Aug 25th, 2007
Nike on Vick: Inhumane, abhorrent and unacceptable
Nike, the $15 billion dollar shoe and sports apparel leader, tore up its contract with beleaguered pro football player Michael Vick yesterday after details of his plea deal with federal prosecutors came to light. (NOTE: Vick’s official website has been overwhelmed by Internet traffic and as of the date of this writing its “Bandwidth Limit Exceeded.”)
The terse, 33-word statement was direct and to the point, stating that Nike considers “any cruelty to animals inhumane, abhorrent and unacceptable” (bolding added by author).
The official definitions of each word? Here’s what Dictionary.com says:
- Inhumane - “not humane; lacking humanity, kindness, compassion, etc.”
- Abhorrent - “causing repugnance; detestable; loathsome: an abhorrent deed.”
- Unacceptable - “used of persons or their behavior; “impossible behavior”; “insufferable insolence” [syn: impossible] ” [NOTE: This was the 3rd definition listed.]
OUCH! OUCH! OUCH!
In Nike’s 2003 Annual Report, Phil Knight’s letter to shareholders (Nike’s then chairman/president/CEO), included Vick in a short list of seven athletes he singled out as those with promise “to reach new levels of human potential,” to which he added it was “(Nike’s) job to help them get there.”
Those listed with Vick in Knight’s letter? In order, they are
- LeBron James;
- Carmelo Anthony;
- Lleyton Hewitt;
- Roger Federer;
- Tiffeny Milbrett;
- The aforementioned Mr. Vick; and
- Paula Radcliffe.
Apparently great company to be in (at the time). I wonder how those six other athletes feel about their association with Vick now?
