Celebrities, athletes and politicians are all seen as public figures. Being a public figure in today’s age means upholding to a variety of standards with unwritten guidelines. Sometimes these figures stray from said guidelines and chaos ensues. Reputations are tarnished, jobs are lost and their image in the public eye might never recover. So why is it that some are forgiven for their wrongdoings while others are ostracized for it?
In 2009, Chris Brown accepted a plea deal for domestic violence against his then-girlfriend, Rihanna. At first, Brown was seen negatively after this event occurred but now, it’s old news. Brown regained most of his fanbase and is as popular as he once was before the incident.
On the other hand, Ray Rice, a former Baltimore Ravens football player indicted for domestic violence, has never fully recovered from the scandal. Even though both celebrities committed the same crime, Brown got a slap on the wrist compared to Rice who lost his career and any possibility of returning to the league.
A slew of other public figures have been involved in court allegations, drug-related offenses and other misconduct but only a few are truly reprimanded for these transgressions. So where do we draw the line? What dictates what is unforgivable or forgivable?
There are many reasons that could explain why some people get off easy while others don’t. It could involve moral standards, societal value or even basic “money talks” ideology. But, whatever the case may be, I think we tend to ignore the old adage we were taught as children: forgive, but never forget.
Everyone deserves a second chance and it would be impractical to think that public figures wouldn’t make mistakes every once and awhile. The figures who commit crimes should face ramifications, but when the public jumps the gun on a judgment of a public figure, people who are falsely accused suffer. For example, Chris Andersen, former center for the Miami Heat, was part of an elaborate “catfishing scheme”, which caused him to be falsely accused of possession of child pornography. This case is a long story, but the short version is that an investigation found that someone created a fake profile of Andersen, posed as him online and released photos of an underage girl he was associated with. Though he was innocent, the damage was already done. Andersen’s career was on the line and the Miami Heat threatened to release him from his contract.
I think we forget sometimes that these public figures rely on their image as their livelihoods. Without a positive image or an attempt to eradicate the negative image, these people lose their position of influence which makes them ineffective at their job.When we judge a figure based on a one-time mishap or a case of mistaken identity and don’t give them a chance to explain themselves or restore their image, it can ruin someone’s life and put them in a position where they can’t grow as an individual or contribute to society.
