Ethical Decision-Making: A Case Study

967 Words2 Pages

On April 24th, 2014, one simple recording released by TMZ made Donald Sterling, owner of the NBA’s Los Angeles Clippers, the most hated man in America. In this recording, Sterling ranted over the fact how he did not want V. Stiviano, his partner, to be affiliated with any African Americans. As a result of his racist statements, fans, athletes, and sports organizations/members, voiced their opinions on the matter, flourishing social media. Many star players such as LeBron James, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and a majority the Clippers players acknowledged that something had to be done, and that the NBA is no place for racism. In the end, after team owners took a vote, NBA commissioner Adam Silver held a press conference enlightening the public …show more content…

For a man in his position, Sterling has the ability to be an influence, and enough money to effect communities around him. Hence he should not have put himself in a situation like this as it could hurt a lot of people. Therefore, the banning of Donald Sterling by the NBA, with the help of commissioner Adam Silver, the collective agreement of team owners, and the voice of the players, was ethically adequate since it delivered the best punishment possible. When it comes to the morality of a certain decision, one can turn to the Four Frameworks of Ethical Decision Making. Out of the four, the two that stand out in the Donald Sterling controversy are the Utilitarian Approach, and Ethical Realism. The Utilitarian Approach describes how a decision was made based off the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It also accounts for the least amount of harm, creating a decent balance between the good and bad. While the NBA deliberated their options, it was clear to them that something needed to be done and fast. In modern society, television and social media take problematic situations and …show more content…

It is clear that I am not the only one that believes so. A majority of NBA team owners voted in agreement for Adam Silver’s punishments and players across the league were satisfied as well. Banning him from the NBA may sound a bit too much, but in an era where racism in sports has not been an issue for decades, it is extremely disrespectful to bring a debacle like this back to the surface. Expressing ones opinion is allowed and there is nothing legally wrong with it, but what Sterling said is something that is not acceptable in today’s society, which is why the penalties were all, justified. Two of the four ethical frameworks, Utilitarianism and Ethical Realism both contribute to this understanding. The NBA made their decision for the greater good given the number of people involved. The choice was to either punish one man for his wrongdoing, or allow thousands of people across the country to question the integrity of the National Basketball Association. They also practiced choosing the lesser of two evils where the reprimand given was a bit exaggerated but necessary considering the alternative. Overall, the banning of Donald Sterling by the NBA, commissioner Adam Silver, team owners, and the players, was an ethically suitable price to pay for such callous

Open Document