Image courtesy of “Grading All 11 Picks from the 49ers 2016 NFL Draft.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, ninerswire.usatoday.com/2016/04/30/grading-all-11-picks-from-the-49ers-2016-nfl-draft/.
Image courtesy of News, BBC. “Kaepernick Anthem Protest: Police Threaten Boycott.” BBC News, 3 Sept. 2016, www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37265886.
Rhetoric
The power of persuasion
The use of rhetoric during the Colin Kaepernick protest, from both Kaepernick and various stakeholders, has influenced the public perception of Kaepernick’s actions. When asked to defend his act of kneeling during the anthem, Kaepernick chose to use transcendence, a form of rhetoric that attempts to persuade the audience “to view the behavior or event as having been conducted for a more significant purpose, something much more important than what the accusers are claiming”(Martin and McHendry, 91). Kaepernick attempted to redirect his audience from his own actions by turning their attention towards the greater issue of racial oppression that inspired his actions. Through transcendence, Kaepernick attempts to redirect the public negativity from his actions “to the social conditions that called the protest into being, staking the protest not as a moral or ethical failing within Kaepernick but as a socio-political failing that demands action”(Martin and McHendry, 92). In other words, Kaepernick is making the rhetorical plea that he is not at fault but rather America is at fault. He attempts to shift the context of his protest beyond an anthem or a football game to the American society as a whole. This became clear during Kaepernick’s interview with the media on August 28, 2016, where “on multiple occasions the media tried to re-center attention on the specific act itself (sitting on the sidelines during the anthem), and Kaepernick continually moved beyond himself and his action and back to the broader issues of injustice and inequality in the United States” (Martin and McHendry, 93). From this interview a contrast between the desires of the media and Kaepernick becomes clear. While Kaepernick hopes to start an important conversation about “bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder”(Martin and McHendry, 93), the media wants to focus on his actions and how they relate to Kaepernick and his profession.
Two of the most important stakeholders in Kaepernick’s protest are his franchise, the 49ers, and the organization he works for, the NFL. The reputation of both the NFL and the 49ers were at stake due to Kaepernick’s actions. Their reactions to Kaepernick's protest were crucial in shaping the way Kaepernick’s protest was viewed by the
general public. From the NFL’s standpoint, punishing Kaepernick for his actions would’ve been risky due to recent claimsthat “the NFL Commissioner’s decisions are inconsistent, unpredictable, and unfair to the players” (Cole 43). So instead they and the 49ers decided to engage in an alternate form of rhetoric called differentiation, “an attempt to redefine interpretations of the initial protest, especially in light of charges that Kaepernick, and perhaps by implication his team and the entire NFL, is unpatriotic” (Martin and McHendry, 94). Both the 49ers and the NFL chose to distance themselves from the situation by supporting Kaepernick’s first amendment right to protest without addressing their stance on the motives behind Kaepernick's actions. By refusing to engage in conversation about Kaepernick’s plea for black rights, these stakeholders shift the public debate from black oppression to first amendment rights.
​
The act of differentiation by key stakeholders in the Colin Kaepernick protest creates a safe position for the public to take in response to Kaepernick’s actions. They can support Kaepernick’s right to protest without supporting the content of his protest. This stance will suffice for the average American worker’s water cooler conversation but brings the American public no closer to addressing recent black oppression in their nation. Furthermore this stance doesn’t call for action on the part of the individual or society, making it a far more popular stance than supporting or opposing the content of Kaepernick’s protest. Kaepernick hoped that through his protest he would be able to spark a conversation far bigger and far more important than himself, ideally individuals would’ve been required to either agree or disagree with Kaepernick that African-Americans haven’t been treated properly and that this is an issue that needs to be addressed by society as a whole. However, due to the use of differentiation by the media and stakeholders in reaction to Kaepernick’s protest, his actions have done little to shift the public perception of the black rights movement and instead have reflected poorly on Kaepernick the individual.