By Nick Pedone/Broadcast version by Mary Schuermann Kuhlman

Reporting for the Kent State-Ohio News Connection Collaboration

CLEVELAND, Ohio – The baseball world will be focused on Cleveland today as the city hosts the Major League Baseball All-Star Game.

But a familiar face to Cleveland baseball, Chief Wahoo, won’t be on the field for the festivities. The team dropped the controversial logo from its uniforms last fall, although the Chief’s cartoonish face will surely be plastered on shirts and hats, in the stands and outside of the stadium.

The Cleveland Indians officially erased Chief Wahoo from the players’ jerseys and hats ahead of their 2019 season, and removed all signage from Progressive Field that portrayed the Wahoo logo. With the full rebrand underway, the team now sports the basic, red “Block C” logo.

Wahoo’s removal stems from pressures by the Cleveland American Indian Movement, as well as MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred. Despite hesitation from the team’s ownership, both remained instrumental in campaigning to remove the image that many Native Americans feel is harmful and racist.

The Cleveland Indians organization would not comment for this story, outside its original statement that Wahoo would be removed from the uniforms in 2019 because of “ethical issues” surrounding the mascot.

Sundance, a member of the Muscogee tribe and the executive director of the Cleveland American Indian Movement, explained that his organization will continue to protest the use of the "Indians" team name and continued licensing of the Wahoo logo.

“I am happy that Major League Baseball took notice of us after a half century. But that’s a half century too late,” Sundance said of the logo’s removal. “It should have been stopped before it started.”

Although banned from the field, the team still holds the trademark to Chief Wahoo, and the licensing for his merchandise sold outside Progressive Field. Sundance described this situation as “problematic, exploitative and obscene.”

The team still makes money from Wahoo’s likeness, profiting from such retail establishments as Rally House using the logo on gear. In order to keep the trademark rights, the MLB and the Indians organization are required to prove some sort of retail presence.

“Quite frankly, it is basically to make money,” Sundance said.

Outside Progressive Field, Vern Thompson owns a retail business selling various teams’ sports apparel downtown, before home games and other big events.

Thompson’s business, Vern & Ozzy’s Sports, and other retailers stocked up on Wahoo gear in anticipation of the logo’s removal.

“It’s definitely made our Chief Wahoo inventory go quick,” Thompson said.

For Thompson and other merchandisers, the controversy creates a monopolistic opportunity. Since Wahoo is no longer available from the Indians’ MLB Shop, other retailers are striving to create a surplus of Wahoo merchandise, which they hope to sell at a premium for years to come.

Sundance isn’t the only person who disagrees with the ethics behind all of this. Indigenous people have protested in front of Progressive Field and Jacob’s Field for decades.

Sundance thinks one protest sign in particular caught the attention of the MLB.

“It meant that they were paying attention,” Sundance said of the Wahoo’s removal. “Especially once we were using the sign that said, ‘A Dollar Spent on Major League Baseball Equals a Dollar Spent on Racism.’”

He added that his group believes the removal of the Chief Wahoo logo from the field was merely a public relations tactic used by Major League Baseball and the Cleveland Indians to keep themselves safe from bad publicity, not to engage with indigenous people.

He said they will continue to protest profiting the logo, and to focus on to changing the team name.

“The logo is offensive, but no less exploitive than the name,” Sundance said.

So far, neither the Indians organization nor the MLB has shown any movement toward a name change. Retailer Thompson believes they understand the negative effect that a name change could have on their business.

“I think it would be detrimental,” Thompson said. “ I think you would see lower attendance, I think you would see lower sales across the board; and personally, I don’t think it will ever happen, because I know they’re aware of those negative effects that could happen from that.”

And Thompson doesn’t believe fans will give up Chief Wahoo.

“Chief Wahoo is an icon in Cleveland,” he explained. “It’s just something that people always love and always buy. I don’t see that going away, ever.”


This collaboration is produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by The George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

A new Washington law ensures employees quick access to their personnel files, which are necessary for many things including filing for workers' compensation and unemployment claims.

Employers must now provide copies of the files when requested within 21 days or face possible legal action.

Jesse Wing, an employment attorney in Seattle, noted under the old law, many employers ignored or restricted requests.

"There are even employers who are located in a different part of the state who say, 'if you want to drive here, you can sit in our conference room and look at the documents but you can't have a copy of them, we won't send them to you.' Which also can cause a lot of problems for employees who have disabilities,'" Wing explained.

Wing noted the new law took seven years to pass, largely because the business community voiced concerns about time-consuming document searches and possible sensitive employee information in the files. He countered digital files make retrieval quick and legally, employees already have access to their records.

Wing added a flood of lawsuits is unlikely under the new law, as they would offer little payoff and employers can avoid them simply by complying.

"What we really want is our clients to be able to get the documents that they need for all the myriad reasons that they need them," Wing stressed.

Wing pointed out the new law only applies to employees working in the private sector. Public employees have another mechanism to obtain their files. Although, he said, there have been problems with that system as well, so follow-up legislation may be needed.


get more stories like this via email

A groundbreaking radio show from the early 1990s is returning this weekend in Arkansas. The PHAT LIP! You(th)Talk Radio show will be back on the airwaves Saturday on KABF 88.3 FM Community Radio in Little Rock.

The show, produced by Washitaw Foothills Youth Media Arts and Literacy Collective, features young people ages 16 to 24.

Director Kwami Abdul-Bey says the broadcast gives teens and young adults a chance to express their feelings about a variety of topics.

"We want all young people involved in the conversation, so you'll be hearing what they have to say particularly as it has to deal with civic engagement and electoral justice," he said.

The show will air from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. the first and third Saturday of each month, and is also available on KABF.org and through the Shortwave Relay Service.

The talk show is funded by a three-year grant. Some of the topics the students want to address are medical and student debt and funding cuts for social programs.

Jasmine Serrano, a show host, is a junior at Jacksonville High School in Jacksonville, and said she got involved with the project after speaking to members of the Arkansas Legislature.

"In society, we always look at the adults and we always look at the older folks and generations, but we don't really take the time to pay attention to how the current policies and societal perceptions are impacting youth," Serrano explained.

When Abdul-Bey started the original show in 1994, he said it was in response to a documentary that painted Arkansas youth in a bad light. His seventh-grade social studies students wanted to combat the negative stereotypes. He noted the name of the show reflects the music of the times.

"One of my favorite hip-hop artists back in the 1990s was Fat Lip from Digable Planets," he continued. "And 'pfat' at the time was something that was cool, something that was vital as far as the culture was concerned. And 'lip' just means you talk too much."

Reports of the Trump administration considering taxing wealthy Americans to pay for mass deportations and other priorities come on the heels of a new study showing how the move could generate significant revenues without slowing economic growth.

Mary Eschelbach Hansen, associate professor of economics at American University and the report's co-author, said raising tax rates for people who earn more than $609,000 a year to 44% would add 3% to the nation's tax coffers, enough to stave off cuts to popular programs serving low-income Coloradans.

"In current budget proportions, that's about enough to pay for some of the biggest, most important programs like food stamps SNAP, Children's Health Insurance Program, and also Temporary Assistance for Needy Families," Eschelbach Hansen outlined.

While 44% may seem high compared to today's top rate of 37%, it is a lot less than the 92% paid by people who earned more than $400,000 a year under Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Republicans have long argued tax cuts create economic benefits for all, and leaders in Congress, including Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., the House Speaker, have said they would oppose any tax hikes.

Eschelbach Hansen argued raising the top tax rate would also increase how much of the national income pie most Americans get to keep, compared to how much the wealthiest get, by about 2%. She added years of trickle-down economics have shown only the wealthy benefit from low tax rates.

"If lowering top tax rates was going to trickle down, then you and I would be much richer than we are now," Eschelbach Hansen pointed out. "Because we have had an era of low top tax rates for decades."

Eschelbach Hansen stressed higher personal tax rates have virtually no impact on long-term economic growth, and lower personal tax rates lead to less economic growth, because people tend to take advantage of the lower rate by moving their income.

"Instead of reinvesting it in your business, where it will grow your business and grow the economy, you'll be more likely to just take it as personal income, which is not going to stimulate growth," Eschelbach Hansen explained.


get more stories like this via email