Performative Progress: The NFL’s Hypocrisy on Racial Justice

Photo via Adweek/Getty Images

***

Kendrick Lamar’s performance on Super Bowl Sunday served as a direct critique of the United States, focusing on the ongoing struggle for true equality. Lamar’s powerful message was most visually apparent when he stood in the middle of a split American flag, surrounded by dancers in red, white, and blue, bringing light to the American divide. His performance as a whole represented the division of the country, especially in recent years. 

 Samuel L. Jackson, who was deeply involved in the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement, made an appearance during the performance. While dressed as Uncle Sam, a “popular symbol for the United States,” Jackson accused Lamar of being “too loud, too reckless, too ghetto.” This critique highlights racist stereotypes that have historically been associated with hip-hop culture and the way it is perceived by mainstream America: as disruptive or rebellious. Kendrick Lamar intended to display the tension between artistic expression and societal expectations. It shows a clash between Lamar’s unapologetic message and that of a more traditional and restrictive view of mainstream America, represented by Jackson as Uncle Sam. While the NFL embraced Kendrick’s politicized music and performance, the league has fallen short in addressing systemic racial inequalities within its own structure in recent years.

The NFL has a history of contradictions when it comes to racial justice. While it consistently showcases the value of talent from Black individuals onstage and on the field, it has actively silenced players and staff who have attempted to use the platform to challenge systemic oppression. This tension became especially apparent in the wake of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, which gained global momentum in response to police brutality and racial inequality.

The Black Lives Matter movement was founded in 2013 in response to the acquittal of George Zimmerman following the killing of Trayvon Martin. According to the Black Lives Matter website, “[Their] mission is to eradicate white supremacy,” also noting that they want to “Build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes.”

At one point, quarterback Colin Kaepernick was one of the most recognizable faces behind the movement. On the San Francisco 49ers, the rising star became widely known for expressing his support for the BLM movement by consistently kneeling during the national anthem when it was sung before games. 

After 2016, Kaepernick was still thought to have had the talent to play as a backup quarterback for the next three to five years. However, Kaepernick remained unsigned, the reasoning for which is widely believed to be (at least in part) because of his protests. Many speculate that NFL teams distanced themselves due to the negative attention and backlash that the league was facing at the time. Kaepernick’s removal from the NFL highlights a preference for activism that fits strictly with the league’s priorities and within the general viewership’s comfort zone. The same league that gave Lamar a platform is the one that pushed Colin Kaepernick out for speaking up against the very injustices Lamar’s music calls out.

 The NFL’s embrace of Kendrick Lamar’s performance and message thus highlights a clear sense of hypocrisy within the league when it comes to political and social activism. Lamar’s performance, even with its outright political symbolism, was celebrated by the NFL, while Kaepernick was unceremoniously pushed out. And while the NFL’s approval of Lamar’s Super Bowl performance may indicate that progress is being made, it also allows the league to align itself with certain messages while avoiding any real accountability on its own behalf, as their past actions tell a different story. This pattern of performative progress made by the NFL extends beyond the field as well, as it is also apparent in the leadership of the organization. 

The Rooney Rule is one effort made by the NFL to encourage diverse leadership in the league. The policy “aims to increase the number of minorities hired in head coach, general manager, and executive positions.” The rule was adopted by the NFL when they received recommendations for new hiring practices from the NFL Workplace Diversity Committee, which emphasizes addressing the “historically low number of minorities in head coaching positions.” The policy required that “all NFL teams must interview at least one minority candidate for head coaching openings.” But since the Rooney Rule’s implementation in 2003, the NFL has faced allegations of conducting sham interviews to meet the requirement. 

In 2022, Brian Flores, the former head coach of the Miami Dolphins, filed a lawsuit against the league, alleging racial discrimination in its hiring practices. In the lawsuit, which targeted the NFL itself as well as three of its teams (the Miami Dolphins, Denver Broncos, and New York Giants), Flores argued that teams conducted sham interviews with minority candidates solely to comply with the Rooney Rule. He shared his experience interviewing with the New York Giants for the position of head coach, claiming they had already decided to hire Brian Daboll before even meeting with him. An alleged unprofessional interview with the Denver Broncos also took place where executives showed up late and disinterested, and according to Flores, lacking any true and genuine intention of considering him as a candidate.

After announcing the lawsuit, Flores elaborated on other unethical practices within his own team, where Dolphins owner Stephen Ross “explicitly offered him $100,000 for each loss the team suffered in 2019, in an attempt to strengthen the value of the Dolphins’ NFL draft pick.” In response to offers like that, Flores said “To disrespect the game like that, trust was lost, and there were certainly some strained relationships, and ultimately, [he thought] that was [his] demise in Miami.” He was then fired after three seasons in January of 2022, “despite recording the Dolphins’ first back-to-back winning seasons since 2003 (10-6 in 2020, 9-8 in 2021).”

As of February 2025, the lawsuit is still ongoing, but it has already brought attention to the NFL’s hiring practices which many say need revision. The league denied any wrongdoing, stating that its hiring processes are fair and based only on merit. Although they rejected the accusations made by Flores, the lawsuit has pressured the league to revise the Rooney Rule, requiring teams to now interview at least two external minority candidates for head coaching jobs. 

While the lawsuit has not yet reached a final legal conclusion, it has sparked wider discussions about systemic racism in the NFL. It has exposed a potential need for more effective leadership reforms that go above and beyond mere procedural requirements. In a league where “there are only three Black head coaches in a sport that had 56.4% Black players in 2022,” and “more than 70 percent of the league identified as a person of color in 2022,” many say that change needs to be made in terms of the leadership.

The NFL’s handling of Colin Kaepernick’s protests and Brian Flores’s lawsuit highlights the league’s selective response to issues of racial inequality. Welcoming performative gestures while suppressing concrete challenges to its own organizational inequities displays a clear sense of hypocrisy. This demonstrates that the NFL’s commitment to racial justice extends only insofar as it remains beneficial to its brand.

This contradiction becomes even more apparent when considering Kendrick Lamar’s Super Bowl performance. The league actively platformed a performance that critiqued racial injustice and America’s exploitation of Black people, yet historically, it has punished players and coaches who take real action against the very issues Lamar highlighted. By allowing such performances, the NFL creates the illusion of supporting change while ensuring that those within its system remain powerless to demand it. Until the NFL reconciles its public image with its internal practices, its commitment to progress will remain nothing more than a branding strategy.

***

This article was edited by Angeline Wu.