When it comes to players in major professional sports leagues versus the owners of those franchises, we clearly have a division between those who labor as compared to those who are the capitalistic owners of these teams. One might think that when it comes to sports writing in major media, as well as sports commentary that we watch on television, there would be an interest in those who are sportswriters to write and speak of all those things that would pique the ears and eyes of viewers. What we find, though, is that while there are plenty of articles that discuss athletes' misbehavior, their salaries, and other foibles that they might have, it seems like the same sort of inquiry is seldom directed against the owners and their foibles, in addition to asking questions such as how they got their wealth, where they spend their money, taxes, and so on. In other words, for every article telling us how much a player makes, there is nary an article telling us how much an owner makes from his ownership or is worth, as if the gloves are off when it comes to most athletes, but kid gloves are on for owners, which isn’t fair, it isn’t good reporting, and clearly shows that the hand of sportswriters is prejudiced in favor of the owners, and not of the players.
This is not to say that there aren’t favorable articles about players, because there are, but rather there seems to be an unseemly amount of focus on the money that athletes make and their personal lives, without the same sort of concern being directed against the owners, of which, since the owners have lived much longer lives, one would think that there would be a whole lot of information that could be divulged about owners, but seldom is divulged, such as in their sweetheart deals for stadiums, their lucrative tax breaks and benefits, and the value of their sports franchise.
Indeed, it has to be taken into consideration that sportswriters for legacy media work for corporate interests that, at the highest management level, have a lot more in common with the owners of sports franchises than they ever would have with players. In fact, owners and the owners of legacy media may know each other and even congregate in the same places, so there is often an unwritten rule that those who are like-minded elites aren’t going to expose one another, but rather prefer to concentrate on the players, who are ever-changing and interchangeable, anyway. This thus signifies that sportswriters have an agenda that they must honor, which seems to be that all is fair when it comes to players and their salaries, along with any legal matters pending for them, but for the owners, to pretty much be hands off, and about the only time that an owner gets into public trouble, is when some other non-legacy organization finds out something about the owner that is derogatory, and then legacy media from a strategic standpoint has to write something in response to this, not so much to inform the public, but rather to control the narrative.
In short, mainstream sportswriters aren’t interested in investigating owners because it isn’t permitted, but all’s fair when it comes to players, and especially their income and bad behavior.