Ask yourself this question. If you publicly dared your supervisor to fire you, would they? Typically, asking that type of question would raise an eyebrow and prompt someone to wonder why you would even pose such an asinine query. That’s essentially what Stephen A. Smith did on his Tuesday SiriusXM program while discussing critics of his commentary on Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl LX halftime performance.
About a month ago, I wrote that Stephen A. Smith must reel in the “straight shooter” persona that helped make him a media star. Consistently barking back and punching down from the top of the mountain only hurts his credibility. Why waste your audience’s time when they come to you for content, not controversy?
However, his latest public defiance against unnamed critics attempting to “cancel” him (his words) over his Bad Bunny commentary should raise alarms. Has it reached a point where networks now accept that Stephen A. Smith is bulletproof?
The facts are these. Bad Bunny’s selection for the Super Bowl LX halftime show was controversial. Critics will always find a reason to object to the entertainment act chosen for the biggest stage in the country.
Yes, Bad Bunny is a Latin artist, with the vast majority — if not all — of his songs performed in Spanish.
Yes, Bad Bunny is currently the most popular and most globally streamed artist in the world.
From a business standpoint, it makes perfect sense for the NFL to bring in Bad Bunny as its halftime act as the league continues to market itself to an international audience. There’s a reason the NFL is going overseas nine times next season, a new record. There’s also a reason Commissioner Roger Goodell said last week that he continues to keep international expansion on the table.
Timing, as always, is everything.
On Monday, Stephen A. Smith credited a singular point President Donald Trump made about the halftime performance being entirely in Spanish. Smith referenced Trump’s Truth Social post and agreed that because the majority of the American viewing audience does not speak Spanish, some viewers felt disconnected.
Apparently, those comments fueled calls from some for Smith to be canceled from his role on ESPN’s First Take. Granted, he did not make the commentary on ESPN programming. Smith elaborated on that during his rant on SiriusXM Tuesday.
“They [critics] got me all over the place with pictures pairing me with right-wingers talking about ‘I was against Bad Bunny.’ I was not against Bad Bunny,” Smith said. “I honor my contracts. I’m not going away. I say stuff on my political channel or my YouTube channel. Why are folks calling ESPN? I didn’t say it on their airwaves… They have nothing to do with what I’m saying. I own this show.”
Smith is correct that he did not make those comments on ESPN programming. He is also correct that he owns the IP of his two SiriusXM programs and his YouTube channel. Where Smith misses the point, however, is that no matter where he shares commentary, it still comes from the same person.
One of the first lessons of becoming a public figure is understanding who you represent. Of course, you represent yourself. More importantly, you represent the people and companies who invest in you and your product.
Stephen A. Smith has built his own media empire, and the value of that property may exceed any paycheck he receives from ESPN. However, he remains an ESPN employee. With every word Smith utters, he represents himself, ESPN, his media company Straight Shooter Media, and SiriusXM.
Public figures do not control how companies respond to commentary they deem damaging to their brand. His Bad Bunny commentary did not cross a line; it simply reflected a moment where he credited the president on a singular point. Was it cancelable? Of course not. But presenting himself as untouchable may be the larger misstep.
“I own both my shows, and I own my own YouTube channel. Why [are] you constantly bringing up my day job? ‘Stephen A. of ESPN.’ Because you want to get me canceled. Why don’t you bring up about me on SiriusXM? Because you know there’s no way in hell Scott Greenstein or SiriusXM is going to cancel me,” said Smith Tuesday.
If you publicly dared your supervisor to fire you, would they?
Positioning yourself as too important to a brand for that brand to fire you is not a winning formula. Smith may argue that the statement was part of a hypothetical. Still, the words stand on their own.
Here’s a better question. Would Smith use that same bravado if another Ray Rice–type incident occurred and he delivered similar commentary to what he once did? ESPN suspended Smith for those comments, and he later apologized.
Reading between the lines of Smith’s recent comments, he appears to believe he is untouchable. He suggests certain employers cannot punish him if he keeps controversial commentary on separate platforms. He even dares executives to fire him because, in his view, he already owns the limelight and the IP. The “straight shooter” continues to fire, and major corporations do not blink.
The most dangerous place any media personality can live is in the belief that they are bigger than the brand that platformed them. Corporations protect their interests before they protect their talent. History — inside and outside of sports media — shows that no contract, no ratings number, and no ego makes someone immune from consequences.
This isn’t about whether his Bad Bunny take was cancelable. It wasn’t. It’s about posture, perception, and understanding that when you cash a corporate check, your independence has limits — even if you own microphones elsewhere.
Smith has every right to defend himself. He has every right to clarify his words. But daring the world — and, by extension, your employers — to silence you is not strength. It’s hubris.
And hubris, especially in corporate media, eventually meets reality.
The “straight shooter” persona built the empire. Believing you’re bulletproof is how empires crack.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
John Mamola is Barrett Media’s sports editor and daily sports columnist. He brings over two decades of experience (Chicago, Tampa/St Petersburg) in the broadcast industry with expertise in brand management, sales, promotions, producing, imaging, hosting, talent coaching, talent development, web development, social media strategy and design, video production, creative writing, partnership building, communication/networking with a long track record of growth and success. He is a five-time recognized top 20 program director in a major market via Barrett Medi’s Top 20 series and has been honored internally multiple times as station/brand of the year (Tampa, FL) and employee of the month (Tampa, FL) by iHeartMedia. Connect with John by email at John@BarrettMedia.com.
IMHO the problem stems from his “political” show on Sirius. He’s a sports guy. Poliics and running for President just ruined his cred and his brand. He’s good at sports opinion, marginal on political opinion. Pick one.