Unwinding Spin: Communication Theory and Controversy in America

The United States Government is based on a declaration that all men are created equal

and have unalienable rights including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When this

declaration was made, only white men were given these rights. Every generation since has

worked to reconcile our society in the image of this declaration. Today this battle takes place on

a new frontier. Citizen journalism and social media have expanded awareness of systematic

injustice. New voices are being heard. Resolving controversy has shifted from government halls

into everyday life. Communication theory provides a means to understanding this controversy

by examining Colin Kaepernick’s protest, the role of media in perpetuating inequality, and ways

to participate in resolving controversy by supporting the ideals of our nation and practicing

effective communication techniques.

Racial Inequality in the United States of America

When America was created, a significant portion of citizens were considered

property. This immediately created a conflict between democratic ideals and the citizens’

reality. This conflict can be examined by Festinger’s Cognitive Dissonance Theory (as cited in

Griffin, Ledbetter & Sparks, 2015). He purported that conflict between beliefs and actions

creates a state of mental anguish that we resolve with selective exposure, postdecision

dissonance and minimal justification. Many of the forefathers acknowledged that slavery

deprived slaves of their inherent rights, and Thomas Jefferson included slavery in his initial draft

of the Declaration of Independence (Iaccarino, 2016). The forefathers initially resolved their

dissonance by blaming slavery on British influence (minimal justification); and reassured

themselves that uniting against the British was more important than the plight of the slaves.

Shortly thereafter, Samuel Morton presented pseudo-scientific proof (selective exposure) that
whites were the superior race (Mitchell, 2018). His study, and others like it, used phenotypic

traits to establish the now falsified concept of race. Blacks were classified as negros, and racial

distinction was used in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) to deny black people U.S. citizenship

(“Dred Scott”, n.d.). The country went to on to fight a Civil War over slavery (“Civil War”, n.d.)

and the practice was ended in 1865.

The country has made some progress combatting racism over the last 153 years, but it

remains a part of American society. Police brutality and racial discrimination are particularly

problematic in the criminal justice system; black men are disproportionately detained, assaulted,

incarcerated, and killed by police officers (Lopez, 2015). This was brought to the forefront of

public awareness in 1991 when George Holliday filmed four police officers beating Rodney

King Jr. (Myers, 2011). At the time, citizen journalists like Holliday would sell or give their

content to news organizations for distribution. Since then, social media and consumer

technology have significantly changed citizen journalism by providing a platform for the public

to distribute and discuss user-created content independently. This has resulted in close to real-

time awareness of the day’s news and events takings place.

Kaepernick’s NFL Protest

Colin Kaepernick, former San Francisco 49ers quarterback, seemingly transformed from

a professional athlete into a symbol of activism overnight. He started posting to social media

about police brutality in early July 2016, when officers killed African-American men on back-to-

back days (Branch, 2017). He wrote on both Instagram and Twitter:

This is what lynchings look like in 2016! Another murder in the streets because the color

of a man's skin, at the hands of the people who they say will protect us. When will they

be held accountable? or did he fear for his life as he executed this man? (Popper, 2018).
After the Louisiana attorney general announced that the two white police officers who had shot

and killed Alton Sterling, a black man, would not face charges, the athlete tweeted, “State

sanctioned lynching by means of gun violence!” (Popper, 2018).

Following this social media engagement, Kaepernick used his status as a professional

athlete and television as his platform to spark discussion on a national scale. He initiated “his

own form of protest in August 2016 when he decided to sit down during the national anthem

before an NFL preseason game, citing racial injustice and police brutality as the reasons for his

actions” (Pena, 2017). He changed his mode of protest after a former Green Beret, Nate Boyer,

contacted him (Farmer, 2018). In a letter to the player, Boyer wrote:

I’ve never had to deal with prejudice because of the color of my skin, and for me to say I

can relate to what you’ve gone through is as ignorant as someone who’s never been in a

combat zone telling me they understand what it’s like to go to war (Farmer, 2018).

Boyer had seen him sitting on the bench and suggested he kneel, so he could be near his

teammates. He even stood next to him on the field before a game, hand over his heart, as

Kaepernick took a knee during the national anthem. Boyer told The Los Angeles Times he was

frustrated that Kaepernick’s original message got hijacked:

[They] put all veterans in this box and say, ‘You’re offending every veteran.’ That’s also

ridiculous. Or, ‘He’s protesting the anthem.’ He’s not protesting the national anthem. It

has become an anthem debate, but that’s not what the protest is about. It’s about racial

inequality, police brutality (Farmer, 2018).

Kaepernick engaged in his protest to expose social injustices and encourage media coverage of

police misconduct. According to Pickard (2013), “this is particularly important given the

tendencies to often depoliticize media issues in ways that protect vested interests and discourage
public engagement” (Pickard, 2013). Kaepernick’s reasons for protesting were constantly being

taken out of context, thus “sparking a nationwide debate about the First Amendment, the national

anthem in sports, and race, among other topics” (Pena, 2017).

Semiotics

Communication theory can be used to explain why Kaepernick’s protest was taken out of

context. Barthes (as cited in Griffin et al., 2015) developed the theory of semiotics to explain

how visual messages are co-opted from their original, historic meaning to new messages that

support the status quo. Jerca (2018) used semiotics trajectory to examine Kaepernick’s

nonverbal message of kneeling during national anthem. She refers to the original meaning of a

visual sign as a first order index; kneeling is traditionally a message of respect. Kneeling after a

player is injured at a sporting events is a show of solidarity. This is a second-order index specific

to athletic culture, that “ensures that no team can use the time taken to treat the player’s injuries

to gain an advantage” (p. 42). By kneeling instead of standing during the national anthem,

Kaepernick was simultaneously showing solidarity with victims of police brutality and violating

an American norm. This violation triggered a semiotic process called fractal recursivity, a binary

way of thinking that equates violating norms with opposing the norm (Irvine and Gal as cited by

Jerca, 2018). The third order index demonstrates this process; the message of solidarity was

reinterpreted as a message of disrespecting the United States, and the response to Kaepernick’s

police brutality protest became a national controversy about patriotism.

Critical Theory

By challenging the dominant culture industries of society, Kaepernick inherently

critiques the media’s control of language and the media’s role in dulling the public’s recognition

of racial inequality and police brutality against African Americans. This is in accordance with
the critical tradition of communication, which seeks to challenge the “dominant ideology of

culture and distract people from recognizing unjust distribution of power within society; e.g.,

film television, music, and advertising” (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 44).

Public’s Response. Kaepernick’s peaceful protest ignited a nationwide conversation.

Pena (2017) referred to the response to his protest as a “media firestorm and ongoing debate

about not only the issues he was protesting, but also about the First Amendment and the role of

nationalism and patriotism in sports” (Pena, 2017). Although many support freedom of speech

and peaceful protest, their support comes with conditions. According to Pena (2017), “People

seem to value and support the ability to protest or peacefully assemble so long as they agree with

the manner and time in which it was done more than whether they agree with the problem at the

root of the protest” (Pena, 2017). The public viewed Kaepernick’s protest as an inconvenience to

their entertainment, but a protest is meant to be disruptive. Fink & Gantz (1996) concluded “the

goal of critical theory is emancipation and change. Critical theory is designed to enhance

appreciation of phenomena and to lead to freedom and to new social order” (p. XX). Guided by

the critical theory of communication, Kaepernick took his initial stance against a dominant

ideology in society and disrupted the status quo in the hopes of improving society; an

undertaking usually expected from those in positions of power.

High Official’s Response. People in power focused on spin or the medium of protesting

instead of Kaepernick’s message. Pena (2017) claims, “Critics of protests often give myriad

reasons why the manner of a certain protest was inappropriate...More often than not, the

criticisms are philosophical or political, in how people perceive the protest is often determined

by whether they inherently agree with them” (Pena, 2017). Some NFL executives sought to

discredit and dismiss him as an activist. Freeman (2016) wrote in a Bleacher Report article that
the public was sympathetic to his message but “in the NFL front offices, the feeling is very

different. ‘He has no respect for our country," one team executive said. "F--k that guy.’ Another

said that if an owner asked him to sign Kaepernick, he would consider resigning, rather than do

it” (Freeman, Bleacher Report, 2016). Kaepernick continued to challenge this language that

perpetuates an imbalance of power and strives to bring attention to social injustice regardless of

the consequences.

NFL’s Response. Many scholars have argued the inclusion of the national anthem at

sporting events is not viewed “as political, but instead patriotic” (Pena, 2017). Because the

national anthem’s presence is considered patriotic rather than political, many criticize

Kaepernick for being disrespectful to veterans and those fighting for our country. Pena (2017)

points out, “Professional sports leagues like the NFL have so engrained themselves in these

patriotic and militaristic ideologies that they try to use certain events as rallying points to tap into

those feelings from the fans” (Pena, 2017). With these ideologies already fixed within the

organization, the NFL takes part in supporting the “status quo.” This serves to distract people

from the social issues the country is yet to resolve. According to Pena (2017), “The NFL, in

essence, culturally opposes the type of dissent Kaepernick and others displayed. And because

many in the public associate the flag so closely with the military symbolically, fans also took the

protest to be anti-military and anti-police, though that was not the case in Kaepernick’s own

words” (Pena, 2017). The NFL began to implement a new policy that fined teams if they do not

stand for the national anthem, “or they can choose to remain in the locker room without penalty”

(Ortiz, 2018). The rejection by the NFL raises a new challenge for Kaepernick: how will he gain

the narrative back?

Media's role in Forwarding the Narrative

Agenda Setting & Culture Studies

If Colin Kaepernick were hoping his protest would shine a light on police brutality of

unarmed black men, he did not find a lot of attention for his cause in the national media.

Certainly, the controversy his protest generated garnered a lot of coverage in the press, but one

could argue that the media played a role in reshaping the narrative. McCombs & Shaw (as cited

in Griffin et al., 2015) believed in the media’s role in agenda setting, which they defined as "the

ability to transfer the salience of items on their news agendas to the public agenda" (p. 375). In

other words, the media have a powerful role in shaping our national conversation by determining

what goes in newscasts and on the front pages of newspapers. Griffin et al. (2015) note that,

"News doesn't select itself" (p. 382). Rather, it is the consensus of senior editors and executive

producers who determine the stories that are selected, including what particular angles they will

cover. So how exactly did Kaepernick's original message become reshaped? The answer lies in

the way framing works. Griffin et al. (2015) define framing as "the selection of a restricted

number of thematically related attributes for inclusion on the media agenda when a particular

object or issue is discussed" (p. 380). After President Trump seized on the issue as a rallying

point to further his nationalist agenda, media outlets largely framed the coverage on this "culture

war," not on the debate about police brutality. As a result, his message became lost in the myriad

of stories reporting on the backlash and reaction to his style of protest. Judge (2017) writes, "It

cannot go unnoticed that Kaepernick's protests and movement have been hijacked by people with

their own agenda. He is being made a footnote in the greater story that he created all by himself"

(para. 2).

Instead of focusing on the issues that the quarterback raised in the first place, the media

framed the story as the NFL vs. Trump. They posed questions: How would NFL owners respond
to the protesters? Would the league impose rules against these displays? Would players speak out

against President Trump as he continued to fan the flames? On September 22, 2017, the

president told a crowd of supporters, "Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL owners, when

somebody disrespects our flag, to say 'get that son of a bitch off the field right now, out, he's

fired.'" (Gleeson, 2018, para. 4). The ensuing headlines demonstrated the media framing of the

story: "Donald Trump's unrelenting war with the NFL" (Zaru, 2018) and "The NFL Still Has a

Trump Problem" (Belson, 2018). Both of these stories glossed over – or did not even mention –

the genesis of the protest, focusing on the war of words springing from the President's Twitter

feed and the anger of some NFL players over the president's attacks. When more black players

joined Kaepernick in taking a knee during the national anthem, the media narrative shifted again

from the original protest to a story about players protesting the president’s assault on their First

Amendment rights (Judge, 2017).

It is not surprising that when President Trump seized on this controversy for political

purposes, that storyline would become the dominant talking point in the national media. In his

cultural studies, Hall (as cited in Griffin et al., 2015) believed "the mass media maintain the

dominance of those already in positions of power" (p. 339). The media predominantly focuses on

the president's more provocative and outlandish comments because they generate controversy

and public debate about his presidency. A Pew Research Center (2017) study showed that news

reports have been more focused on Trump's personality and character than his policy. Hall (as

cited in Griffin et al., 2015) believed that the "consent-making function of the mass media is to

convince readers and viewers that they share the same interests as those who hold the reins of

power" (p. 341). Indeed, conservative media outlets such as Fox News and The Wall Street
Journal, along with right-wing political pundits, seized on the issue, which they framed as an

example of Trump's political savvy (Wilson, 2017). Lowry (2017) writes:

He takes a commonly held sentiment – most people don't like the NFL protests – and

states it in an inflammatory way guaranteed to get everyone's attention and generate

outrage among his critics. When those critics lash back at him, Trump is put in the

position of getting attacked for a fairly commonsensical view (para. 2).

While it is debatable that the mainstream media, outside of the conservative echo chamber, were

overtly trying to persuade audiences to side with President Trump's position, they indirectly

achieved this aim through framing and agenda-setting. By focusing coverage on the protesting

players' patriotism, not the underlying meaning of their protests, news reports skewed in Trump's

favor. With the original meaning of the protest lost in the minds of the public, an NBC

News/Wall Street Journal poll released in August of this year showed a majority of those

surveyed, 54 percent, believed that kneeling during the anthem was inappropriate. 43 percent of

those polled considered it an acceptable form of protest (Dann, 2018). Hall (as cited in Griffin et

al., 2015) used the term hegemony, which is defined as "the sway of society's haves over its

have-nots" (p. 341) to illustrate how the media prop up the status quo.

In the Kaepernick case, the status quo is a football league in which none of the owners

are black, while a majority of players are African-American (Zaru, 2018). The status quo is also

the popularity of an American sport that normally dominates the television ratings. As a

professional quarterback commanding a multi-million dollar salary, and a celebrity platform to

boot, Kaepernick is certainly no "have-not," though he did end up unemployed in the NFL after

launching his protest. By relentlessly going after him in speeches and on Twitter, Trump helped

turn the player into such a polarizing and controversial figure that when Sports Illustrated
unveiled its October 2, 2017, cover paying tribute to sports figures who had stood up against

racial injustices, one athlete was surprisingly nowhere to be found: Colin Kaepernick (Judge,

2017).

Communication and Controversy

Social Judgment Theory

The real problem here is that Kaepernick’s message was distilled to a point where nobody

is sure what is trying to be said. Social judgment theory suggests that the issue is not in

manipulation of the message to further an agenda, but rather a miscommunication of the initial

message. Sherif (as cited by Griffin, 2015) says, “We weight every new idea by comparing it

with our present point of view” (p. 178). The perspectives and thoughts of an individual can

color their perceptions of the world, allowing the same issue to be looked at in very different

ways. One needs to look no further than Washington D.C. to see the types of problems that can

happen when people argue from opposite perspectives: nothing gets accomplished. This has to

do with the opposite side digging in their heels and refusing to find common ground. Griffin

(2015) calls this the Boomerang Effect, “an attitude change in the opposite direction of what the

message advocates” (p. 182). Instead of listening the Kaepernick's message, the opposition sees

another black man complaining about America. This kind of thinking makes it impossible for

common ground to be found, and instead intensifies opposite positions, charging the whole topic

with negative energy.

It can often be impossible for someone to find common ground, because they have no

context for it. Sherif (as cited by Griffin, 2015) defines three attitudes people can draw ideas

from: latitude of acceptance, latitude of rejection, and latitude of noncommitment

(p.178). Sheriff defines the latitude of acceptance as “the range of ideas that a person see as a
reasonable or worthy consideration” (p. 178). It is easy to persuade someone who has a latitude

of acceptance to an idea, because they basically agree with it. The opposite can be said of the

latitude of rejection, which Sherif (as cited by Griffin, 2015) defines as “the range of ideas that a

person sees as unreasonable or objectionable” (p. 178). When a person tries to persuade someone

else that has a latitude of rejection of the idea, there is a complete lack of understanding. Social

judgment theory also mentions a strong ego-involvement in around issues that complicates

persuasion even more. Griffin (2015) mentions how ego can be dangerous when connected with

traditionally taboo topics, because “when passions run deep, radical opinions are common, and

there’s little tolerance for diversity” (p. 180). Race is one of those topics that people are very

invested in, so when people have differing opinions, tensions run high, and no understanding can

be reached.

For Kaepernick, race was a central part of his life. He grew up as a biracial man, and

much of his life, he tried to be an advocate of these issues. Before any of this controversy started,

Kaepernick would frequently acknowledge his race in his role as an advocate. Kaepernick (as

cited by Lee 2015) said:

My racial heritage is something I want people to be well aware of. I do want to be a

representative of the African community, and I want to hold myself and dress myself in a

way that reflects that. I want black kids to see me and think: ‘Okay, he’s carrying himself

as a black man, and that’s how a black man should carry himself’ (para. 7).

Kaepernick is obsessed with his fashion and outward appearance, because he knows what he

dresses like matters to the young kids who look up to him. His actions have consequences, and

the messages he communicates to others matter.

 The opposition sees this in another way. The ideas Kaepernick is presenting by taking a

knee fall into their latitude of rejection, and they don’t see his message as being a real problem in

America. Florida Law professor Russell-Brown (as cited by Carpenter and Graham, year) says,

“The negative responses to his protest are a reaction to the subject matter and the message of his

dissent, not the form of his protest...the people who object to his form of speech are really

saying, ‘I don’t agree that these are nationally significant issues’” (para. 3). Their own point of

view and life experiences do not see racial discrimination as a major problem the way

Kaepernick does, and instead, equate the protest to attacking the flag, the country, or troops.

Social judgment theory shows this controversy is really just a skewed message that is the result

of a miscommunication and is not simply political posturing or agenda setting.

Taking the message back

Unfortunately, there is no easy way to persuade someone who holds a latitude of

rejection towards an idea. Griffin (2015) suggests that the only way to stimulate large-scale

change is through a series of small, successive movements (p.183). The process of ending racial

inequality and racial injustice that Kaepernick started in 2016 is not going to happen overnight,

and might even become more contentious. But perhaps change is coming, thanks to Nike.

As a company, Nike has long targeted controversial topics in order to bring light to them,

many times upsetting the general public in the process. Take their decision to not drop their

endorsement deal with Tiger Woods in 2009, after he had very public accusations of infidelity.

While most of his sponsors began dropping him, Nike stood by him. While not outwardly

offering words of support, their choice not to drop him was a clear stance. A study done by

Chung, Derdenger, and Srinivasan (2013) shows that Nike ended up losing around $1.5 million

dollars in profit directly as a result of the scandal. While these losses are not minute, they are still
something a big company like Nike could absorb. However, Chung et al. (2013) found that Nike

would have lost $2.7 million in revenue because there was no play of Tiger’s caliber that Nike

could replace him with. “The next best player (in rankings) was Phil Mickelson, and he was

already tied to the Callaway brand” (p. 291). Nike evaluated the benefit of parting ways with

Tiger, and they kept him, because at the time, he was still the most profitable option.

Perhaps Nike is starting the small movements Griffin (2015) calls for in order to create

larger-scale changes. Nike began running ads using Kaepernick. Following the release of the ad,

Nike’s stocks rose almost 7% (Reuters, 2018, para. 10). The surge in Nike’s stock numbers after

an initial dip immediately after the release of the campaign shows that their target audience is

again hearing Nike’s message loud and clear.

Conclusion

Social judgment theory would suggest that the best way to combat our different

perspectives is by listening, understanding, and confronting the controversial and tabooed

topics. Griffin (2015) uses Abraham Lincoln abolishing slavery as an example of how to

effectively create a latitude change. “The film shows Lincoln’s political operatives in the House

balcony noting which Democrats are sweating or at least not cheering when their leaders lambast

the amendment” (p. 180). By observing people and understanding their point of view, Lincoln

was able to persuade directly to them, thus leading the abolishment of slavery. This seems easy,

but it could be the type of common-sense solution to the Kaepernick issue. In order to really

affect social change, one should slow down and observe the other side. Think of why they

oppose the point of view, and what life experiences brought them to that point. Once the other

side is understood, then maybe, social change can happen.

 References

Belson, K. (2018, June 5). The N.F.L. still has a Trump problem. The New York Times. Retrieved

from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/sports/nfl-trump-anthem.html.

Branch, J. (2017, September 7). The awakening of Colin Kaepernick. The New York Times.

Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/sports/colin-kaepernick-nfl-

protests.html.

Chung, K. Y. C., Derdenger, T. P., & Srinivasan, K. (2013). Economic Value of Celebrity

Endorsements: Tiger Woods’ Impact on Sales of Nike Golf Balls. Marketing Science,

32(2), 271–293. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1120.0760

Clarke, L. & Maske, M. (2018, April 6). Tired of politics, NFL wants to get back to what it does

best: Selling football. Washington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/tired-of-politics-nfl-wants-to-get-back-to-what-

it-does-best-selling-football/2018/04/06/6d770e7e-3448-11e8-8abc-

22a366b72f2d_story.html?utm_term=.b03fc7f73b9c.

Dann, C. (2018, August 31). NBC/WSJ poll: Majority say kneeling during anthem 'not

appropriate'. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-

read/nbc-wsj-poll-majority-say-kneeling-during-anthem-not-appropriate-n904891.

Farmer, S. (2018, September 17). The ex-Green Beret who inspired Colin Kaepernick to kneel

instead of sit during the anthem would like to clear a few things up. Los Angeles Times.

Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-kaepernick-kneel-boyer-

20180916-story.html.

Gleeson, S. (2018, May 24). Donald Trump vs. NFL players: Tracking president's anthem

remarks in war on protests. USA Today. Retrieved from

 https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2018/05/24/donald-trump-vs-nfl-players-

tracking-anthem-remarks-protest/640055002/.

Graham, B. A., & Carpenter, L. (2016, September 16). Colin Kaepernick's critics are ignoring

the target of his protest. Retrieved from

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2016/sep/16/colin-kaepernick-protest-racial-

iniquity-nfl-american-football

Griffin, E. A., Ledbetter, A., & Sparks, G. G. (2015). A first look at communication theory (9th

ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Iaccarino, A. (2016). The Founding Fathers and Slavery. Retrieved

from https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-and-Slavery-1269536

Judge, M. (2017, September 27). Colin Kaepernick, Sports Illustrated and how media complicity

is erasing his movement [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.theroot.com/colin-

kaepernick-sports-illustrated-and-how-media-comp-1818861875.

Lee, E. (2015, October 08). Colin Kaepernick details racial struggle from his childhood.

Retrieved from https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/colin-kaepernick-

details-childhood-racial-struggle-2015810/

Lopez, G. (2015, December 17). There are huge racial disparities in how US police use force.

Retrieved October 8, 2018, from https://www.vox.com/cards/police-brutality-shootings-

us/us-police-racism

Lowry, R. (2017, September 23). Why Donald Trump is president [Blog post]. Retrieved from

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-nfl-protest-comments-example-why-hes-

president/.
Pew Research Center (2017, October 2). Covering President Trump in a polarized media

environment [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org/2017/10/02/covering-

president-trump-in-a-polarized-media-environment/.

Popper, D. (2018, March 27). Colin Kaepernick says Alton Sterling ruling is ‘state sanctioned

lynching.' New York Daily News. Retrieved from

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/kaepernick-alton-sterling-ruling-state-

sanctioned-lynching-article-1.3899696.

Reuters. (2018, September 19). Nike selling out of merchandise since Colin Kaepernick ad.

Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2018/09/19/nike-selling-out-of-merchandise-since-

colin-kaepernick-ad/

Wilson, J. (2017, September 25). Take a knee: how conservative media is reacting to NFL

protesters. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/us-

news/2017/sep/25/take-a-knee-how-conservative-media-is-reacting-to-nfl-protestors.

Zaru, D. (2018, February 5). Donald Trump's unrelenting war with the NFL. CNN. Retrieved

from https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/03/politics/trump-super-bowl-tom-brady-football-

colin-kaepernick/index.html.