enjoy the articles, as we certainly did here at Time, and hope that you will respond with more opinionated editorials of your own. Enjoy!
Ryan Kissick Editor in Chief Time Magazine Strike Him OUT! Pete Rose Must Exit the Spotlight Before it is too Late
Dear Commissioner Vincent, When it comes to the issue of Pete Rose, I am without question on your side. Rose broke the rules, lied, and manipulated the American public; three swings and misses, three opportunities gone awry. Call me old-fashioned, but in baseball, three strikes and you’re out. There are no exceptions to this rule…no fabricated strikes, and no re-evaluations. His entire persona disgusts me, and it is time that Pete Rose is called out. My name is John Ericson. I am a 68 year old retired Major League Baseball scout after nearly four decades with the Boston Red Sox. I have spanned much of the game’s long-term existence, floundering in its years of shame and indifference and soaring in its times of glory. Over the past decade, America’s pastime has struggled to interest the general population as it once did. While the homerun escapade in 1998 between Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa sparked revived interest in the sport, its overall appeal remains on an exponentially downward spiral. Thus, many people have pointed to the current Pete Rose scandal as a perfect medium to renew passion and desire for this once beloved game. They claim that reinstating Rose into the institution of baseball and consequently the Hall of Fame will reverse this recent downfall and pull baseball out of its disgraceful slump. I strongly disagree, and feel that Pete Rose should be held accountable for his selfish and destructive actions. Outside of the sports realm, reinstatement would never be considered for an individual committing such an atrocious and detrimental crime to his profession. The amount of attention he has recently received is ludicrous, and his return to baseball would cause far more harm than good. More than 83 years ago, the steadfast Baseball Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis banned members of the Chicago White Sox involved in the infamous Black Sox Scandal of 1919, including the wildly popular “Shoeless” Joe Jackson. In this incident, players accepted money from wealthy gamblers to throw the World Series, unaware of the resounding effects of their actions. This event has striking similarities to the current Pete Rose scandal, and I propose that it be handled in a comparable manner. To illustrate the catastrophic ramifications of reinstating Pete Rose, I have attached a recent political cartoon that parodies the current scandal and denigrates a man of disgustingly low morality and a disgustingly high ego.
Figure 1 – Kevin Siers, North Carolina – The Charlotte Observer January 2004
In its layout, the cartoon clearly alludes to the parallel between the two situations; both Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson are standing in the same pose, each with a baseball bat over his shoulder and a newspaper in hand, and standing in the same background. However, while Jackson appears truly contrite and ashamed of his rash and illegal behavior, Rose sports a smirk that reveals his true, unapologetic and manipulative intentions. As he claims in his recently released book, “I’m sure that I’m supposed to act all sorry or sad or guilty now that I’ve accepted that I’ve done something wrong. But you see, I’m just not built that way…Let’s move on.” Hence, in the cartoon, the word apologize in Rose’s newspaper is in quotation, calling into question his sincerity and motives behind apologizing. He pretends to be naïve and innocent, as depicted by the halo placed so delicately above his head. However, below this façade is the naked truth, as seen by the hooves protruding from his corrupted pant legs; Rose is nothing more than a loathsome barnyard animal despite the seemingly penitent manner in which he has recently portrayed himself. Can it be a coincidence that his public confession coincides with the release of his book which has already brought him millions of dollars? Can it be a coincidence that only one year from now, Pete Rose will officially be ineligible for Hall of Fame contention? Finally, can it be a coincidence that his shocking admission that he bet on baseball came one day before the induction of previous baseball greats Dennis Eckersley and Paul Molitor into the Hall of Fame? Certainly not! Pete Rose possesses an innate and loathsome tendency to pilfer the limelight from others and wallow in his greed and arrogance. If Joe Jackson, an equally deserving and much more desirable candidate, is not honored in Cooperstown, then neither should Rose. I also lament the attention currently placed on Rose and dread his entrance back into baseball for its undoubted corrupting influence of American ethics and moral values. Less than a week ago, my ten year old grandson approached me in a very inquisitive manner, and asked me, “Grandpa, why won’t they let that great baseball player into the Hall of Fame? Everyone says he is good enough, and he said he was sorry for his mistake!” How am I supposed to respond to this warped perspective that he most likely adopted from a few brief and brainwashing minutes of watching television? As a mature adult, I can distinguish between one side of the argument and the other, but at such a delicate age, my grandson and the millions of American children like him are irrevocably vulnerable to whatever they see or hear in newspapers, television, the radio, or any other form of persuasive media. Thus, the more they see “It is time to forgive Pete Rose,” the deeper it is pounded into their minds that it is acceptable to lie and deceive and violate the most sacred of rules, as time and repenting will heal all. They are perilously learning that any individual who consciously makes a calamitous mistake should and will be forgiven for their wrongdoing with a mere “apology.” This is clearly not the message we should be teaching our children; why should we celebrate a man who broke the rules and lied about it for nearly fifteen years? Furthermore, why should we believe Rose when he claims that he only bet for his team and never against, and why should we deem his apology valid? The same rules that apply to mainstream Americans should apply to celebrities, especially in a nation that prides itself on hard work, honesty, respect and equality for all. There is no arguing that Pete Rose’s baseball talents and accomplishments render him eligible and an appropriate selection for the Baseball Hall of Fame. However, to enter the Hall of Fame, those on the ballot must also be judged on their character and integrity, two qualities Rose fails to encompass. In the sixty plus years I have been a baseball fan, I have seen few baseball players with a passion for the game exceeding that of Charlie Hustle. However, as he continues his greedy machinations and hustles the institution of baseball as well as American society, I see few people who are less deserving of entering the Baseball Hall of Fame than Pete Rose. John Ericson Weymouth, Massachusetts
Let Him In Why isn’t Pete Rose in Cooperstown?
Dear Mr. Vincent, As a current baseball player at the University of Arizona, I am writing to cordially disagree with your distant, professional opinion regarding the future of Pete Rose, and would like to voice the perspective of a younger generation more intimately connected with the constantly evolving game. I share your distress regarding the inordinate amount of attention recently focused on Rose, as it clearly has contributed to the declining reputation of the sport. Nonetheless, I would like to pose a different solution to this unremitting news story. Let Pete Rose into the Hall of Fame, but keep him out of any managerial positions within baseball. On the surface, this proposal seems overly simplistic and destined for failure. Upon closer analysis, however, it might not seem so preposterous. It would quell both the proponents and antagonists of Rose’s admittance into the Hall of Fame, and would finally put to rest an issue that is long overdue. While he greatly excelled on the baseball field and deserves to be honored for his feats, he is not a role model and should be kept from participation in the game. He would thus be removed from the collective eye of the media and focus could be reasserted on the redeeming and charitable qualities of baseball. Throughout this scandal, there have been a wide variety of fluctuating viewpoints and arguments. Some feel that Pete Rose should be forgiven for a mistake he made over fourteen years ago, believing that everyone should be given a second chance. Others steadfastly adhere to the notion that Rose should suffer the consequences of breaking baseball’s most sacred rule, especially since he vehemently denied the truth for so long. However, despite the polar positions of these sentiments, one constant has clearly emerged; Pete Rose will continue to grasp the spotlight given the opportunity, and will continue to be a pest until he gets his way. This is not to say that Pete Rose is undeserving of election into the Hall of Fame. Were that the case, the previous statements would be obsolete, and no reason to satisfy Rose’s ego. However, his statistics and major league records speak for themselves. He holds 10 Major League and 19 National League Baseball records, including the record for most career hits, most at-bats, and most games played. These records are astonishing considering the thousands of athletes who have played baseball over the past century. During his playing career, Rose epitomized the successful underdog that is uniformly cheered and supported. Born with few natural talents, he thrived on hard work and desire, hence the nickname Charlie Hustle. Growing up, my friends and I idolized Rose, fantasizing about achieving such mastery and glory and modeling our behavior after his. It would be absurd to withhold Rose from the Hall of Fame, as few professional baseball players left the game with such impressive on-field merits and overwhelming popularity. Uncertainty arises upon considering Rose’s ultimate miscue of betting on baseball as a manager. Especially in the wake of his recent confession, there is no doubt that Pete Rose broke Major League Baseball’s golden rule. Rose compounded the problem through repeated lies about the situation as well as his lofty and distasteful demeanor. In all of his recent media portrayals, he has appeared unapologetic and arrogant, as if the rules of mainstream American society do not apply to him, an increasing trend among current athletes. This is clearly the case in the picture to the right, which shows Rose in a recent interview deceptively trying to plead his case. His red shirt besets the viewer, igniting an intrinsic sense of anger, and his hand positioning and facial expression instill an overwhelming sense of suspicion. He sports a presumptuous façade that undoubtedly develops a sense of indignation within the reader. While this photo may mold a negative opinion of Rose, it does not make him any less worthy of Hall of Fame contention. His accolades and achievements as a ball player are clearly in concordance with the Hall of Fame’s motto, “Honoring excellence, connecting generations, and preserving history.” In the Hall of Fame, Rose would be celebrated for his accomplishments as a baseball player through pictures such as the one on the left, the one erroneously chosen to represent your article. Such images should grace the Hall of Fame to remind viewers of the triumph of one of the best hitters of all time. This picture clearly depicts Rose as the hard- working American who fully utilized his little talent. As in his playing career, in this photo Rose emerges clearly in front of the blurred background, his white uniform a symbol of inspiration to all who have played or seen the game of baseball. Unlike the other picture of modern-day Rose, this photograph is a testament to his glorified qualities, diverting attention from his blunders off the field as a manager. However, the Hall of Fame is surely not proof of the great character and integrity of its admits. Were this the case, many of its most renowned members would remain on the outskirts of Cooperstown. Ty Cobb, one of the best hitters ever, was a notoriously dirty player and a highly outspoken racist. Similarly, perhaps the most famous baseball player and athlete of all time, Babe Ruth, was infamous for womanizing as well as his compulsive drinking habits. Likewise, Rose should be honored for his achievements and forgiven for his sins, as he fits the credentials to join the baseball elite in the Hall of Fame. Finally, I wish to point out why Rose’s crime of betting is not as severe as it may originally appear. As a baseball player, I would be quite disheartened knowing that my coach was betting against my team, yet inspired to find out that he bet for my team. Rose never bet against the Cincinnati Reds. Thus, he clearly had confidence in his team to win, and was doing everything in his power to ensure its success within the confines of the game. Contrast that with players today who knowingly try to gain an unfair advantage over the competition through body altering drugs. They artificially and illegally enhance their abilities over opposing players, in effect cheating. Nonetheless, the penalty for violating this policy is a one or two week suspension from the sport. Pete Rose did not alter the outcome of his games, yet his penalty was a lifetime ban from the game and thus no opportunity to enter the Baseball Hall of Fame where he belongs. Pete Rose clearly made a mistake as a manager, and has proven that he cannot be trusted coaching another Major League Baseball team. As a player, however, he competed with a passion and superiority that should render him Hall of Fame bound. Clearly, his managerial mistakes should be disregarded, as he would enter Cooperstown as a player, not a manager. His entry into the Hall of Fame would bring revived interest to the floundering institution of baseball, and would hopefully center attention on his greatness on the field (Fig 2), not the mistakes off. What Rose accomplished on the field encouraged me to fully pursue my dream, and his entry into the Hall of Fame will undoubtedly stimulate other younger generations of Americans in the same manner. Let’s remove from the spotlight his corrupt and arrogant ways and remember the glory he once achieved by finally placing him in the Hall of Fame. Go Wildcats! Leland Will Winh Tucson, Arizona
Looking Back: Assessing undeserving of entering the purest and Pete Rose most sacred institution in Major League Baseball.
Former baseball scout John Upon reading each of the Ericson agrees with the fundamental previous articles, it is evident that the viewpoint of Vincent, but appeals respective authors are quite persuasive primarily to pathos in denouncing the in the presentation of their specific attention on Rose and its potential viewpoint regarding the future of Pete implications on future generations. Rose. Thus, Time has been unable to Through the story of his grandchild pinpoint its stance on this complicated asking about Rose, Ericson strongly issue as there is no obvious right or engages the emotions of the reader; wrong answer. Consequently, multiple perhaps having never considered the viewpoints are presented to inform the Pete Rose scandal in this light, readers reader of the broad scope of this are enraged at the prospect of instilling dilemma. Interestingly, each article deception and cheating into younger uses a distinct rhetorical strategy to generations of Americans. How can the argue either for or against the induction American public continue to allow media of Pete Rose into the Baseball Hall of coverage of such a corrupt and Fame. However, no particular strategy undeserving man? Furthermore, seems to be more effective than Ericson appeals to logos through a another, and each article employs comparison of Shoeless Joe Jackson appropriate visual evidence to and Rose, and illustrates the complement its underlying message comparison with the inclusion of an about Pete Rose. appropriate political cartoon. Through Commissioner Fay Vincent an astute juxtaposition of these two clearly makes use of ethos, or baseball greats, both banned from the character, in his adamant stance against game, Ericson proves that if Joe admitting Pete Rose to the Baseball Hall Jackson is unworthy of Hall of Fame bid, of Fame. Using recent Rose quotes, he then so is Rose. unveils Rose’s true lofty and egocentric Finally, current collegiate character and his inability to truly repent baseball player Leland Will Winh for his misdeeds. Similarly, the logically points to the abounding placement of the picture in the center of reasons why Pete Rose should be voted the article demands the attention of the into the Baseball Hall of Fame, arguing reader, and parallels the current the parameters upon which baseball attention placed on Rose; he is the greats are judged and which Rose center of attention, unwilling to undoubtedly fits. His inclusion of two relinquish the spotlight to anyone. completely contrasting pictures of Rose Through his anecdotes and analysis of strongly reveals the ability of the media recent occurrences, Vincent clearly to contort the character of an individual portrays Rose as a money-hungry fiend to fit the circumstance. Thus, he argues that there is no harm in honoring Rose There is no clear-cut answer to for the greatness he achieved on the this scandal. Many of you, upon reading baseball field, pointing to the positive these articles, probably swayed back influence such an image had on him and and forth, unable to take a firm stance his friends when he was a child. Also, either way. Similarly, Time has not he deftly raises the issue of Pete Rose’s taken a firm position, but hopefully has current vainglorious attitude as a introduced ample background potential counterargument to his point of information to delve deeper into this view, yet uses it to bolster his ultimate issue. We look forward to hearing more argument; in his mind, any off the field from you as the scandal and your actions taken by Rose are completely viewpoints continue to evolve. impertinent to the issue at hand, and do not make Rose any less worthy a Hall of Editorial Board Fame candidate. Time Magazine
Looking Ahead: Research Project
After writing these multiple articles, I have learned that I truly enjoy writing about the current status of athletes. With the recent influx of athletes making the news for their miscues in society, many interesting and complex questions arise. Should athletes be role models? How does media portrayal affect the viewpoint of American society towards athletes? What influence do athletes have on society? Clearly Pete Rose has had and may continue to have a resounding impact on both baseball and American societal values. Does this coincide with a change in American values, or is it the reason for changing American values? All of the aforementioned questions will be interesting to research, and I look forward to finding advertisements, news clips, articles, and cartoons that subjectively portray athletes. Comprising the majority of celebrities in today’s society, they will continue to have a bigger and bigger impact on issues completely unrelated to sports.
Works Cited
Drew, Richard. Untitled. Photograph. Time. 19 January 2004: 153.
PeteRose.com. “Pete Rose’s Records.” 24 January 2004
Siers, Kevin. “Daryl Cagle’s Professional Cartoonists Index.” 7 Jan. 2004. 24 Jan. 2004
Vincent, Fay. “No Bloom on This Rose.” Time. 19 January 2004: 139.
Works Cited
Drew, Richard. Untitled. Photograph. Time. 19 January 2004: 153. Print.
PeteRose.com. “Pete Rose’s Records.” n.d. Web. 24 January 2004.
Siers, Kevin. “Daryl Cagle’s Professional Cartoonists Index.” MSN. 7 Jan. 2004. Web.
24 Jan. 2004
Vincent, Fay. “No Bloom on This Rose.” Time. 19 January 2004: 139. Print.