Videos by OutKick
During ESPN’s NFL Draft coverage on Thursday night, analyst and former NFL safety Louis Riddick made a comment that included the words ‘Indians’ and ‘chiefs.’ While what he said was a little odd, it doesn’t make him or what he said offensive or racist, despite some folks on Twitter and Sports Illustrated attempting to insinuate that after the fact.
The moment came after the Arizona Cardinals selected Paris Johnson Jr. with the sixth-overall pick. Riddick began breaking down the Ohio State tackle’s game and the Cardinals’ needs and said “they need chiefs on their team, not Indians, chiefs.”
That’s it, that’s all he said. But hey, we live in 2023, many years into the era in which the sports world is trying to erase anything involving Native Americans.
We live in a world now where little kids playing ‘Cowboys and Indians’ is considered offensive, so when an ESPN analyst even says the word ‘Indians’ on the air you know the faux outrage is going to pour out, which is exactly what happened.
Sports Illustrated Wants You To Be Offended By Louis Riddick’s Phrase
Sports Illustrated ran with the headline ‘ESPN’s Louis Riddick Facing Criticism After Insensitive Proverb During NFL Draft.’ Notice that the outlet didn’t have the stomach to write the word ‘Indian’ in the headline, which would likely make the story perform better given the fact people are searching some iteration of ‘Louis Riddick Indian,’ but SI wouldn’t dare risk upsetting some of its woke audience.
Sports Illustrated and The Spun, which is an SI publication, are the only recognizable websites to publish a story about Riddick’s “insensitive proverb.” They’re not afraid to jump aboard the faux outrage train so as long as they’re culturally accepted on Twitter, which is not real life, believe it or not.
While some folks on Twitter acted legitimately offended by Riddick saying the words ‘Indians’ and ‘Chiefs’ out loud, every single reply to SI’s tweet sharing the story is someone calling them out for how ridiculous it is that they even wrote the story, let alone acted offended.
At the time of this writing, there are 24 replies to the tweet, all 24 are critical of Sports Illustrated.
Is this a parody account?
— David B (@DavBoy49) April 28, 2023
It’s not a proverb, it’s a metaphor. And there can’t be anyone but Bud Light drinkers complaining.
— Mick Moyes (@MickMoyes) April 28, 2023
So are those criticizing @LRiddickESPN calling the @Chiefs front office about their name? I would say that’s the pot calling the kettle black but I’m sure someone would find that racist.
— sportsQ™ (@sportsQ4info) April 28, 2023
It’s always refreshing to see people who aren’t offended by anything and everything actually speak out about ridiculousness.
Follow Mark Harris on Twitter @ItIsMarkHarris
2 CommentsLeave a Reply
SI is a PR firm now. They take money to lend their brand to people who need it as a stepping stone to get where they want to be. Outkick does the same thing. Remember when Paige was on the “cover” of Maxim magazine as sexiest women. Or even Livy Donne on the cover of SI. Then Paige/Livvy can use that in her bio to make her seem more official. Same with any award. This site employs the same tactics.
Has anyone from Mumbai complained about the use of “Indians” ?