St. Cloud State University St. Cloud State University
The Repository at St. Cloud State The Repository at St. Cloud State
Culminating Projects in English Department of English
12-2023
Building Terministic Screens: An Investigation of the NCAA’s Building Terministic Screens: An Investigation of the NCAA’s
Communication on Title IX Communication on Title IX
Lauren Kirchberg
Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/eng_etds
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Kirchberg, Lauren, "Building Terministic Screens: An Investigation of the NCAA’s Communication on Title
IX" (2023).
Culminating Projects in English
. 27.
https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/eng_etds/27
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of English at The Repository at St. Cloud
State. It has been accepted for inclusion in Culminating Projects in English by an authorized administrator of The
Repository at St. Cloud State. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Building Terministic Screens: An Investigation of the NCAA’s Communication on Title IX
by
Lauren Kirchberg
A Thesis Paper
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
Saint Cloud State University
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Master of English
in Writing Studies and Rhetoric
December, 2023
Thesis Committee:
James Heiman, Chairperson
Marla Kanengieter-Wildeson
Sarah Green
2
Abstract
Historically, women’s sports have been underrepresented. The sports world has been dominated
by male athletics; football, basketball, baseball, and more. It was not until recent years that
female athletes have received more recognition in media and in organizations, like the NCAA,
National Collegiate Athletic Association. The increase in female athletes has led to an increased
awareness for gender equity efforts in athletics. The NCAA has a myriad of social media posts,
online resources, and more materials highlighting the benefits of Title IX. However, the NCAA
continuously leaves out Title IX and protections against sexual harassment. Lack of resources for
women’s sports, inequitable policies, and no mention of sexual harassment communicates that it
is not a problem in the NCAA and is not relevant to their conversation about Title IX. Although
they continue to increase awareness for women’s athletics in general, the NCAA does not have
the same awareness to sexual harassment issues faced by athletes. In addition to the main
research question, “How has the NCAA removed sexual harassment from the Title IX
conversation?”, the thesis will investigate the following research questions: a) Where and what
does the NCAA communicate information about Title IX? b) What meaning can be interpreted
from the NCAA’s communication on Title IX? c) What is the motivation for the NCAA to
communicate the way they do about Title IX? Through analysis of external communications, I
will utilize rhetorical tools to investigate interpretations derived from the NCAA’s
communication and lack of communication on Title IX.
3
Acknowledgements
To all my Communication Studies and English Department professors who inspired me
to continue my academic journey as a graduate student. A special thank you to Dr. Mutua, Dr.
Bineham, Dr. Vorell, Dr. Tuder, and Dr. Dorn who made huge contributions to my education.
To my chair, Dr. Heiman. Thank you for taking the time to meet with me each week for
the past year and thank you for helping me see the world in a whole new light. The education
you and the English Department provided will not end with graduation, I will take it with me in
all my future endeavors.
To Dr. Kanengieter-Wildeson, my committee member. From my first semester at St.
Cloud State University, you inspired me to pursue Communication Studies. Thank you for
guiding me through my collegiate career and always being willing to support my academic
endeavors.
To Dr. Green, my committee member. Thank you for advising me throughout my time as
a grad student and keeping my thesis on track. Your perspective as a poet has provided new
insights into my thesis, which I would not have gotten without you.
To all those who have helped me better understand the NCAA, Title IX, and student-
athlete advocacy, thank you.
Finally, to Heidi Kirchberg (Mom), Doug Kirchberg (Dad), and Kyle Ripplinger. Thank
you all for listening to my ideas, letting me vent when things got heavy, and supporting me in
this goal. Without you all, I would have never had the capacity to finish this thesis.
4
Table of Contents
Page
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………………..5
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………………..6
Chapter
Chapter 1: My Story……………………………………………………………………….8
Chapter 2: Title IX and the NCAA………………………………………………...…….14
Chapter 3: The Method of Controlling Narratives...…………………………..…………22
The NCAA’s Use of Positioning to Control Narratives……………………...….29
Rhetoric as an Interpretive Tool………………………………………………....31
Chapter 4: Title IX Becomes a Symbol………………………………………………….35
The Semantic Triangle……………………………………………………….…..37
The NCAA Creates Terministic Screens……………………………….………..39
Chapter 5: Power to Position…...………………………………………………………..47
Chapter 6: The Pentadic Analysis…………………………………………………..……53
Chapter 7: Analysis of Selection, Reflection, and Deflection…………………………...61
Chapter 8: The Danger of a Single Story….…………………………………….……...100
Works Cited………………...……………………………………………………………..……106
5
List of Figures
Figure Page
1. NCAA Title IX Logo……………………………………………………………………..36
2. Semantic Triangle………………………………………………………………………..38
3. QR Code…………………………………………...……………………………………..61
4. King Feels Riggs’ Bicep…………………………………………………………….…...70
5. King and Riggs Tap Tennis Rackets……………………………………………………..71
6
List of Tables
Table Page
1. Executive Order 11375…………………………………………………………………..61
2. The Boston Marathon ……………………………...……………………………………62
3. 40 Years of Title IX…..………………...………………………………………………..64
4. Executive Order 11375 and Higher Education…………………………………………..65
5. AIAW is Established….…………………...……………………………………………..66
6. Title IX Becomes Law..…………………...……………………………………………..67
7. Bobby Riggs and Billie Jean King...……………………………………………………..68
8. Cal State Scholarship…….………..……………………………………………………..69
9. Image Comparison…………...…………………………………………………………..70
10. AIAW Success………..………………………………………………………………….72
11. The John Tower Amendment…………………………………………………………….73
12. Javits Amendment……….……………………………………………………………….74
13. Gerald R. Ford Award….……..………………………………………………………….75
14. Title IX Guidelines……...……………………………………………………………….76
15. NCAA v. Title IX………..………………………………………………………………76
16. The Three-Pronged Test…...…………………………………………………………….77
17. Alexander v. Yale………..………………………………………………………………78
18. NCAA’s First Coed Championship…………...…………………………………………79
19. The Winningest Coach………...…………………………………………………………81
20. Grove City v. Bell………………….…………………………………………………….82
21. Civil Rights Restoration Act...……..…………………………………………………….83
7
Table Page
22. Title IX Overview……..……………...…………………………………………………84
23. The Task Force…...…………………...…………………………………………………85
24. NCAA Defines Gender Equity...………...………………………………………………86
25. Cohen v. Brown…………..………………..…………………………………………….87
26. Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act….……………..…………………………………….88
27. Commission on Opportunities in Athletics……………………..……………………….89
28. Central Images……………………………………………..…………………………….90
29. Equity Task Force Meets Again.…………………….………..…………………………91
30. Tokyo Olympics……………..………………………………………..………………….95
31. External Gender Equity Review.……………………………………..………………….96
32. 50 Years of Title IX………………………………………..…………………………….98
8
Chapter 1: My Story
When I was eight years old, I dreamed of playing collegiate softball. It was a big
aspiration for someone who could hardly throw a ball 30 feet away, but I wanted more than
anything at the time to be like the college athletes I saw on television. After years of travel ball,
lessons, and games I finally committed to play collegiate softball. Although nervous about the
new experience, I felt prepared to be playing softball. I had played games, practiced, and
watched collegiate athletes in preparation for my college experience. However, what the
television doesn’t show is the behind-the-scenes. What I learned is behind the scenes of college
athletics, it is not always pretty. When you watch college athletes you think they are invincible.
You think although they have to work incredibly hard, they are living the dream. However, for
many college athletes, their dream has been tarnished by sexual harassment and assault.
One large, seemingly undiscussed, issue college athletes face is sexual assault. In my five
years as a student-athlete, I saw or heard of a myriad of sexual harassment or assault cases. From
my own experience, I had two coaches who were put on leave for sexual harassment or relations
with a player. On both occasions we, the players, were told not to talk about what was going on,
and in both situations we were informed there was little we could be told because of “legal
concerns”. The truth was coaches were acting inappropriately towards players. Yet, those two
coaches went on to coach other teams, coaching other girls and women. This begs the question,
why are other schools allowed to hire coaches with a sexual harassment history? The answer, the
schools didn’t even know about the history. No record followed the coaches, and there was no
punishment besides a non-renewal of their contract. The only way for outsiders to know what
happened was if we spoke, even though we were told “legally” we could not because it would
interfere with the investigation. Thus, we were silenced. Experiencing the effects of sexual
9
harassment in college athletics firsthand made me realize how wide the impacts reach. We know
sexual harassment or assault can impact a survivor's physical and mental health, but what I
learned is when it happens within an athletic team it can impact the whole team’s safety.
In college athletics, student-athletes spend the majority of their time with the team. When
not in class or sleeping, the rest of your time is either spent practicing, working out, traveling, in
meetings, or volunteering as a team. All of the time spent with the team is also spent with the
coaches. When a player doesn’t feel safe with their coach, they have nowhere to go. They are
forced to remain in the environment, quit the team, or try and report the coach. Additionally, the
power dynamic between a coach and their player often makes it easy for the coach to break
boundaries. Player’s fear losing playing time, their scholarship, or reprimand from their coaches.
This fear often drives players to not speak up when they feel uncomfortable or say no to
inappropriate behavior by the coaches. In order to get to the collegiate level, many athletes have
been “trained” on how to act around college coaches. Often times their former coaches, parents,
or peers tell them they always have to say “yes” to college coaches otherwise they will be seen as
un-coachable. College athletes have been told to always listen, trust, and do whatever the coach
says. If a player doesn’t, they are seen as having a bad attitude or a bad teammate. This creates a
perfect environment for grooming because some players may not even know they are
experiencing sexual harassment. They are so conditioned to say “yes” and not disagree with the
coach they don’t process when grooming or sexual harassment is taking place and is a problem.
Learning to say “yes” as a student-athlete has more repercussions than expected. With
only saying “yes” comes the absence of “no” or any opinion. This creates a silence. Athletes are
silenced constantly, as my teammates and I were in the case of our coaches. The silencing of
student-athletes allows so many cases of coach-player harassment to go unnoticed or
10
underreported. The majority of cases I know are from word of mouth of other student-athletes.
Recently, within our softball conference, a coach was hired in 2011. By 2014 he was placed on
administrative leave after the school received a complaint against him. After a year of leave, the
coach returned for the next season. Then, again in 2018, complaints were sent in by players
about the coach. It was not until 2019 that the coach officially left the team. However, it is not
public knowledge if the coach left his position or was fired. There is no public data regarding the
outcome of the case (Austin et al.). Although there is a level of confidentiality necessary with
sensitive cases, there is also a level of protection needed for athletes. The only reason I know the
coach committed sexual harassment and assault was from first-hand accounts from the players.
The need to bring to light the problem of sexual harassment experienced by student-
athletes began my investigation of other player-coach harassment cases. The truth is one in four
collegiate athletes experience sexual harassment from an authority figure (Book), found in a
2021 survey of 1,500 college-educated athletes (men and women) under the age of 45 conducted
by Lauren’s Kids Foundation in cooperation with attorneys Ben Crump and Richard Schulte. The
results of the survey have a 95% confidence level. It would appear athletes of all gender
identifications experience problems with sexual harassment from authority figures. I want to
recognize men experience sexual assault as well, but as noted in the national statistics women (as
a whole) experience sexual harassment at a higher rate. Of those student-athletes who
experienced sexual harassment, only 25% reported the abuse (Book). This shows the scale at
which silencing victims can operate. The study also shows my team is not alone in witnessing
harassment or in being silenced by authority figures. According to the same study, 83% of all
student-athletes were aware of another student-athlete who experienced some form of sexual
harassment or assault. Of that 83%, 25% knew someone whose athletic career was threatened
11
and 22% knew someone whose grades were threatened if they did not comply with the sexual
advancement (Book).
The statistic provided gives us an insight into just how prevalent sexual harassment and
assault is for student-athletes. This made me think about what preventative and safety measures
are in place for student-athletes. The overarching law preventing sexual harassment and assault
of any student at a federally funded school is Title IX. In federally funded colleges and
universities, there is a Title IX office built to handle equity issues, including sexual harassment.
Title IX and the college or university’s protocol is built for all students, not just student-athletes.
The only separate governing body over the college athletics is the membership entity they play
under, for the scope of this project, I will specifically be talking about the NCAA. The NCAA is
the National Collegiate Athletic Program. According to their website, NCAA.org, the NCAA has
over 500,000 student-athletes across their 1,100 member schools. Along with organizing and
running championship tournaments and providing scholarships, the NCAA maintains regulations
for member schools and student-athletes. As noted by the NCAA itself, it was created to
“regulate the rules of college sport and protect young athletes” (NCAA, “History”). Yet, when
doing my initial research, I began to question how true it is that the NCAA protects young
athletes. As a former student-athlete, I knew my university’s protocol for all Title IX cases and
their expectations as a school to protect all students. I also knew NCAA regulations on things
like, grade/credit eligibility, drug and alcohol use, COVID-19 protocol, and more. However,
what I didn’t know was the protocol for reporting coaches, what that would entail, or how they
were held accountable through the NCAA. In terms of sexual harassment and assault, the only
regulation the NCAA enforced was making student-athletes attend a meeting once a year on
sexual harassment or assault. It was the school's job to run the meeting and they could make it
12
about anything in relation to sexual harassment or assault. Our topic in 2023 was how to support
victims of sexual assault. Our coaches are not expected or required by the NCAA to attend
separate sexual harassment or assault training.
When I began thinking more about my thesis, it was at the opportune time as it was the
50th anniversary of Title IX. Schools across the country were celebrating 50 years of Title IX
and women in sports. The NCAA also celebrated the 50th anniversary of Title IX. Through
social media and their website, they recognized women coaches, athletes, and athletic staff
across their conferences. This seemed a little ironic, considering that year social media exposed
severe inequities between the women’s and men’s Division I basketball tournaments.
Additionally, the NCAA and most member schools only celebrated Title IX in regard to
monetary equity or the right to participate in sports, even though Title IX is also instrumental in
preventing sexual harassment and assault. Though I was already skeptical of the NCAA’s
intentions in their celebration of Title IX, through conversations with collegiate staff members I
learned the NCAA is not legally liable by Title IX. This means they have no legal connection to
Title IX at all. Since they are not federally funded the NCAA technically does not legally need to
be equitable or provide any rules or regulations to prevent sexual harassment or assault. This
began my exploration into what the NCAA’s relationship with Title IX has historically looked
like. After investigating the history of the relationship, I assessed the current conversation of
Title IX and how the NCAA constructs Title IX. Then, I examined the way the NCAA constructs
the conversation of Title IX in the way they do. Finally, I looked at what ways student-athletes
have attempted to tell their stories and the NCAA’s response to their story.
As indicated above, my thesis will address what interpretations can be found within the
NCAA’s public communication on Title IX and gender equity. In addition to the main research
13
question, “How has the NCAA removed sexual harassment from the Title IX conversation ?”,
the thesis will investigate the following research questions: a) Where and what does the NCAA
communicate information about Title IX? b) What meaning can be interpreted from the NCAA’s
communication on Title IX? c) What is the motivation for the NCAA to communicate the way
they do about Title IX? Through analysis of external communications, I will utilize rhetorical
tools to investigate the interpretations derived from the NCAA’s connection and lack of
connection to Title IX. One of the biggest rhetorical elements my research involves is a pentadic
analysis. More than just investigating what is put out and said by the NCAA, I will be
investigating what is not said by the NCAA and what the silence communicates. The saying
goes, “actions speak louder than words”, but when I think of communication on sexual
harassment and abuse I believe the statement “silence speaks louder than words” is more
appropriate.
14
Chapter 2: Title IX and the NCAA
As mentioned, Title IX is often known for making it illegal for there to be inequitable
resources and programs for men and women at publicly funded institutions. However, that is not
the only impact of Title IX in institutions. In order to provide the full scope of Title IX, I will
provide an overview of the entire law. Additionally, in both the public and legal sectors terms
like sexual harassment, violence, and abuse have been highly debated so I will outline what
definition we will use for the rest of this paper. The definitions I provide of the terms are based
on the language documentated in Title IX. However, there are areas where the language is
ambiguous and continues to be upheld based on judicial discernment. In those situations, I will
defer to what may be considered a progressive view of the terms sexual harassment, violence, or
assault. This is because although the action may not be considered severe and pervasive, it can
still impact the student-athlete's safety and experience.
Title IX states “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded
from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any
education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance” (Department of Education).
Although upon initial adoption Title IX did not address the issue of sexual harassment, The
Department of Health Education and Welfare established laws to ensure protections against
sexual harassment, violence, and abuse. The Department believes that sexual harassment affects
the equal access to education that Title IX is designed to protect and this problem “warrants
legally binding regulations that address sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination under
Title IX, instead of mere guidance documents which are not binding and do not have force and
effect of law” (Department of Education). The Department adopted, as I will moving forward,
the Gebser/Davis definition of sexual harassment:
15
Severe, pervasive and objectively offensive conduct that effectively denies a person
equal educational access helps ensure that Title IX is enforced consistent with the First
Amendment. Including quid pro quo harassment and Clery Act/VAWA sex offenses.
Ensures that quid pro quo harassment and Clery Act/VAWA sex offenses trigger a
recipient’s response obligations, without needing to be evaluated for severity,
pervasiveness, offensiveness, or denial of equal access because prohibiting such conduct
presents no First Amendment concerns and such serious misconduct causes denial of equal
educational access. (Department of Education)
This adoption of the Gebser/Dabis definition of sexual harassment made it legally binding for
federally funded institutions to prevent and protect against sexual harassment. Additionally, it
became a law that staff members had to report if they became aware of sexual harassment, no
matter what severity. Sexual harassment is defined in alignment with section 106.3 of federally
ruling,
Sexual harassment is conduct on the basis of sex including unwelcome conduct.
Unwelcome conduct that a reasonable person would determine is so severe, pervasive,
and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to education.
Sexual harassment includes a single instance of sexual assault, dating violence,
domestic violence, or stalking. The department also recognized quid pro quo sexual
harassment under Title IX. (Department of Education)
When discussing sexual harassment, this will be the all-inclusive definition I refer to.
Title IX was not implemented instantaneously; it went through multiple changes to be
what it is today. In June 1972, President Nixon signed Title IX into law. In the following years,
entities tried to amend or undercut Title IX, specifically to exclude income-generating sports
16
from its coverage (Department of Education). It was not until 1979 that the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare issued a final interpretation of Title IX’s effect on intercollegiate
athletics. The Department mandated education institutions provide equal opportunity to men and
women in athletic programs. A year later, the case of Alexander v. Yale established the
precedent that sexual harassment is a form of discrimination and therefore illegal. The case of
Grove City v. Bell actually rescinded Title IX from athletic programs, but by 1988 the Civil
Rights Restoration Act overrode Grove City v. Bell stating Title IX applied to all programs and
activities of educational institutions receiving federal financial assistance. Since then, there have
been a few changes in Title IX (NCAA “What You May Not Know about Title IX and
Athletics”). What becomes interesting is when we examine the timeline of Title IX itself against
the NCAA’s timeline of equity in intercollegiate athletics. The history of the NCAA’s
misalignment and alignment with Title IX reveals the history of their motives concerning equity.
Although one of the most widely known intercollegiate athletics organizations is the
NCAA, historically there have been other, larger intercollegiate athletic organizations. In 1971,
one of those organizations was the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW).
The AIAW provided opportunities and sponsored championships specifically for women. As
noted above, it was just a few years after the AIAW was founded that Title IX was issued. In the
Title IX timeline, it is noted organizations and institutions attempted to rescind or undercut Title
IX. In 1976, the NCAA was actually an organization who filed a lawsuit against Title IX,
claiming no athletic programs receive direct federal funds. The case was dismissed a few years
later. It wasn’t until 1980 the NCAA held its first official championships where women were
allowed to compete. A year later the AIAW filed an antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA, but the
AIAW lost the case and inevitably had to close down. As noted prior, the Grove City v. Bell case
17
removed Title IX’s application to athletic programs. During this time, schools cut women’s
teams, and the Office for Civil Rights canceled 23 ongoing Title IX investigations. When Title
IX was reinstated for athletic programs, the cases were already dismissed (NCAA “What You
May Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). Around 20 years after the creation of Title IX, the
NCAA created the Gender Equity Task Force. The task force provided recommendations to the
NCAA for more resources and programs for female athletes. They also defined “gender equity”
in their own terms:
An athletics program can be considered gender equitable when the participants in both
the men’s and women’s sports programs would accept as fair and equitable the overall
program of the other gender. No individual should be discriminated against on the basis
of gender, institutionally or nationally, in intercollegiate athletics. (NCAA “Gender
Equity and Title IX”)
Following their recommendations and a new definition of gender equity, the NCAA Gender and
Equity Task Force did not reconvene again until 2015, 21 years after they first met. One of the
only other major reports of the NCAA’s involvement with Title IX came about in the past few
years.
Following COVID-19, the NCAA held its 2021 Division I Men’s and Women’s
Basketball Tournament, commonly known as “March Madness”. It gained the media’s attention,
but not for slam dunks or unprecedented upsets. When women’s basketball players posted the
workout facilities, meals, and gear they received in comparison to men on social media the
public saw blatant inequity. The NCAA had failed on many levels to provide women with an
equitable experience. If you compare the two budgets it is evident the men received far greater
18
resource allocation than the women, as noted in the NCAA’s Third-Party Gender Equity Review
(Kaplan, etal.).
Due to the magnitude of publicity, the NCAA had no choice but to take action. They
brought in an external law firm, Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLC to do a gender equity review. Due
to the exigency of the review, the law firm began with an equity review of just the men’s and
women’s basketball championships. Following the first equity review, the law firm did another
gender equity review this time of all the sport’s championships. In both reviews, the law firm
outlines areas the NCAA can improve equity and provides recommendations in areas including
but not limited to; finance, communication, resources, media, and staffing. The information
provided from the reports acted as an audit. The NCAA learned where they could improve their
gender equity and gained helpful recommendations. However, the recommendations were not
legally binding (Kaplan, et al.). The NCAA could choose to follow or not follow the
recommendations as they saw appropriate. A year after the equity review was published, it was
Title IX’s 50th anniversary. Whether already planned or due to the equity review, the NCAA
created a media campaign focused on Title IX’s 50th anniversary. This seemed slightly
manipulative as posts tried to celebrate women in sports and Title IX when the previous year
gender equity was such a big challenge, in addition, the NCAA had historically opposed Title IX
and its application to athletics. Regardless of motivation, there is no denying the NCAA
increased its efforts toward gender equity.
The equity review revealed large gaps in resource allocation, finances, and
communication between men and women in athletics in the NCAA. However, what it did not
mention, not once, was the NCAA’s protections and regulation of sexual harassment. The equity
review did not include sexual harassment in its scope of review, although it falls under equity as
19
described in Title IX. This begs the question as to why. As we know the NCAA is not liable
under Title IX, meaning they have no legal obligation to regulate or enforce any protections for
student-athletes regarding sexual harassment. However, the same is true of all items regarding
gender equity. Although member schools do need to compile with Title IX, the NCAA does not.
The gender equity review and any action taken by the NCAA based on the law firm’s
recommendations are made or not made without any legal ramifications, including resource
allocation, media attention, budgeting, and staffing. Technically, nothing needs to be equitable
within the NCAA. This means the NCAA is making an active choice to focus on certain aspects
of Title IX. Yet, the one aspect of Title IX they choose to ignore, sexual harassment, is highly
impactful to student-athlete safety. Although the NCAA may want to remove itself from the
conversation on sexual harassment, some student-athletes have tried to speak out against coach-
player sexual harassment.
In 2020, several women filed a class-action lawsuit against the NCAA for negligence in
its failure to protect young student-athletes. The women were all victims of sexual harassment
from the same coach, John Rembao. All the women reported the coach to their institutions, but
after reporting, Rembao would move to a different NCAA school to coach. The women state:
1. NCAA regulations do not prohibit sexual or romantic relationships between student-
athletes and athletic staff 2. Investigations into allegations of abusive conduct by athletic
personnel are not conducted by an independent third party, and therefore become insular
and prioritize institutions’ self-interest 3. Unlike the US Olympic and Paralympic
committees, which have an overseeing third party - SafeSport - tracking and investigating
athletes’ abuse claims, there is no centralized system for reporting and tracking abuse
allegations at NCAA member schools, and coaches facing accusations like those against
20
Rembao are allowed to slip under the radar and simply move along to other victims 4.
The NCAA mandates sexual assault training for coaches and athletes, but focuses solely
on peer abuse, and does not provide critical education on health boundaries between
student-athlete and athletic authority figures. (Thomas)
The NCAA and its board of governors filed a motion to dismiss the case, asserting the NCAA
“has no legal duty to protect NCAA student-athletes from such predatory conduct” (Thomas).
The motion to dismiss was granted, as the NCAA is not legally liable under Title IX since they
are not a federally funded institution, even though their member institutions are liable under Title
IX.
The case brought forward in 2020 is one of only a handful of articles reporting
coach/player sexual harassment or violence. Yet, I know firsthand just how prevalent this issue
is. As noted in the statistic from Lauren’s Kids, one in four collegiate athletes experience sexual
harassment from an authority figure (Book). Recently, our team was made aware of a Title IX
case filed at one of our conference schools. The case was against the coaches. We knew firsthand
the discrimination and abuse the athletes who filed the case faced, as one of the athletes
transferred to our team. She relayed the abusive language used and the actions the coaches
displayed against the athletes. When the athletes first brought the case against the coaches, the
coaches were put on temporary leave. This was very similar to my experience with our two staff
members. However, the coaches were allowed back to coach the team within two weeks.
Reportedly, there was no clear evidence of abuse. Those athletes are now back with the same
coaches, perhaps with the same abusive environment. If you search for information on this case,
you will not find it. It is not public knowledge. There is silence. The NCAA has done nothing to
get involved in the situation or reprimand the school or coaches.
21
Historically, the NCAA has had many interactions with Title IX, positive and negative. In
its current state, the NCAA utilizes Title IX language in their media, press releases, and other
public-facing materials. Throughout the thesis, I will identify when and how the NCAA utilizes
Title IX in their communications. This identification will lead to a pentadic analysis, which will
reveal motivations and interpretations of the NCAA’s communications. Through my analysis, I
will demonstrate how the NCAA redefines Title IX, builds its credibility, and silences multiple
narratives, and creates mystery. The rhetorical mystery of the NCAA will be revealed through
silence, imagery, power, semiotics, myth, dramatism, and the use of pentadic analysis.
Ultimately, the analysis will demonstrate how the NCAA removed sexual harassment from the
conversation on Title IX.
22
Chapter 3: The Method of Controlling Narratives
In order to remove sexual harassment from the Title IX conversation, the NCAA has to
control the narrative of Title IX. To control the audience’s understanding of Title IX, they need
to reinforce their narrative through public messaging, or mass communications. In mass
communication, marketers and advertisers work to bring the most successful campaigns to their
companies. One marketing campaign the NCAA deploys is a media campaign highlighting Title
IX’s 50
th
anniversary. The campaigns are developed to give the product, service, etc. a certain
meaning. Advertisers and marketers will do anything to connect with their target audience, create
a specific image, and develop an association to positively reflect their company. It is common
knowledge marketing campaigns employ tactics on their audiences. Additionally, it is well-
known how much power these campaigns have over the public. The campaigns, much like the
NCAA’s Title IX 50
th
anniversary campaign, create a way for consumers/audience members to
think. If organizations can control thinking, they control perception, actions, and attitudes. Then,
if you add on top of all the meaning creation, an addictive product, the company can not only
make millions but develop something a world cannot live without. With this power, many have
questioned the ethics around marketing campaigns. Although there are regulations around
advertising and marketing campaigns to ensure a standard of ethical practice, a lot of the
campaigns remain highly powerful over consumers. As such, the campaigns and companies
involved tactfully implement campaigns to remain influential while still abiding by regulations.
This practice, although common, is not just applicable to advertising campaigns, but also to any
form of mass communications. The practice implemented through advertisements revealed to me
what I will call the concept of positioning. In the next section, I present previous research on
how JUUL utilized positioning to control the narrative of vaping. This previous research is
23
exposed in a documentary, which will provide an outline of how the NCAA partakes in similar
media campaign tactics to control the Title IX narrative.
Throughout this section, I will define my concept of positioning, provide examples of
positioning, and demonstrate the NCAA’s use of positioning concerning Title IX. The goal of the
theory of positioning is to combine legal academia with rhetorical academia. When we combine
the academic areas, we see how organizations are consistently maneuvering through what is
good for business, good for society, and legally acceptable. When we uncover the areas of focus
organizations are prioritizing, we develop a more deep understanding of the motives of an
organization’s communications strategy. Positioning is the use of persuasive tactics to remove
oneself/organization from liability and ultimate legal ramifications. The tactics used include, but
are not limited to; silence, mystery, comparison, terministic screens, and symbol creation, which
I will later define and outline. Through these tools, organizations develop a narrative or
perception of themselves which the audience holds as Truth. Organizations shut down any
critical questions or elasticity in their messaging. They attempt to control the narrative and limit
perception. The connotative meaning they induce in audience members is limited to their agenda.
They withhold any accountability for negative outcomes of their product, service, etc. with
potentially serious legal fault. Organization’s media campaigns becomes so pervasive, that it is
widely accepted and anyone who questions it is considered not a credible source of information
as the only experts are the organization itself.
We can see multiple examples of positioning throughout advertising and general
communications; political campaigns, tobacco companies, JUUL, Subway and other restaurants,
alcohol advertising, Shein and other fast fashion organizations, Starbucks, and more. To further
explain the theory of positioning, I will utilize Juul as my case study. This case study will
24
demonstrate my own methodology, as both the JUUL case study and my own analysis utilize a
rhetorical lens to understand and explain how organizations or people of authority can control
narratives through positioning. This case study is in reference to the Netflix documentary, “Big
Vape: The Rise and Fall of JUUL”. JUUL is an e-cigarette that has over the years been a public
controversy. Most recently, JUUL faced over 5,000 lawsuits against them. These lawsuits ended
up reshaping how JUUL operated and advertised their product. Although JUUL did end up
dealing with legal ramifications, they did attempt to use positioning to avoid the lawsuits and
reshaping of their product. A case study of their campaign “Vaporize”, which was documented
by director R.J. Cutler, will show how the positioning theory is put into action.
JUUL’s original mission, and continued mission, was to find a solution to get adult
smokers to stop smoking. They wanted to make smoking non-cancerous. Through research
JUUL believed they could do so by creating an e-cigarette This would not bring the same toxins
to the lungs that smoking did. Their first prototype was fairly unsuccessful. In fact, it cost the
company more money than it made the company. The design and delivery of nicotine was not
what smokers wanted. JUUL, running out of funds, knew they had to do something and
something quick. They developed the first JUUL, which was a sleek, professional design with a
lot of nicotine delivery. Due to the rush for the product, JUUL did little research on the outcomes
of the new product. They only tested in-house with their own employees but had little other data
or testing to show for it. However, at the time this was not important as the FDA had not set out
any regulations on e-cigarettes. In fact, the FDA encouraged the sale of e-cigarettes because they
saw it as a viable alternative to cigarette smoking. In order to ensure the JUUL product sold, the
organization knew it had to market its product to the public. They brought on marketers to ensure
its popularity and sales across the nation. This is where we begin to see the use of positioning.
25
JUUL created a campaign called “vaporize”. According to the organization, it was a
“lifestyle” campaign. This is a common campaign across marketing. It is pretty much the use of
celebrities, trends, and other fads to make the product seem popular to use. It creates the idea of
normalization and “coolness” of the product. Not only did the campaign visually highlight young
people and influencers using JUUL and having fun, but it also used in-person events and
giveaways of the product to young people. Parties were hosted with music, dancing, drinks, and
of course JUULs. These parties were used as an opportunity to test out JUUL, taking photos and
videos of people using the product in a fun environment, and exposing the JUUL name to a large
audience. This campaign, although effective in getting JUUL products out to the public, seemed
to go against their original mission of creating a healthier alternative to cigarette smoking for
adults. The majority of those attending parties and featured in the Vaporize campaign were not
part of the generation who smoked cigarettes, they were a part of a much younger generation. In
addition, the product design itself seemed to be targeting a younger audience. It had fun flavors
and a sleek design, a design that reminded a lot of people of innovative, new technology.
Through this campaign, JUUL continued to maintain its argument that JUUL was
produced, created, and designed with the goal of being a healthy alternative to smoking. It also
maintained that all of those flavors, design aspects, and marketing techniques are what made it
appealing to use by adult smokers. Following the year of the campaign, JUUL’s sales shot
through the roof. As JUUL took off, smoking sales also decreased, it seemed JUUL was
accomplishing its mission. However, JUUL was picked up by teens. Soon masses of teens started
using JUUL and becoming addicted to its nicotine. Many people have begun to accuse JUUL of
harming youth because it was marketed to young people, and did not make it clear it was a
nicotine product that brings toxins into the body. JUUL consisted this was not the whole story.
26
Rather they continued the narrative of how they are doing good for the world by reducing the use
of cancerous cigarettes. In order to remedy the issue, JUUL wanted to do a program to educate
kids on JUUL and its proper use. The company went into a school and gave a presentation on
JUUL. The presentation highlights JUUL’s design, flavors, function, and more. It told the kids
how to understand JUUL. The representative of JUUL told the class it was for adults to use and
that it was a healthy alternative to smoking cigarettes. The presentation did not include how it
could be harmful to kids, the lack of research on the product, or the fact that it was not FDA-
approved.
Rather than provide complete information, and encourage consumers to ask questions and
seek out answers, JUUL limited the conversation, restricted access to research, and diverted the
conversation by reverting back to its original goal. At first glance, it would seem JUUL did this
just to continue their business production. However, I argue that JUUL was practicing
positioning because if the FDA did get involved, which they ended up getting involved, there
would be severe monetary impacts, product changes, and serious legal ramifications. As noted,
before JUUL’s large-scale lifestyle campaign, the FDA had no regulations regarding e-cigarettes.
Following the campaign, the FDA did get involved. They told all e-cigarette brands they could
continue to sell the products they already have on the market, but any new products would need
to go through a lengthy FDA approval process. For JUUL, the product was already on the
market, so they had to continue to sell that specific product since a new product would have a
lengthy approval process. In addition, with little to no research or data done JUUL did not want
the FDA to get involved. However, after seeing the impacts on youth and multiple lawsuits, the
FDA did get involved with JUUL. This ended the vaporize campaign, marketing to youth, and
trendy attitude of JUUL.
27
Although JUUL ended up with an FDA investigation, they did try to avoid it at all costs.
The terministic screen JUUL attempted to build was developed by their vaporize campaign. The
product was supposed to be seen as a positive, safe product that is associated with health. In the
campaign, young people were used to make the public believe it was used by healthy, happy
people because that is what consumers wanted, a product to keep them from dying of lung
cancer. The mission statement continued to reinforce and further develop the organization’s
image as a healthy product that cares about its consumers. Many people saw this as true
meaning, especially the workers because the data showed fewer and fewer people were smoking
cigarettes. When issues did arise, the organization attempted to silence or create mystery around
the issues. For example, a concerned parent emailed the organization asking if they had any
recommendations to quit vaping as her teen was addicted to JUUL. The organization replied
back saying they could not know of the specific situation that brought on this outcome for the
child, and they should consult their doctor for this type of advice. They noted they are not and
could not be responsible for misuse of the product. Thus, the complaint and issue were silenced.
The organization created mystery about their role in protecting teens. They continuously argued
the flavors were not designed for teen use, but rather for adults. Many adults enjoyed and wanted
the flavors themselves to make the experience more enjoyable. In addition, the organization did
not initially advertise JUUL as a nicotine product. It was rather just seen as a comparison to
cigarettes, it was to be the healthy alternative. Although yes, the JUUL was a better alternative to
cigarette smoking, there were still serious repercussions to the product that JUUL excluded from
public knowledge. Rather than admit the product was being abused by teens, causing serious
addiction, mood changes, and other side effects, the JUUL company simply changed their
marketing tactics.
28
JUUL attempted to change their media approach to avoid an investigation by the FDA.
They made it more professional and targeted the adult audience. However, it was too late. All the
work to position themselves as a healthy alternative for adult smoking was overshadowed by the
growing health concerns for teen users. JUUL’s use of positioning by the creation of perception,
terministic screens, silencing, and mystery was a poor attempt at avoiding the 5,000 lawsuits
they ended up facing. The motivation for an organization to utilize positioning is monetary. The
strategic avoidance of accountability is an attempt to remove oneself from any potential lawsuits.
If a company is faced with a lawsuit and lose, they often lose not only thousand to billions of
dollars but also integrity and overall revenue due to the company’s damaged public image. When
companies or organizations utilize positioning, it reveals their priority of monetary success and
financial prosperity. Rather than focus on open dialogue and ethical practices in their business
operations, companies, and organizations utilize positioning to ensure no lawsuits are won
against them and they don’t lose money or credibility.
The JUUL business case study gives us direct insight into how organizations use
positioning. Positioning is not limited to just businesses. For example, positioning can often be
seen in the political sector. When I worked for a liberal state senator, their marketing refused to
post or say anything with the terminology “black lives matter”. Although in private, the senator
told his team he believed in the black lives matter movement, he could not publicly use that
statement, as it would give him association to any actions done in the name of black lives matter
and, as a public figure, potentially present him as someone who would be able to answer to
anything regarding the black lives matter movement. So, he positioned himself so that he would
not be held accountable or responsible for the actions of others. The NCAA is also dependent on
their revenue to provide member school sponsorship, maintain their power as a regulatory
29
organization, provide resources to member schools, and pay their staff members. According to
the Sports Business Journal, the NCAA made 1.1 billion dollars in revenue in 2022. In addition,
the CEO of the NCAA in 2022 made 2.99 million dollars in compensation. Without financial
prosperity, the NCAA would not be able to sustain the structure it has. The way the NCAA
makes their money is through broadcasting of NCAA Championships, such as March Madness,
merchandise, and other small revenue areas. Since they need money to remain the top collegiate
athletic regulatory body, they use positioning in order to avoid legal, financial, and image
ramifications. Throughout the thesis, I will explore how the NCAA has successfully utilized their
communication on Title IX to control the narrative and remove sexual harassment from the
conversation.
The NCAA’s Use of Positioning to Control Narratives
The NCAA utilizes current social movements to maintain their image as an organization
who cares about more than just money and power. The NCAA’s mission statement is “Provide a
world-class athletics and academic experience for student-athletes that fosters lifelong well-
being” (NCAA “Overview”). Through this mission, the NCAA takes their place as an
organization whose top priority is all student-athletes and their success and safety. This includes
athletes of all genders, races, and creed. Therefore, through recent social justice movements, the
NCAA has capitalized on their ability to align with the movements. If they did not align with
current social movements, the NCAA would risk their image and ultimate business function.
This in turn would make audience members, member schools, and athletes question the NCAA’s
legitimacy. The NCAA would lose members, fans, athletes, and money from broadcasting
opportunities. This would lead to the opportunity for other collegiate athletic regulatory
organizations, such as the NAIA, to gain membership, fans, and athletes, and overall more
30
business and power in the industry. The NCAA must ensure it consistently aligns itself with
justice, equity, inclusion, and more to maintain their monetary and business power. However, the
NCAA not only needs to align itself with social justice but as a regulatory body, needs to manage
what responsibilities it wants to be liable for. If the NCAA takes on too much they could be held
liable for issues that occur at member schools, which would ultimately lead to lawsuits, and loss
of money, credibility, and power.
One area we see the NCAA using positioning to maintain their mission while avoiding
liability is in their application and communication of Title IX. Following the negative social
media attention the NCAA received regarding gender equity between the Division I men’s and
women’s basketball tournament in 2021, the NCAA enlisted a third-party legal review to provide
recommendations for gender equity. After receiving recommendations, the NCAA leveraged the
50th anniversary of Title IX to launch its equity campaign. However, this campaign both aligned
with the NCAA’s previous goal of life-long wellness and conflicted with historical and current
communications regarding their involvement in Title IX. The plurality of alignment and
misalignment brings up the question of when, how, and why the NCAA communications about
Title IX. I argue the NCAA is utilizing positioning through their communications on Title IX by
controlling the narrative. Through a rhetorical analysis of the NCAA’s Title IX communication, I
will further outline when they communicate about Title IX, how, and their motivations. This will
be done through the identification and explanation of the NCAA’s use of binaries, symbols,
terministic screens, silence, mystery, and the use of a pentadic analysis. It is important to note
here the use of these tools to investigate the NCAA will uncover all possible meanings and
perceptions, it is not to say what is right or what is wrong.
31
Rhetoric as an Interpretive Tool
Many rhetoricians, beginning with the ancient Greeks have tried to define rhetoric, all
with different nuances. However, putting one “true” definition to rhetoric defeats the purpose of
rhetoric as a practice. In my studies, I have found the purpose of rhetoric is to escape the binaries
such as; right/wrong, true/false, good/bad, and so on. Rhetoric is a tool in which to see the world,
a way to examine all meanings of language, actions, symbols, and more. Providing a single
definition of rhetoric would negate the purpose of rhetoric. Maybe all the definitions of rhetoric
from all the rhetoricians accumulate to form the mystery of what rhetoric is. One thing we can
say is what rhetoric is not. It is not manipulation or coercion. Rhetoric is not in the practice of
trickery. Rather, rhetoric is used to identify manipulation and unearth how it impacts the
audience’s understanding of the world. For me, my main goal as a rhetorician is to be what Barry
Brummett calls a “meaning detective” throughout his book, Rhetorical Dimensions in Popular
Culture. This means being aware of the binaries manipulative language may build and
deconstruct those binaries to understand better the meaning behind language, actions, symbols,
etc. Throughout this thesis, I will be a “meaning detective” (Brummett) and explore all meanings
derived from NCAA communication with Title IX. I will explore how the NCAA creates a new
perception of the meaning of Title IX, how they create terministic screens and the impact of
those screens, and finally, I will investigate the motives for the NCAA’s communication around
Title IX.
In order to practice rhetoric and investigate all meanings, we have to understand binaries
and why a binary is in place. Binaries promote either/or thinking. This means something is either
good or bad, either right or wrong, either truth or falsehood, there is no in-between. Often we fall
into binaries when we have a strong belief in something that often stems from ideology. For
32
example, religions often use ideology to have their members make certain decisions. They create
a binary so members know how to behave within that religion. This often leaves members seeing
things as either right or wrong. Additionally, we see this a lot in political campaigns. Politicians
tell their audiences, “A vote for me is a vote for safety”. This is an blatant version of a binary
because it is only giving two options, either you care about safety and vote for me or you do not
care about safety if you vote for anyone else. This type of either/or thinking restricts our ability
to make decisions, examine all perspectives, and completely understand the situation. Some
binaries are as easily identified as the examples above, while other binaries require deeper
investigation. The NCAA creates a binary in their communications on Title IX through their
media campaign which limits the conversation on sexual harassment.
The NCAA is cited as the nation’s largest sports organization (Gough). Currently, there
are over 500,000 NCAA student-athletes today alone. With thousands of alumni athletes, the
organization's breadth is far and wide. This reach demonstrates how the majority of athletic
programs are associated with and take on the perspective of the NCAA. This creates a space for
the NCAA to be the sole entity we think of when we think of college sports. So, it can take a lot
for any individual program or person to speak out against the NCAA. It took multiple women
and a lot of public media to call out the NCAA’s inequitable standards at the 2021 Women’s
NCAA Division I Basketball tournament. The media quickly picked up the story after a women’s
basketball athlete made a TikTok displaying the weight room, food, and the gifts they received in
comparison to the men’s weight room, food, and gifts. The TikTok showed firsthand how big of
a disparity in resources the women were given. The media picked up the story and athletes and
fans were reposting and sharing how disappointed they were with the NCAA. Following the
media backlash, the NCAA came out apologizing for the inequitable treatment and was working
33
to remedy the situation. Ultimately the NCAA worked to get more equitable resources to the
men's and women’s tournaments for that year, to adhere to the public outcry. The NCAA also
hired an external law firm to audit the NCAA in terms of equity. Following the audit, the NCAA
was given recommendations by the law firm they could choose to take or not take (Kaplan et al.).
The reason the NCAA was only given recommendations is because the NCAA is not
liable under Title IX. Technically, they have no legal obligation to provide equitable service for
their members. Yet, the NCAA did connect itself with Title IX through the external report, social
media, and mass communications. Additionally, as mentioned prior the NCAA has been
connected to Title IX through lawsuits by former and current athletes. However, when the
lawsuit came to the NCAA’s attention the NCAA stated they are not liable under Title IX since
they receive no federal funding. Thus, the NCAA dismissed Title IX’s application and
connection to themselves. The NCAA chooses when and how Title IX applies to their
organization. When Title IX is applied to women’s athletic participation and resource allocation,
the NCAA steps up and uses Title IX in their gender equity efforts. However, when Title IX is
applied to sexual harassment and assault, the NCAA dismisses Title IX’s connection to the
NCAA. When the NCAA was called out by the media and student-athletes for their inequitable
resource allocation, they hired a third-party law firm to provide recommendations. When the
recommendations were easily applied and highlighted the opportunities the NCAA provides to
women athletes, the NCAA jumped on those recommendations. However, the third-party law
firm nor the NCAA ever discussed gender equity in relation to protections against sexual
harassment. Instead, they focused on resources and communication. The NCAA used this
opportunity to solely highlight Title IX’s application to opportunities for women and resource
allocation and created a new meaning for Title IX that limited the scope of its legislation. In
34
order to redefine Title IX and how it is used, the NCAA began with the media. This is similar to
how JUUL used media to control the narrative around vaping and position itself as a positive
organization that is good for society. The NCAA utilizes media to control the narrative around
Title IX while still positioning itself as an advocate for gender equity.
35
Chapter 4: Title IX Becomes a Symbol
Recommended to the NCAA by the third-party law firm, the NCAA began a new media
campaign to promote their efforts in gender equity. Throughout the 2022 - 2023 school, the
NCAA had a huge media presence promoting Title IX. During that time period, it was the 50th
anniversary of Title IX. The NCAA used the anniversary to celebrate Title IX in their media
posts and external facing collateral. In the media posts, the NCAA created their own logo for
Title IX (NCAA “Title IX at 50 Years”). Over the course of the year, the NCAA curated posts to
be related to Title IX in some way. Any accomplishments female NCAA coaches or players had
were directly linked to Title IX. The NCAA would make posts celebrating the coach/athlete and
then add #TitleIX or the Title IX logo they created, located on their Instagram page (@ncaa).
The NCAA creating and using Title IX in the media posts has a deeper meaning than what it
might appear at first glance. The audience of these posts, student-athletes, and fans, see these
posts as positive improvement by the NCAA. Not only is the audience seeing more women
highlighted by the NCAA, but they are also seeing accomplished women highlighted by the
NCAA. The tie-in of Title IX also indicates the NCAA’s priority is equity. This is when we can
really see the binary begin to form. The audience has a formerly held belief that Title IX relates
directly to gender equity and it is good. When the NCAA uses Title IX in their posts they are
telling their audience they are good and equitable. However, as noted previously, binaries need
to be deconstructed to uncover all the meaning.
The NCAA created their own logo specifically for Title IX (see fig. 1). As I know, no
other amendment or law has a logo or a branded logo. The NCAA’s logo is not just a clever
design made by the graphics team, it is making Title IX into a symbol. Before the NCAA’s Title
IX logo, Title IX was just what it was, a bill. In the bill, instructions were provided to create
36
equity in federally funded organizations. The intended use of Title IX was to enforce gender
equity at federally funded organizations and institutions. However, when the NCAA created a
logo for Title IX, it became a symbol. A symbol “is a human construction connected only
indirectly to its referent” (Foss et al. 2). Once the symbol is constructed, it is now developing
lenses to see the world. The symbols we apply to our world impact our perceptions, thus creating
a reality for which we live (Foss et al. 2). When we apply symbols, we can only see the related
content through the lens created by the symbol. For example, I recently had a new workout
partner and was giving them an ab workout. I said our next exercise would be butterfly crunches.
My partner shook his head yes in understanding. However, when we started doing the workout,
we did two different things. That is because “butterfly crunches” to me was a symbol for a
different movement than it was for him. I told him the “right” way to do butterfly crunches, but
what I was really asking my partner to do was to work through my lens of understanding. Rather
than accept there could be multiple meanings or associations to the term ‘butterfly crunches’ I
perceived there to be only one correct way to do the exercise. Thus, when we adopt symbols, and
in turn lenses to see the world through, or rather “realities”, we adopt a binary.
Figure 1. NCAA Title IX Logo (NCAA “Title IX at 50 Years”)
When the NCAA uses the Title IX logo as a symbol they are creating a binary by
ensuring the audience only views Title IX through the NCAA’s lens, which limits the audience’s
37
understanding and controls the narrative. Every time the NCAA creates a post or releases a
media piece with the Title IX logo they are reinforcing a reality. Every time the NCAA posts
with the logo, they highlight a woman athlete or coach's success. They are directly relating the
women’s opportunities to Title IX and to their organization. The meaning they create is only
derived from a specific portion of Title IX. They limit the scope of their connection to Title IX
and imply Title IX is only in the conversation when it is related to women in athletics and
equitable resources. Thus, a new understanding of Title IX and its application is reinforced.
The Semantic Triangle
Some theorists note realities, or single narratives, can only be constructed when meaning
is built. The way symbols, like the Title IX logo build meaning can be explained through the
semantic triangle. The semantic triangle was first explained by I. A. Richards. Richards created
the semantic triangle (see fig. 2) to help explain how meaning and realities are constructed
through symbols (Foss et al.).
38
Figure 2. Semantic Triangle
As pictured in Figure 2, the triangle has three corners and three sides. The lower left
corner is the symbol. The top of the triangle is the thought or reference. The lower right corner of
the triangle is the referent. Between each corner is a relationship. The left and right sides are
causal relations or indirect. While the bottom relation between the symbol and referent is “true”
or in other words the reality created by the symbol (Foss et al.) In the case of the Title IX logo,
the logo is the symbol. The thought or reference is what the NCAA wants us to think of when we
see the Title IX logo. Then the referent is Title IX itself. Thus, depending on what the NCAA
wants us to associate with the Title IX logo is the new reality/meaning we will associate with
Title IX. During the NCAA’s Title IX 50th anniversary campaign, the NCAA found multiple
ways to include Title IX when talking about women's successes in sports. They always highlight
39
positive accolades of women in the NCAA, or how many more women are participating in sports
today compared to fifty years ago. The thought/reference the NCAA wants us to have when we
see the Title IX logo is that it is related to women’s participation and success in sports. Thus, the
meaning of Title IX takes on a new perception. Title IX became something that allowed women
to participate in sports and gave them great opportunities. While this is true, it also leaves out a
large portion of what Title IX is intended for, which is the protection against sexual harassment.
Additionally, the Title IX logo has the NCAA logo included in it. This creates another reference
for the symbol. Now, the NCAA is reinforcing its association with Title IX within the new
meaning created. The NCAA is constructing the belief that they are associated with Title IX,
which the new meaning is women’s success in sports, indirectly creating the belief the NCAA
itself is all about women’s success in sports. If the NCAA were to use the complete reality of
Title IX, they would associate it with the protection against sexual harassment and tie themselves
to that protection. However, they have no protections for student-athletes, so rather than address
sexual harassment the NCAA created a new meaning of Title IX. Thus, a binary is enforced, the
mystery of the NCAA and Title IX’s relationship continues to grow, and silence around sexual
harassment continues.
The NCAA Creates Terministic Screens
When Title IX loses its ability to be fully understood or have multiple understandings a
binary develops. When the NCAA reduces Title IX to only one applicative definition, it becomes
the only way to perceive the world around us. This creates what Kenneth Burke coins a
“terministic screen”. As noted by Sarah Heiss, “Burke introduces the concept of terministic
screens to explain how language choices reflect and construct particular realities while
abandoning alternatives” (Heiss 540). The key point here is that terministic screens construct
40
reality. They become the lens through which we see our world. Our language and the images we
surround ourselves with become our reality, which impacts the way we perceive and interpret
messages. When the NCAA permanently became associated with Title IX after the creation and
use of the Title IX logo, the NCAA began building a terministic screen through which audience
members were to perceive Title IX itself and the NCAA as an organization. Since the NCAA not
only created the Title IX logo, but used it repeatedly, the screen of understanding for what the
NCAA does, what Title IX does, and how the two are related developed. As noted previously,
the Title IX logo as a symbol builds meaning for what Title IX is and how it appeals to the
NCAA. Every time we see the NCAA logo, we also associate it with Title IX, more specifically
the new symbolic meaning of Title IX (its limited scope and application to resource allocation
and allowing women in sports).
Once we assign meaning to any symbol, it is almost impossible to forget or change that
meaning. It becomes how we see the world around us, a terministic screen. For example, when a
child learns their first language, it shapes how they see the world. They now have a label for
every single thing within their environment, but what they label may be misunderstood in an
different environment. For example, when I moved to Minnesota I was asked to bring a “hot
dish” to a friend’s dinner. It seemed everyone knew what that meant, except me. For me,
something called a “hot dish” just meant something served hot, like a soup. However, I came to
learn what “hot dish” was to Minnesotans is “casserole” to Wisconsinites. If I had never left
Wisconsin, I would have never known there were multiple meanings to a dish with layers of
carbohydrates, dairy, and veggies. In the case of NCAA and Title IX, the terministic screen
brought forth is the perception that Title IX is only about women in sports, and this is how the
public views any issues or challenges surrounding Title IX moving forward. When audiences fall
41
into the echo chamber of the NCAA, they fall into its terministic screen and audiences don’t get
any additional interpretations or the full meaning of the world around them unless they go find it
on their own. Oftentimes, audience members do not have the resources or ability to find other
interpretations or meanings besides the dominant view. Therefore, when the NCAA creates the
meaning of Title IX, it only allows for one terministic screen and removes any interpretation of
multiple meanings.
To study meaning and terministic screens, we also need to understand semiotics. Roland
Barthes is credited with semiology (semiotics). “Semiotics is the study of the social production
of meaning from sign systems, the analysis of anything that can stand for something else”
(Griffin et al. 320). Barthes' goal with semiotics is to interpret both verbal and nonverbal signs.
In his book Mythologies, Barthes sought to understand the meaning of a variety of visual signs.
He wanted to understand how signs can subtly communicate or utilize deception to perpetuate
specific values or ideals. In order to understand semiotics, there are three key terms; myth, the
signifier, and the signified. Myth is the connotative meaning a sign carries. The signifier is the
physical form as we perceive it, an image. The signified is the meaning we associate with the
sign. (Griffin et al. 321). According to Barthes, the problem with mythic signs is they “go
without saying”. In other words mythic signs do not raise questions, rather they “reinforce the
dominant values of their culture” (qtd. in Griffin et al. 326). In the case of the NCAA’s Title IX
logo, the image we are given is the logo itself, the signified is the meaning we come to associate
with the logo. When we see the logo on posts highlighting women in sports, we immediately
associate the NCAA to Title IX and then Title IX to women in sports. The post itself does not
explicitly say it, but it goes without saying. It is having consumers make an assumption about
Title IX. The NCAA directs the attention of the audience to Title IX’s hand in women’s
42
participation in athletics, thus creating the association. In addition, the continuous use of the Title
IX logo in relation to the NCAA’s posts on women athletes reinforces the assumptions and
creates a dominant viewpoint on Title IX. This continues the NCAA’s narrative and terministic
screen they create on Title IX.
When the NCAA creates one terministic screen, through the development of meaning,
and the enforcement of dominant values, they are controlling the perception of others. As we
have already discovered the NCAA communicates Title IX through its symbolic use of the logo.
The symbolic use restricts understanding of Title IX and its application. Through their meaning
construction, the NCAA develops mystery. Mystery can have many uses, one of which is the
distortion and prevention of understanding (Meyer 210). The majority of NCAA fans, athletes,
and supporters do not have an intricate knowledge of Title IX. They, for the most part, have the
knowledge from what they have learned through institutional education sessions or the mass
media. To add on top of the limited knowledge of Title IX, the majority of persons do not have
an understanding of how Title IX applies to the NCAA. With the ambiguity already in place,
audience members seek out clarity. When the NCAA posts about Title IX the audience begins to
believe they now have full clarity and understanding of the topic. However, the NCAA is not
creating clarity, but rather more mystery as they are not revealing all aspects and information.
Rather than allowing audiences to uncover more, the NCAA controls the narrative and uses
mystery as a way to unite the audience under one perception.
Mysteries are often not true realities, but perceptions and assumptions of the audience.
Plato describes how important audience perception is when looking at meaning. Plato, well-
known as an ancient Greek philosopher, used his dialectics to engage with both rhetoric and
philosophy. Plato wrote the “Allegory of the Cave” in one of his famous dialectics, Republic. In
43
the Allegory of the Cave, Plato tells the story of a group of prisoners who can only see a cave
wall. The prisoners watch the wall as shadows display before them of objects or people who pass
in front of the fire behind the prisoners. The shadows became the prisoner's reality but were not
the true representation of the real world. The image(s) and subsequently mystery created by
organizations or people of authority are similar to these shadows. The images are what the
audiences perceive as reality but are not the true reality of the world. The NCAA utilizes social
media and their external website to create the images the audience perceives as the only truth. By
utilizing the audience's state of ambiguity, the NCAA defined their reality for them. They acted
as though they provided clarity, when in reality they provided one perspective to avoid the
potential of other interpretations or ideas.
In order to create a mystery, there must be some kind of shared understanding to
minimize multiple interpretations or in-depth research. Mystery shuts down questions from
audiences. First, an organization will create one, simple answer potentially not even truly
addressing the questions of the audience. The organization will continuously repeat the answer
until it is built as the one truth. Second, if an audience member does ask questions or tries to find
a new interpretation the organization will respond by saying that aspect is a mystery. The NCAA
created one meaning for Title IX and its application. Then, it repeated it over and over again via
social media. Finally, when a different perspective comes forward to challenge the NCAA’s
narrative they simply shut down the conversation by marking it out as a mystery. The mystery
the NCAA creates is a tactic for positioning and narrative control.
When the NCAA communicates about Title IX via social media it is highlighting the
positive work Title IX has done for women athletes. In 81 directly Title IX-related Instagram
feed posts, the posts that are displayed on the NCAA’s profile page, since April 2022 the NCAA
44
had no mention of sexual harassment or assault. In addition, the NCAA had 23 stories separate
from the feed posts, out of these stories zero mentioned sexual harassment or assault. Proof of
these statistics can be found in the appendix. In each post or story, the theme was continuously
“How did Title IX benefit you”, “Did you know…” facts about Title IX, and women in athletics
success stories. According to Burke, “Words create orientations or attitudes, shaping individuals’
views of reality…” (Foss et al. 197). I would take that a step further and say images create
orientations or attitudes, shaping individuals’ views of reality. In each of the 104 posts made the
NCAA maintained the same narrative about Title IX. They continued to reinforce the limited
viewpoint that Title IX was simply about resource allocation, completely shaping the reality of
Title IX for its audience members. Each time the NCAA made a Title IX post they were creating
an identification for the audience of what Title IX is, and through this, they limited the complete
understanding and various perspectives one could bring in regards to Title IX. The identification
of Title IX does not dispel the mystery of it by retaining it (Meyer 213). This is because the
NCAA hides the full scope of Title IX, rather than providing its full definition on social media. It
is also important to note the medium through which the NCAA communicates this message of
Title IX on social media. The role of the medium in controlling narratives and builiding
terminstic screens is explained by Marshall McLuhan.
Marshall McLuhan was the first to coin the term “media ecology”. This theory focuses on
the environment of a message or communicative act. McLuhan’s theory of media ecology can be
summed up by the common aphorism, “The medium is the message.” In terms of theory, media
ecology is defined as, “the study of different personal and social environments created by the use
of different communication technologies” (Griffin et al. 310). McLuhan focuses on
understanding the way media works as environments. He argues we are so immersed in our
45
communicative environment that we become vulnerable to its pattern. We can examine the way
the NCAA utilizes the social media environment to construct its image without the audience
even being aware. Twitter, for example, is a recent digital creation that has changed our
communication environment. One big change in the communicative environment is the lack of
complex ideas and thoughts. On Twitter, each tweet has a 140-character limit. This leaves no
room for complex ideas, or thorough research evidence (Griffin et al. 316). The use of social
media platforms, such as Instagram and Twitter, limits the conversation. It allows one side to be
presented, and the conversation can be directed to that limited scope. As previously noted, the
NCAA limits their posts on Title IX to women’s opportunities in sports. This limited
conversation on Title IX is exacerbated by the medium of social media, as limited characters,
restricted comments, and other factors can leave the audience with only one narrative. This one
narrative is used to maintain the mystery of the full extent of Title IX. However, the NCAA does
communicate about Title IX through other mediums but in different mediums to maintain the
mystery of their involvement with Title IX.
One of the other mediums the NCAA communicates about Title IX is over their website.
This medium is more restrictive in the side of the conversation, it only comes from the NCAA
whereas on social media the audience can comment or repost; however, the website does allow
for more in-depth communication on Title IX. Websites can hold large reports, documents, or
other materials with little to no restrictions on length. This gives the NCAA the opportunity to
open up the conversation further about Title IX. Although they did provide more information on
their website, the NCAA still controls the narrative. The NCAA primarily provides insights on
their website about Title IX as it applies to athletics by their definition and standards. This
information includes celebrating the 50th anniversary of Title IX, NCAA-organized gender
46
equity initiatives, NCAA-created definitions, reports, and history provided by the NCAA, and
other information highlighting the NCAA’s work towards gender equity. The website does still
restrict information on the NCAA’s stance on sexual harassment and assault, as well as its
relation to Title IX. The mystery remains for audience members on whether the NCAA has
regulations surrounding Title IX, sexual assault, and harassment, and what areas of Title IX truly
apply to the NCAA. For the majority of the website, it appears the NCAA focuses on athletics
and highlighting its services for student-athletes, member schools, coaches, and fans. However,
in the section the NCAA does highlight gender equity and Title IX, its main focus is resource
allocation and the opportunities provided to women in sports. There are only a few resources
discussing sexual harassment and abuse between coaches and players. One of these resources
was recently archived, so it is not even easily accessible to the public any longer. When the
NCAA does address the full scope of Title IX, it hides it in a sea of other content and even
chooses to archive the materials. This creates mystery around the full scope of Title IX and shuts
down the opportunity to fully ask or investigate it. This control of conversation and choice for
when and how to communicate Title IX shows the NCAA’s attempt to position themselves in
regard to Title IX and gender equity.
47
Chapter 5: Power to Position
Throughout the last chapter, I outlined how the NCAA creates a terminstic screen and
controls the narrative of Title IX. However, there is one scenario the NCAA did not have control
over the narrative of Title IX was in a class action lawsuit (Thomas). Through this lawsuit, the
NCAA had to face another side of Title IX and communicate their position. As mentioned
previously, the lawsuit brought into question the NCAA’s liability for the coach’s continued
sexual abuse of his athletes. When the case was brought to the NCAA it jeopardized their
positioning tactics. This was one of the few times the NCAA was directly challenged legally in
relation to Title IX and gender equity. However, at the time, and to this day, the NCAA has not
made official policies, regulations, or consequences regarding Title IX. This means that when an
infraction happens, such as the case brought forward, the NCAA has no documented evidence of
liability in any way. The NCAA was able to quickly dismiss the case, saying they are not
federally funded so they have no right to sue the NCAA on the basis of Title IX or gender equity.
The dismissal of the case was another tactic in keeping the mystery. Rather than create more
conversation and encourage student-athletes to speak out against sexual harassment and assault,
the NCAA quickly dismissed the case and removed ties from Title IX. This creates a mystery
around the relationship between the NCAA and Title IX. The power the NCAA has to shut down
conversations was enhanced by the legal situation. The lawsuit format also meant the NCAA did
not have to make any comments more than what they did. They were able to remain firm in their
stance that Title IX did not apply to them, so they did not need to elaborate more. Not only does
the lawsuit demonstrate how the NCAA continues to build mystery in order to build their
positioning in regards to Title IX, but it also demonstrates how much power the NCAA holds.
48
Power can be a tool utilized in positioning. Brenton Faber argues “Power can be more
productively seen as the self-reflexive ability to control an image. Powerful people are able to
control how they are interpreted and perceived by other people” (Faber 122). The NCAA is a
very powerful organization, as we know they have the ability to create and shut down
conversations in various spaces. These conversations lead to perceptions and narratives
surrounding the NCAA and Title IX. In his book, Community Action and Organizational
Change: Image, Narrative, Identity, Brenton Faber’s Chapter 5 is all about images, power, and
rhetoric. Faber discusses how people of authority and organizations can build external images
that control the audience’s perception. This is what Faber calls, “image-power”. “[Image-power]
is created strategically using specialized discourse, visuals, sounds, and other forms of what
academics call rhetoric, or the tools of persuasion” (Faber 122). In other words, organizations
and people of authority know they are constructing a specific image and they can monitor the
image. The NCAA is a powerful organization that continuously builds and monitors their image.
The tools to create an image vary from organization to organization. The power the NCAA holds
has a large impact on their ability positioning. Without power, the credibility of the NCAA
greatly decreases and its influence over the masses decreases. This would mean they would no
longer be able to make a symbol of Title IX, create a new meaning of Title IX, limit the
conversation, or build their reputation as an organization that protects and cares for the life-long
well-being of student-athletes. The power the NCAA has is not only seen through these
examinations but its power is reinforced as audiences continue to pick up the perceptions the
NCAA creates.
The NCAA has power over its member schools and student-athletes because they are
considered the best of the best when it comes to college athletics. For many of the schools and
49
current and former athletes, they felt the NCAA provided so much for them. They were given
scholarships, and the opportunity to continue their sports career, join clubs and organizations,
and compete in championships on a large platform. With this many supporters, the NCAA knows
it has a large and wide impact. All of the student-athletes, coaches, and member schools are also
aware of the NCAA’s power to create regulations. The NCAA enforces regulations that don’t
allow athletes to play, member schools compete in championships, and so on. Then, on top of
that, many athletes, have worked all their life for the opportunity to play college sports. For some
of the athletes, it is the only reason they are able to pay for college, or maybe it is the next step to
pursuing their sports career. Regardless, the NCAA holds a lot of power over those they serve.
This power dynamic allows for them to create their own narrative and impose their perspective
into their member schools, athletes, and fans. With this power, it is an ethical expectation for the
NCAA to be honest in their word and treatment of athletes.
However, as we have uncovered the NCAA does have a narrative they create around
Title IX that does not necessarily align with their actions. The NCAA not only has
communication online, they also has the ability to present narratives in other modes. One way
they do this is through events, initiatives, and other projects for Title IX’s 50th anniversary. The
NCAA has its own Hall of Champions, which is a building displaying all things NCAA.
According to the mission and vision, “The NCAA Hall of Champions seeks to provide a greater
understanding of the NCAA, including its membership of more than 1,000 colleges and
universities and over 400,000 student-athletes” (NCAA “Title IX at 50 Timeline Open at Hall of
Champions”). This means the sole purpose of the Hall of Champions is to educate the visitors on
the NCAA. When the NCAA was running its campaign, this included a new exhibit at the Hall
of Champions called the Title IX timeline. This is a timeline created by the NCAA highlighting
50
what they deemed important facts of the historical progression of Title IX. This is another case
where the NCAA is acting as the experts of Title IX, and even providing information on it in an
educational format. This medium is one-sided, meaning visitors can come to see what the NCAA
has displayed and provided information on, but the NCAA is the only entity talking or
communicating information about Title IX. The audience members, nor any other entity, have
the ability to communicate with the exhibit. The timeline in the Hall of Champions appears to be
similar to a museum exhibit. The public’s perception around museums is that it is expert,
complete, and fully accurate information. This is the same perception the audience has
concerning the timeline. However, it is important to understand the NCAA had full control over
the display itself. The NCAA could control their message and the audience's perception, so we
need a pentadic analysis to reveal what interpretations and motivations can be found within the
NCAA’s communication on the timeline.
Once again, the NCAA is using Title IX as a symbol to create meaning. Title IX is now
not just a law or even a logo created by the NCAA, but also an exhibit. Now, everything the
NCAA puts into the exhibit is seen as a representation of Title IX. The timeline itself is labeled
“What You May Not Know About Title IX and Athletics” (NCAA “What You May Not Know
about Title IX and Athletics”). This title has multiple connotative meanings. First, it implies the
audience has prior knowledge about Title IX. This means the NCAA is going to tell the audience
something that is not normally discussed in regard to Title IX. When we are in a social or
academic setting and someone claims to have information about something that isn’t common,
we assume those individuals are experts. In the same way, the NCAA positions themselves as
experts by claiming they have in-depth and uncommon knowledge of Title IX. Additionally, they
are deliberate about their word choice in the title. In rhetoric, we look at what is being
51
communicated in all aspects, including what is being communicated through omission. The
NCAA purposefully uses the word “Athletics” in their title rather than “the NCAA”. Using the
word athletics makes the topic very broad, does it mean high school, recreational, collegiate,
specifically NCAA, or another athletic-related field? The audience inherently assumes the
NCAA is relating Title IX to their specific athletic programs because they are the ones pushing
out the timeline and they are the largest athletic organization in the nation. However, if the
NCAA had used their name in the title, it would directly connect the NCAA to Title IX and be an
admittance on their end of their relation to Title IX. This is another tactic of their positioning.
Removing their name from the title and using “Athletics” keep them from admitting their
compliance with Title IX and avoiding any legal liabilities that could come from taking on that
role.
This particular timeline is also online. The dual medium of the timeline, website, and
Hall of Champions, changes the meaning. However, the NCAA is using Title IX in both
scenarios. In the Hall of Champions medium, it is obvious the expertise the NCAA is trying to
communicate. In the online format, it still conveys expertise, but to a lesser extent. Rather this
timeline online can be mass distributed and communicated to a larger audience, exactly what the
NCAA wants audience members to think about concerning Title IX. This document is nuanced
because we see both the positioning of the NCAA as connected to Title IX and the NCAA’s
disconnection from Title IX all in one document and exhibit. Above, I described how the title
disconnects the NCAA from direct association with Title IX. Rather than be seen as liable
constituents, the NCAA is seen as the subject matter experts of Title IX. Yet, the NCAA does
create a direct association in the timeline. In the header itself, the first thing most readers or
viewers would see is the NCAA’s Title IX logo. This logo, as described previously, has now
52
become a symbol. A symbol that audiences associate with the good work the NCAA has done to
move women’s sports forward. It represents what the audience views as the meaning of Title IX,
gender equity in resource allocation, and extracurricular activity participation. When the logo
appears in the header of the timeline, it becomes an instant thought that the rest of the piece will
be about women in sports. It also shows a rhetorician all the information provided will be used to
build upon the symbolic message already begun in regards to the logo.
I.A. Richards was not the only contemporary rhetorician to discuss symbols. Kenneth
Burke, another contemporary rhetorician, focused much of his work on symbolism and symbolic
action. To further uncover the interpretations of the NCAA’s Title IX timeline, I will use Burke’s
pentadic analysis. The pentad will help uncover the meanings and motives of the creation of the
timeline. The pentad was created by Kenneth Burke, who asserted dramatism as the study of
symbolic action. According to Burke, “dramatism would keep us alert to ambiguity” (Blakesley
9). To better understand dramatism, I turn to David Blakesley. He notes, “The dramatistic view
of the world holds that language is not simply a tool to be used by people, but the basis for
human beings acting together and thus, of all human relations” (Blakesley 5). Dramatism as a
method allows us to not only understand what the message is, and how it is functioning, but also
what the motivation of the message is. I will utilize Burke’s pentad to outline how the NCAA
communicates information on Title IX through their Title IX timeline, as well as their motivation
for this specific communication.
53
Chapter 6: The Pentadic Analysis
The pentad is a dramatistic tool critics use to find other choices, perspectives, and
motivations of action (Blakesley 23). The pentad has five key terms; Act, Scene, Agent, Agency,
and Purpose. The Act names what took place, the Scene is the situation in which the act
happened, the Agent identifies the person or kind of person involved, the Agency names the
means or instruments used, and the Purpose which is why it was done. After identifying each
term of the pentad in the specific situation, ratios should be applied and examined. Ratios are the
relation of two pentadic terms. Below are the possible ratios (can be reversed):
How does the act influence the scene?
How does the act influence the agent?
How does the act influence the agency?
How does the act influence the purpose?
How does the scene influence the agent?
How does the scene influence the agency?
How does the scene influence the purpose?
How does the agent influence the agency?
How does the agent influence the purpose?
How does the agency influence the purpose? (Blakesley)
In the below section, I will use the pentad and pentadic ratios to critically understand the
NCAA’s use of the Title IX timeline (see fig. 3). This analysis will contain multiple pentadic
ratios to completely understand all perspectives and motives. Due to the extent of content within
the timeline, I will look at the timeline as a whole, and then provide evidence through in-scope
written section.
54
The pentadic analysis helps us understand when, what, and how the NCAA
communicates information regarding Title IX. The pentadic analysis provides a look at the
motivations the NCAA has in communicating Title IX and gender equity in the timeline. We can
use the pentad to better understand why the NCAA created the timeline and what interpretations
can be drawn from it. The act is the creation and publication of the timeline as a whole. The
scene is 2022, the 50th anniversary of Title IX. The agent is the NCAA themselves. The agency
is the website, where they distribute the virtual version of the timeline, as well as the Hall of
Champions where they house the physical exhibit of the timeline. The purpose is impacted by
each and every one of these items, which will be revealed through our analysis.
The act as a whole is the creation and publication of the timeline. Through the
development of the timeline, the NCAA picked to highlight situations or acts that fell into two
categories. As seen through a detailed pentadic analysis, each act is focused on either the first
category, NCAA’s expertise on Title IX, or the second category, the NCAA’s gender equity
efforts. These two categories are working to establish the NCAA’s ethos. Ethos is “the speaker’s
power of evincing a personal character which will make his speech credible” (Aristotle and
Corbett 3). As noted by Aristotle, character can be one of the most effective means of
persuasion. We can believe a person or organization did a good thing or has good intentions if
we believe it is something they would do. Therefore, if an organization has good credibility, we
trust their intentions and work. Through the items highlighted on the timeline and the NCAA’s
use of the Title IX logo, the audience begins to build a perception of the NCAA’s character
concerning gender equity. For the audience to build their credibility, there has to be a certain
level of power over their image. This can be understood through the concept of image-power.
55
As previously established, the NCAA is a powerful organization. This can be seen
through their monetary value, the number of member schools they regulate, and the widespread
recognition of their name. The NCAA asserts their power through their timeline choices. In the
act of creating the timeline, the NCAA made direct and declarative communication on Title IX
and gender equity. These communicative characteristics are examples of powerful speech
(Rothwell 173). Now, combine this power with their need to control their image as an
organization to gain credibility. This becomes image-power. “It [image-power] enables people to
define others while resisting others’ definitions of one’s self” (Faber 122). Through the timeline,
the NCAA defines the history of Title IX, athletic gender equity, and women in athletics all
while defining themself within the process. The act is an establishment of historical items, which
provides current and future audiences with perceptions of the past. These perceptions become the
reality collectively through which audiences see Title IX and the NCAA’s relationship to it. As
outlined prior, the NCAA limits the conversation of Title IX itself to resource allocation, creates
their own definition of Title IX as exclusively gender equity by focusing the timeline on
women’s success with the NCAA.
The scene of the timeline is the 50th anniversary of Title IX. This anniversary began just
a year after the NCAA faced backlash from their 2021 Women’s Basketball Tournament, as
previously discussed. This scene puts into question the NCAA’s credibility. This is because the
tournament was a representation of what the NCAA had put into practice, whereas all media and
communications were just ideas of what the NCAA had done for gender equity. Since the
tournament was not a positive representation of the NCAA, they had to adjust their approach.
This scene made the generic media seem like empty words to actual actions. The NCAA’s
creation of the timeline, which ended up being not only online, but in the Hall of Championships,
56
established a more permanent and intentional form of media. In addition, the timeline
highlighted multiple historical scenarios where the NCAA could be seen as a positive influence
on gender equity. The timeline is an “accessory”, something to make a story more credible
(Aristotle and Corbett 61). It is not the true action of making change toward a more equitable
experience, but a tool to make the NCAA’s narrative on gender equity and Title IX more
credible.
The agent is the NCAA. As noted throughout the timeline, if we hear the story from more
than the NCAA, the acts serve different purposes and become more than just an advertisement.
When we looked at the acts from the lens of the agents who were involved such as; the AIAW,
President Reagan, Billy Jean King, Sarah Fuller, and more, we were able to see past the limited
story we get from the NCAA, which places us in a binary of understanding. Each word in the
timeline was written by the NCAA, which is important to understand. The saying goes, “History
is written by the victors”. This becomes important when we look at how perception and reality is
created. As noted in previous sections, binaries, terministic screens, and symbols impact how we
think and how we experience the world around us. These items are all created through the things
we consume, such as the NCAA’s timeline. This is done through words which “create
orientations or attitudes, shaping individual views of reality…” (Foss et al. 167). This means the
NCAA has the power to impact how we think through their use of words and language in the
timeline. I do not believe the NCAA is unaware of this fact, so they create a timeline that
highlights and focuses our thinking towards what they want us to see and understand in regards
to themselves as an organization.
The agency is the NCAA’s Title IX website page and the Hall of Champions. As
previously noted, these areas are mediums which communicate expertise. The medium combined
57
with the act and scene of creating a historical piece of literature on Title IX and gender equity
gives the audience of feeling of expertise and credibility of the NCAA. In addition, this trust in
the NCAA allows them to leave out pieces of information or selectively choose which aspects of
Title IX and their history to highlight over others. In preparation for questioning around the
history, the NCAA utilizes disclaimers within their timeline. “Disclaimers anticipate and contain
audience inferences that venture beyond what the speaker sanctions and that, left unchecked,
could do the speaker potential harm” (Kaufer, et al. 250). The disclaimers that the NCAA utilizes
in their timeline are not explicit, but we do see them. For example, when the NCAA mentions the
lawsuit they placed against Title IX and the antitrust lawsuit filed against the NCAA, those are
both items as disclaimers. Due to the NCAA’s agency, they create an expectation they tell
history without biases. This means the audience wants the NCAA to take responsibility and
claim for any negative history they were involved in, rather than try to cover it. By utilizing
disclaimers, the NCAA is able to adhere to this need, which again gains audience trust. However,
the NCAA is still able to control the narrative of their disclaimer. They are able to present the
negative side of their history through a lens they choose, and they get to limit the amount of
information they present on the specific negative topic. These disclaimers reinforce the NCAA’s
expertise, gain audience trust, and create a limited view that reinforces the mystery around the
NCAA’s relation with Title IX and gender equity.
The purpose of each event within the timeline was outlined based on the context provided
in the timeline itself, and additional analysis on the act, scene, agent, and agency. The purpose of
the timeline as a whole is to create a single narrative of the history of the NCAA and Title IX’s
relation. The NCAA’s purpose in their creation of the timeline is 1. to provide a single history of
gender equity in athletics, 2. reinforce their construction of Title IX, and 3. remove themselves
58
from legal liability of Title IX while maintaining credibility. In summary, we have discovered
the timeline works as a response to gender equity complaints from the scene, establishes
credibility, and creates a terministic screen of Title IX to limit perceptions, so as not include
sexual harassment. These three purposes, all coincide and enhance each other. The response to
gender equity complaints is directly related to the scene. The efforts pushed in the NCAA’s Title
IX 50th anniversary celebration can be directly seen as a response to the gender equity
complaints, and the gender equity review. The complaints were on a large public scale, so in
response, the NCAA had to provide something at the same scale. This led to a media campaign,
Title IX logo design, and the timeline. The NCAA used each of these response items to establish
their credibility and show how they are gender equitable.
On the website, the NCAA claims, “The National Collegiate Athletic Association is a
member-led organization dedicated to the well-being and lifelong success of college athletes”
(NCAA “Overview”). When we consider the language, “well-being and lifelong success” to
most this would mean providing resources and ensuring mental and physical security for athletes.
However, when the NCAA was called out for their lack of resources for women athletes, it put
this statement by the NCAA in question. This caused the NCAA to lose their credibility in not
only gender equity but also their ability to provide what they promise. Therefore, the timeline
and the overall 50th anniversary campaign attempts to reestablish the NCAA’s credibility as an
organization that provides opportunities and gives athletes the best of the best. This re-
establishment of credibility would not have been possible without a recreation of the narrative.
The NCAA’s timeline title, branding, design, and overall content continues their work in
reframing Title IX and gender equity. They consistently establish their connection to Title IX,
while simultaneously changing the meaning of Title IX for the audience. The NCAA’s
59
application and use of Title IX and even gender equity itself is contained and controlled by their
selves. They choose when, how, and what is communicated about their relation to Title IX. The
timeline is no exception. As mentioned, the NCAA’s image-power prevails by controlling the
narrative surrounding Title IX and gender equity in women’s athletics. The timeline lays out
exactly what the NCAA wants the audience to take away and remember regarding Title IX and
gender equity. The medium of the message and the content constrain the audience's
understanding of the NCAA’s point of view. Through their expertise and credibility, the NCAA
provides the audience with just enough to maintain their terministic screen and limit the
audience's questions. As broken down in the detailed pentadic analysis, the NCAA leaves a lot of
contextual information out of the timeline and restricts the audience’s perception to their
narrative. The purpose of the timeline; to respond, gain credibility, and maintain their narrative is
all in alignment with the concept of positioning. They utilize the tools and tactics above to not be
questioned regarding gender equity and Title IX but to remove themselves from the conversation
regarding sexual harassment and assault. This positioning makes it so the NCAA is not liable
under Title IX for sexual harassment allegations against NCAA coaches while maintaining their
status as an organization, but it also impacts the student-athletes and audiences.
To provide further evidence and clarity on how the NCAA positions themselves through
the creation of Title IX’s terministic screen, I will provide an analysis of in-scope sections of the
timeline. This analysis will be done by looking at the timeline’s data points, what the NCAA is
selecting to include in the conversation, what the item reflects about the NCAA, and what the
NCAA chooses to deflect from the conversation. The data point will help identify which section
of the timeline is being discussed. The “selected” refers to what the NCAA discusses in the
section. The “reflected” is what the NCAA wants the audience to take away from the information
60
they selected to share. The “deflected” is what the NCAA chooses to either not include at all or
what they attempt to dismiss in their conversation. The deflected is what creates mystery, and is
what the NCAA does not want us to question. Then, I will provide a summary of the purpose for
the NCAA including section. This reveals the motivation of the NCAA’s communication on each
section about Title IX and the NCAA. Throughout this analysis we will further show when the
NCAA chooses to talk about Title IX, how they choose to construct or talk about Title IX, and
what motivates the NCAA to communicate the way they do.
61
Chapter 7: Analysis of Selection, Reflection, and Deflection
Throughout this thesis, I have looked at the meaning created by the NCAA’s
communication of Title IX. Specifically, I have looked at what the NCAA communications
about Title IX, how they communicate about Title IX, and their motivations for their
communication on Title IX. As noted prior, the NCAA controls and limits the conversation of
Title IX. By doing so, the NCAA removes sexual harassment from the Title IX conversation as it
applies to athletics. I will now provide an analysis of in-scope sections of the NCAA’s Title IX
Timeline. I will be utilizing a selection, reflection, and deflection framework for analysis. This
will show what the NCAA chooses to highlight surrounding Title IX (selection), what perception
the NCAA provides to the audience (reflection), and what the NCAA chooses not to highlight
regarding Title IX (deflection). This analysis will provide data on how the NCAA creates a
terministic screen and positions themselves as an organization in relation to Title IX. Scan the
QR Code below (see fig. 3) to view a visual of the NCAA’s Title IX Timeline.
Figure 3. QR Code
Table 1
Executive Order 11375
Data Point
President Lyndon B. Johnson Signed Executive Order 11375
Selection
The signing of Executive Order 11246 and 11375 barring federal
contractors from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion,
national origin, and eventually sex
Reflection
The association to some of the first legislation regarding gender-equity
Deflection
The Executive Orders actual application, workplace discrimination
62
In this data point (see table 1), the NCAA states. “Executive Order 11375 laid the
groundwork for future gender-equity legislation signed five years later” (NCAA “What You May
Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). However, this is what the NCAA chooses to select to
communicate. What they deflect is the legal purpose of Executive Order 11375 was to provide
women and men the same opportunity in the workplace. The impact was more women in the
workplace. The question is what motivated the NCAA to use this act, and why did they use
broad language to omit the full purpose of the Executive Order? The NCAA set up the document
to be about Title IX and athletics, yet this very first item on the timeline was about neither of
those items. Rather, it set the stage for the NCAA as an expert. It told the story of an Executive
Order that mass audiences may not have known about, and positions it to relate to the NCAA’s
image to women’s equality. This positioning creates an ethos for the NCAA and establishes them
as subject matter experts when it comes to women’s rights.
Table 2
The Boston Marathon
Data Point
“Did You Know” - Boston Marathon
Selection
Katherine Switzer, Syracuse University student, labeled as the first woman
to run the Boston Marathon with a race number
Reflection
The association to a women’s athletic accomplishment and the
accomplishment’s relation to the NCAA
Deflection
Bobbi Gibb as the first woman to run the Boston Marathon without a race
number
The purpose of the highlight was to demonstrate the NCAA celebrates women in sports,
and associate themselves with historical women’s rights moments (see table 2). Upon first
reading this section, I automatically believe it to be true. However, this is not the case. The
63
NCAA has established their credibility so much that the claim of who was the first woman
Boston Marathon runner goes unquestioned. Yet, it is documented in other sources that Bobbi
Gibb was the actual first woman Boston Marathon finisher. Gibb’s did her best to disguise
herself and hid in the bushes near the start line so she could run in the marathon without getting
kicked out (Wallock). Gibb’s ran the marathon a year prior to Switzer, both women
accomplished great things. Gibb’s notes the reason people say Switzer was the first is because
when she registered for the race she went under a different name so she was approved and sent a
race number since the Boston Marathon organizers thought she was male (Wallock). When the
NCAA wrote out their data point selection, they used the term “officially” to describe Switzer as
the first woman runner of the Boston Marathon. This term makes their statement plausible, since
they may define Gibb’s running of the marathon unofficial.
It is important to provide context to understand the NCAA’s motives in choosing one
woman over the other to recognize. When Switzer ran the Boston Marathon, she was a student at
Syracuse University. This is important to note because currently, Syracuse is a part of the
NCAA. Meanwhile, Gibbs, the true first runner, was not a student of a University connected to
the NCAA. The selection of Switzer impacted the way the NCAA was able to frame the act.
Rather than say Katherine Switzer was the first Boston Marathon runner, they had to use the
term “official”. Rather than just celebrating the accomplishments of women in athletics, the
purpose becomes tied with the NCAA’s success. Since the NCAA is only as successful as its
member schools and in turn, its athletes are successful, the NCAA continuously reminds its
audience of their athlete’s successes. This becomes the purpose of the NCAA’s section. The
NCAA highlights Switzer as a former student of a member school and her success reflects their
own success in athletics and gender equity.
64
Table 3
40 Years of Title IX
Data Point
40
th
Anniversary of Title IX Group Photo
Selection
The NCAA’s Women’s Final Four half-time recognition of “a group for
their impact on women in sports”
Reflection
The NCAA’s continuous effort and work to recognize women’s athletic
progress
Deflection
The actual impact or work the group did for women in sports
The purpose of this group photo is to demonstrate how the NCAA has previously
honored and celebrated those who have helped move Title IX and women’s sports forward (see
table 3). The NCAA only highlighted an image of this group of individuals during the 40th
anniversary of Title IX, the question is does the NCAA truly recognize the impact of the group’s
work or are they leveraging the celebration to market themselves? Rather than providing
education on the individuals or their impact as group, the NCAA is providing a meta-
communication. They are highlighting how they previously highlighted those who impacted
women’s sports. The purpose of these celebrations appear to be about demonstrating the
NCAA’s work on gender equity and proving to the audience that the NCAA celebrates and
supports women in athletics.
65
Table 4
Executive Order 11375 and Higher Education
Data Point
Dr. Bernice Sandler applies Executive Order 11375 to higher education
Selection
The University of Maryland’s refusal to grant Bernice Sandler tenure, and
Sandler’s formal complaint of the University through Executive Order
11375, taking place prior to Title IX
Reflection
NCAA member schools are some of the first to make progress and change
around sex-based discrimination on campuses
Deflection
The actual outcome and case of the compliant
The act of Dr. Sandler being rejected based on sex discrimination, although not directly
related to athletics, leads Sandler to advocate for Title IX and more intensive laws around sex
discrimination, according to the NCAA (see table 4). However, they deflect the actual outcome
of the complaint and are left wondering if change was made. Again, the mention of the
University of Maryland is important as it relates to the reasoning of the NCAA included this in
their timeline. The NCAA tells us the creation of Title IX was a result of Sandler’s complaints,
and it happened at what would later become an NCAA member school. This highlights how the
NCAA is tied to and in charge of member schools where change was made and connects the
NCAA to the creation of Title IX. The NCAA is not enforcing or implementing this work or
Title IX themselves, but they can inadvertently be tied to it because they are the parent of
member schools.
66
Table 5
AIAW is Established
Data Point
The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) is
founded
Selection
The AIAW forming to provide a framework and sponsored championships
for women’s athletics
Reflection
The NCAA’s support for organizations who provide resources women’s
athletics
Deflection
The full history behind the AIAW, the reach of AIAW across the nation
The selection of information (see table 5) positions the AIAW to appear as the very first
women’s collegiate athletic organization; however that is not the full and complete truth. As an
organization that has established this timeline in a museum setting and has established
themselves as experts, they are saying this is fact and nothing more to be added or adjusted.
However, the AIAW was developed from the Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics for
Women. This organization was developed in 1967 as a way to connect women’s sports across
Universities, not just playing within their own University (Bell). In addition, the organization did
initially span over 278 campuses across the nation upon creation, due to the CIAW’s established
relations with these schools. In addition, the AIAW is noted to have expanded its reach, as the
NCAA notes it gets even bigger than the NCAA themselves. However, they do not mention the
actual metric, which is 800 schools become a part of the AIAW over a ten-year time period. The
NCAA also deflects that the organization was adopted before Title IX and thrived in the initial
years of Title IX, and the AIAW had all-women leadership. The idea was to create space by
women and for women in athletics. This would encourage and inspire women to not only
participate in but also become leaders within women's athletics and be their own voice (Bell).
The purpose of the NCAA deflecting this information and selecting only the formation of
67
AIAW, rather than its full history, is to maintain their credibility as the largest athletic
organization, while still recognizing previous programs for women. In addition, the deflection of
AIAW’s success prior to Title IX is needed for the NCAA to maintain and create the terministic
screen that Title IX’s sole purpose is to provide opportunities for women in athletic programs.
Although we know Title IX’s purpose is much more expansive.
Table 6
Title IX Becomes Law
Data Point
Title IX is signed into law
Selection
Richard Nixon signs Title IX into law, and the NCAA provides the
definition of Title IX
Reflection
The NCAA’s support of the creation and implementation of Title IX
Deflection
Why Title IX was created, what it applies to, and who created or advocated
for its adoption
This section of the timeline from the NCAA seems fairly cut and dry (see table 6).
However, what the NCAA does not mention is context to the creation of Title IX. In the previous
years, the United States was undergoing civil rights and women’s rights movements. The
creation of Title IX was even more encouraged due to other regulations and rights applied to
women. The focus of the situation is on the act of the law being signed, and that is it. If the
selection had been focused on the creation of Title IX, the focus would have been the authors and
advocates for Title IX, rather than the President’s signing of the law. This would have changed
the audience's perception of who to credit with Title IX. The credit in this scenario, is going to
President Nixon, rather than the creators of Title IX. Although Title IX itself is to ban sex-based
discrimination, the purpose of this situation is deeper than just stopping sex-based
discrimination. Since the language is focused on the signing of Title IX, we are focused on the
68
purpose of Title IX as a legal document and what we think is the NCAA as in support of Title
IX. Had the language focused on the creation of Title IX, the purpose would be more focused on
social change itself and Title’s IX full impact.
Table 7
Bobby Riggs and Billie Jean King
Data Point
The “Battle of the Sexes”
Selection
The tennis match between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs at a full
stadium. King wins, demonstrating women athletes are as talented as men
Reflection
The NCAA’s recognition that women can be as successful and talented as
men in athletics
Deflection
How this match had social weight as it happened directly after Title IX’s
implementation
The NCAA highlights Billie Jean King beating her male competitor, Bobby Riggs, in a
televised tennis match on September 20th, 1973 in front of 30,000 spectators (see table 7). The
purpose for the NCAA to highlight this match is to relate themselves to the empowerment of
women and recognition that women athletes are as talented as men athletes. However, the label.
“battle of the sexes” has a connotative meaning that pits women and men’s athletes against one
another in a comparison of talent. Due to the recent Title IX implementation, the match carried
even more weight. The NCAA deflects the social implications of this match because they do not
want to highlight how many people did not believe women should be participating in sports at
the same level as men. This match is really about proving that women are equal to men. It is not
just a competition between two people, but a social message about equality between men and
women. This match did become a landmark win for women across the nation, but it also
continued the comparison between women and men in athletics.
69
Table 8
Cal State Scholarships
Data Point
“Did You Know” on the tennis match
Selection
King’s denial of a scholarship at Cal State as it was prior to Title IX’s
passing
Reflection
Title IX is the reason women are allowed athletic scholarships in college
Deflection
The AIAW’s collegiate scholarship opportunities prior to Title IX
The NCAA states, “before the passing of Title IX, the opportunity for women to even
play college sports was minimal and scholarships were almost unheard of” (NCAA “What You
May Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). The purpose of this data point is to reinforce the
idea that Title IX’s greatest feat was allowing women to play collegiate athletics (see table 8).
This creates the terministic screen for the audience that Title IX can be understand in a limited
scope, its application to women athletic opportunities. The NCAA claims there were minimal
opportunities for women to play college sports prior to Title IX. However, this is not necessarily
100% true. In reality, there were opportunities for women to play sports in college before Title
IX, just not at a national intercollegiate level. Once the AIAW formed, a year before Title IX,
many women were able to compete and play at the national intercollegiate level. What the
NCAA also does not mention is the reason Billie King was denied a scholarship for
intercollegiate tennis is because she attended school from 1961 to 1964, before the creation of
AIAW which did provide scholarships to women athletes. However, the NCAA sets the scene
through language to make it seem as though Title IX is the only reason women today have
scholarships. Although Title IX definitely added in women’s rights and athletic scholarships, it is
not the sole reason women now have scholarships. Title IX has multiple other applications, and
limiting its scope creates a terminstic screen.
70
Table 9
Image Comparison
Data Point
Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs image
Selection
Image of King feeling Riggs bicep with the explanation that the two are
getting ready to play
Reflection
Women’s joy and fun in athletics
Deflection
Other images of King and Riggs
In this data point, the NCAA provides an image of King and Riggs at the tennis match
(see table 9). Right below the highlight of Billie King is an image of her and Bobby Riggs (see
fig. 4). The image is captioned, “Billie Jean King with Bobby Riggs as they get ready for the
“Battle of the Sexes” at the Houston Astrodome” (NCAA “What You May Not Know about
Title IX and Athletics”).
Figure 4. King Feels Riggs’ Bicep (NCAA “What You May Not Know about Title IX and
Athletics”).
As seen in the image, it appears Bobby Riggs is flexing his bicep while Billie King feels
his muscles. In the caption, it just notes the two people are getting ready to play. The image also
depicts King smiling, to demonstrate the joy and happiness in women’s athletics. However, the
71
image depicts a stereotypical depiction of a man and woman. Even though the description and
story above are meant to empower women and demonstrate our strength the image of Billie King
is of her feeling a man’s muscle. There are more images from the match the NCAA could have
used to represent Billie King’s monumental win and the tennis match itself (see fig. 5).
Figure 5. King and Riggs Tap Tennis Rackets (TodayShow “Billie Jean King recalls what Bobby
Riggs told her after their historic ‘Battle of the Sexes’ match”).
In this image, King and Riggs are tapping rackets as tradition in tennis matches. The image the
NCAA chooses to use presents a perspective of male strength and dominance. It is confusing to
the audience to see the image of King feeling her opponents muscle in relation to the story of
equality.
72
Table 10
AIAW Success
Data Point
“Did You Know” AIAW National Championship
Selection
The AIAW Women’s Championship and its financial success
Reflection
Recognition of the monetary value of women’s sports
Deflection
Title IX’s enforcement of equity regardless of monetary success
According to the NCAA, the AIAW Women’s Basketball Tournament Championship
demonstrates how women’s sports can have financial success (see table 10). According to the
post by the NCAA, “The 1973 AIAW Basketball Tournament was an indication that women’s
sports could be financially successful” (NCAA “What You May Not Know about Title IX and
Athletics”). According to data provided by the NCAA, more than 3,000 fans watched the 1973
final games and in 1975, at Madison Square Garden, the AIAW tournament brought in more the
12,00 spectators. The NCAA is not solely recognizing the accomplishment of the women
participating in the AIAW Basketball Championships but evaluating it for its monetary success.
Had there been only a few fans in attendance, the purpose would be very different as it would
simply be focused on the success of the athletes themselves, not the monetary success the NCAA
highlights. The NCAA utilizes this piece in the timeline to recognize the monetary value of
women’s athletics. However, according to Title IX, it does not matter how much money an
athletic team brings in, women and men's teams still deserve equitable and non-discriminatory
practices. Therefore, this tells us about how the NCAA measures success and value of their
member schools and athletic programs, the more fans they have, the more television deals the
NCAA can make and the more money they can bring in.
73
Table 11
The John Tower Amendment
Data Point
John Tower Amendment rejection
Selection
The rejection of the John Tower Amendment, which attempted to exclude
revenue-generating sports from Title IX
Reflection
The NCAA’s credibility in legal proceedings regarding Title IX
Deflection
Title IX opponents suggesting it will cut and take away from men’s
programs and should not be applied to men’s basketball and football
The John Tower Amendment, which would have exempted revenue-generating sports
from Title IX was rejected (see table 11). Deflected by the NCAA was the reasoning for the
amendment. It was specifically directed toward men’s basketball and football, two very popular,
men-dominated sports. Title IX had just been signed into law and questions regarding its
application to athletics and all aspects of institutions were being heavily debated. Many men
were concerned Title IX would reduce their resources to be fair with women's sports. However,
this was not the intent. The purpose of Title IX was to provide all genders with equity. This
ruling to reject the amendment confirmed what Title IX was intended to do, protect everyone’s
right to a discrimination-free experience. The NCAA adds to the section noting that this ruling
did allow for nondiscriminatory reasons for differences in spending between men's and women’s
sports (NCAA “What You May Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). This is an interesting
note for the NCAA to highlight, as it seems to position the ruling as allowing differences without
defining what ‘nondiscriminatory reasons’ there could be. Thus displaying the potential leniency,
the NCAA has in their use of Title IX.
74
Table 12
Javits Amendment
Data Point
Javits Amendment Enacted
Selection
Proposed alternative to Tower Amendment, enforcing the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare to provide responsible provisions
“considering the nature of particular sports”
Reflection
The NCAA’s credibility in legal proceedings regarding Title IX
Deflection
The full understanding of the Amendment and its impact on gender equity
in athletics
This data point highlights the Javits Amendment (see table 12). The Javits Amendment,
according to the NCAA, required The Department of Health, Education and Welfare to issue
Title IX regulations that include the following, “with respect to intercollegiate athletic activities,
reasonable provisions considering the nature of particular sports” (NCAA “What You May Not
Know about Title IX and Athletics”). This new Amendment is further justification for when
differing in spend is allowed. In addition, the ambiguity of the terminology of the Amendment
leaves it open for interpretation, meaning many people could apply this rule to men’s sports over
women’s to justify spending without getting in legal trouble with Title IX. The NCAA utilizes
this section to build credibility in legal proceedings regarding Title IX. In addition, the lack of
explanation on the Amendment by the NCAA leaves the audience to make their own
interpretation and to even feel as though it was not nearly as monumental as other items on the
timeline.
75
Table 13
Gerald R. Ford Award
Data Point
“Did You Know” Ann Meyers Drysdale image
Selection
The NCAA awards Ann Meyers Drysdale with the NCAA President’s
Gerald R. Ford Award. Drysdale was the first women’s athlete at UCLA to
receive a full four-year scholarship.
Reflection
Demonstrates the NCAA commitment to awarding and recognizing women
athletes and ties the athletes accomplishment to the NCAA
Deflection
The NCAA was not the organization involved with UCLA or the
scholarship allocation when Drysdale received the first full four-year
scholarship.
The purpose of the NCAA’s award and recognition on the timeline is to demonstrate how
they honor women athletes who had great influence on intercollegiate athletics (see table 13).
Yet, when we remove the celebratory selection and reflection the NCAA wants us to see, we
learn the NCAA was not involved in Drysdale’s UCLA scholarship success. Ann Meyers
Drysdale was a star on the UCLA basketball team and led them to their first intercollegiate
championship in 1978. What is not told in the NCAA’s timeline is that during this time period
the UCLA women’s basketball team was playing in the AIAW, and that is who awarded
Drysdale with the full four-year scholarship. The NCAA providing Drysdale with the award and
highlighting her scholarship accomplishment makes it appear that the NCAA is the organization
who oversaw UCLA and Drysdale’s collegiate career, accrediting them to Drysdale opportunity
in athletics. We can see how the NCAA is attempting to build their credibility and power as a
gender equitable organization. However, after a deeper look at the scene and agent, we realize
the NCAA was not the organization involved with UCLA or the scholarship allocation at the
time period.
76
Table 14
Title IX Guidelines
Data Point
Title IX regulations issued
Selection
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare enactment of Title IX
regulations into school athletic departments.
Reflection
NCAA’s support and credibility in relation to Title IX
Deflection
How and who will enforce Title IX across athletic programs
The purpose of NCAA highlighting this data point and the language they use is to call our
attention to The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare as the sole responsible party for
Title IX (see table 14). This designation removes responsibility from the NCAA, as they do not
mention have any responsibility or part of the process for implementing or maintaining Title IX.
This is a scenario where the NCAA’s needs to position themselves away from Title IX and its
legal obligations, therefore the NCAA focuses its attention on the government as the agent in this
data point. Through this the NCAA is able to maintain their image as experts in a major legal
development around Title IX while simultaneously removing themselves from responsibility in
regards to Title IX.
Table 15
NCAA v. Title IX
Data Point
NCAA files lawsuit against Title IX
Selection
The filing and dismissal of the NCAA’s lawsuit against Title IX. The
argument against Title IX applying to athletic departments because they do
not receive federally funding
Reflection
NCAA’s honesty in their connection and history with regards to Title IX,
building their credibility
Deflection
Details on the case and grounds for the case against Title IX, and the delay
in Title IX’s application due to the case
77
The NCAA claimed since athletic programs themselves do not receive direct federal
funding, they were not legally obligated to Title IX (see table 15). However, the case was
dismissed two years later. As previously noted, multiple cases we brought forward to remove
athletics as a whole, or revenue-generating sports from Title IX compliance. However, these
efforts failed. The NCAA’s act, unlike previous challenges, was after Title IX was implemented
and was a lawsuit. When lawsuits are pursued, no changes to behavior need to be made, so it
delayed the implementation of Title IX in athletic programs for two years. This is because the
NCAA was trying to see how women’s sports would fair in the market. Remember, during this
time period, the AIAW was on the rise, proving there was an audience and success for women in
athletics. Rather than discuss the delay in Title IX’s enforcement, the NCAA chooses to keep the
data point short and to the point. Instead of seeing the NCAA as an opposition to Title IX, the
audience members begin to trust the NCAA for pointing out a negative point in their connection
to Title IX.
Table 16
The Three-Pronged Test
Data Point
Office of Civil Rights established three-pronged test for compliance
Selection
The three-prong test guidelines to ensure Title IX compliance
Reflection
NCAA expertise in Title IX and it’s focus on athletic gender equity
Deflection
How the NCAA is involved or not involved in these guidelines
The Office of Civil Rights created a three-pronged test, and guidelines, to ensure
universities comply with Title IX (see table 16). The guidelines provide institutions with official
guidance on how to become Title IX compliant. The NCAA ensures the Office of Civil Rights is
labeled as the main enforcer of Title IX at institutions. The Office of Civil Rights sets the
78
regulations and standards for institutions to operate. The purpose of this data point is to deflect
responsibility of Title IX while again maintaining their expertise and credibility in Title IX. If the
NCAA loses credibility, they lose the ability to build a terministic screen around Title IX.
Therefore, positioning themselves as both in alignment and non-alignment allows them to remain
credible while not legally liable to Title IX.
Table 17
Alexander v. Yale
Data Point
Alexander v. Yale
Selection
Yale students filing a lawsuit against Yale claiming sexual harassment was a
type of sex discrimination. Labeling it as a new precedent although Yale
won the case against the students
Reflection
Focus on the positive aspects of the case and the change it could bring
Deflection
The perpetrators and detailed reasons for the result of the case
Five Yale students who filed a lawsuit against the university, claiming sexual harassment
was a type of sex discrimination (see table 17). According to the NCAA in the timeline, the
students called for “sexual harassment to be viewed as sex discrimination under Title IX, thus
propelling institutions across the country to establish grievance procedures for students to report
sexual harassment” (NCAA “What You May Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). In the
frame created by the NCAA, the agents are the students who filed the lawsuit. This leaves the act
to be limited to the filing of the lawsuit, and not be inclusive of the sexual harassment itself.
According to the United States Court of Appeal the students filed the lawsuit against the
preparators, one of whom was a coach. However, had the agents been inclusive of the staff
members and the act been inclusive of the sexual harassment itself, we would have an agency of
the university music department, English department, and athletics program. This would create a
79
much different image of the situation and would reveal the terrible acts that happen within
NCAA member school athletic departments, rather than the celebratory focus the NCAA takes.
The purpose of the NCAA deflecting the preparators is because they do not want to address Title
IX as it applies to sexual harassment in their athletic departments.
Table 18
NCAA’s First Coed Championship
Data Point
“Did You Know” NCAA Rifle Championship
Selection
The first official NCAA Championship women were allowed to complete in,
Rifle in 1980.
Reflection
The NCAA’s successful integration of women into their Championship
programs
Deflection
How long the NCAA went without having Championships for women since
their inception
In this data point (see table 18), the purpose is to focus the audience on the NCAA’s first
administration of a women’s championship. In reality, as we know, the NCAA was not the first
organization to hold intercollegiate championships for women. In addition, the NCAA left out
information on why it took years for them to conduct championships for women. The NCAA is
creating the perception of celebration and congratulations on this accomplishment but does not
want us to celebrate the first actual women’s athletic championship which happened years prior
in AIAW. In addition, a data point directly below relates to this section, as it highlights more
NCAA women’s championships. What the NCAA does not want to notice or look into is the
antitrust lawsuit filed by the AIAW. The NCAA hides this information at the end of paragraph
and says after losing the antitrust lawsuit, the AIAW had no choice but to close its doors (NCAA
“What You May Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). The NCAA does not elaborate on
80
why the case was brought against them, or how their new position as the primary governing body
for women’s athletics impacted the closure of the AIAW. Rather, the NCAA lists the event as a
fact and frames the closure to be due to the failure of the antitrust case. However, there is more
context and scene to the AIAW story.
According to Bell in The Sport Journal, before the NCAA filed the lawsuit against Title
IX and subsequently lost, they met with the AIAW. This meeting was to discuss a partnership
between the NCAA and AIAW. The meeting took place in the fall of 1974. The NCAA wanted
the AIAW to affiliate itself with the NCAA, and the AIAW was hoping to collaborate with the
NCAA and create a committee to draw up rules. “The NCAA did not consider the AIAW its
equal and it would not agree to a 50-50 joint union and equal representation at all policy-making
levels” (Festle 1996). This lack of compromise became the downfall of the AIAW, the NCAA
knew there was revenue and power in women's athletics and they could not risk having a
competitor providing women’s sports at the schools they provide men’s sports. Due to the
NCAA’s power and money, they were able to buy out the majority of AIAW members.
Ultimately, leading to the demise of the AIAW. Knowing this aspect of the scene, we now can
better understand why the AIAW brought the antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA. In their
meeting, the NCAA said the AIAW was not equal to them. This is ironic in the wake of the
recent signing of Title IX into law, which aims to prohibit sex discrimination. Yet, the NCAA, an
organization made by and for men, blatantly told an organization made by and for women, that
they were not equals. The meaning of this statement by the NCAA is only exacerbated as we
recall, the AIAW actually ended up having more member schools at one point than the NCAA.
So, in terms of business operations, the AIAW would have been the NCAA’s superior. However,
due to the misogynist nature and monetary driver, the NCAA sees the women’s league as
81
inferior. In addition, the NCAA’s statement that “when the association lost this case [antitrust
lawsuit], it was forced to close its doors” is a fallacy. It creates a scene that puts the
responsibility of the failed lawsuit on the AIAW itself. When we better understand the scene, we
learn the reason and need for the antitrust lawsuit, which then helps us understand the motivation
of the act and how the NCAA actually played a part in the dramatistic situation. Through the
pentadic analysis, instead of seeing the section as a celebration of the NCAA’s first women’s
championship, we see a new narrative and perspective, one the NCAA did not want us to have.
Table 19
The Winningest Coach
Data Point
“Did You Know” first female coach to have 1,000 wins
Selection
The first female coach in the NCAA to have 1,000 wins in all sports.
Reflection
Celebration for women’s athletic accomplishments and the reiteration of the
opportunities they provide at the NCAA
Deflection
The coach, Jan Hutchinson, is potentially the first person in the NCAA to
have 1,000 wins
In this section, the NCAA highlights the first female coach in the NCAA to have 1,000
wins in all sports, Jan Hutchinson (see table 19). The language highlights the fact that the coach
was a woman. This makes us believe no female has made this accomplishment, but a man has, so
our reference for the scene is set within the limits of women athletics. However, as we dig deeper
with research we do not find another coach (male or female) who reached 1,000 wins prior to
Hutchinson. Rather than celebrating an accomplishment regardless of gender, the purpose of this
section is to demonstrate how the NCAA uses language to position themselves in alignment with
gender equity in any way possible.
82
Table 20
Grove City v. Bell
Data Point
Grove City College v Bell Supreme Court decision
Selection
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling that Title IX applied only to programs in
schools that receive direct federal funding. Weaking Title IX’s application to
athletics.
Reflection
NCAA’s expertise in Title IX legal applications
Deflection
Why women’s programs and Title IX cases were thrown out after the ruling
The purpose of the NCAA’s use of this data point (see table 20) in the timeline proves
they were not the only opponents to Title IX’s legal application to athletics, and it continues to
situate them as legal experts in all things Title IX. The impacts of this case listed in the NCAA’s
timeline included schools cutting women’s teams and the Office of Civil Rights canceling
ongoing Title IX investigations. When the Grove City v. Bell case was settled, Title IX
adversaries took the opportunity to drop women's athletics and even ongoing cases that could be
about anything related to Title IX. The scene was also that the NCAA was the largest collegiate
athletic association for both men and women at the time. This was because the AIAW had closed
its doors just a few years prior. The AIAW, was in existence before the implementation of Title
IX, meaning they were providing athletic programs for women without Title IX’s application to
athletics. Had the AIAW still been in existence during the Grove City v. Bell case, it is more
likely those programs lost would have stayed as they could have been a part of AIAW. The
NCAA does not associate itself with the closing of the women’s programs during this time
period, again deflecting responsibility of gender equity.
83
Table 21
Civil Rights Restoration Act
Data Point
Congress passes Civil Rights Restoration Act
Selection
Congress overrides President Ronald Reagan’s veto to reverse the Grove
City v. Bell decision. This reinstates application of Title IX to athletic
programs.
Reflection
NCAA’s expertise in Title IX legal applications
Deflection
The NCAA’s Theodore Roosevelt Award to President Reagan
The purpose of this data point (see table 21) is to again provide the NCAA with
credibility around Title IX. It also serves as a celebration of bringing women’s athletics back to
many campuses. This aligns the NCAA again with Title IX and values of women’s success in
athletics. However, what the NCAA does not mention in the timeline is the NCAA’s Theodore
Roosevelt Award. This award is provided to a former NCAA student-athlete. The awardee, as
noted by the NCAA, “by personal example and contributions to society, exemplifies the ideals to
which collegiate athletics programs and amateur sports competition are dedicated” (NCAA
“Theodore Roosevelt Award”). This award was actually presented to Ronald Reagan in 1990.
This was two years after he vetoed the Civil Rights Restoration Act. Whether by intention or not,
the NCAA aligned itself with Reagan by presenting him with the award. In addition, they
explicitly state the awardee exemplifies their ideals. Although Reagan may have had his own
political motivations for vetoing the Act, the close timeline between the veto and the
announcement of Reagan’s NCAA Theodore Roosevelt Award can appear to align the NCAA to
the sentiment against the Civil Rights Restoration Act. Thus, it again puts into question the
perspective we have on the NCAA’s historical standpoint on Title IX. However, this explains
84
why the NCAA did not include it in their timeline. Rather, they highlighted the celebration of
bringing women’s programs back through Title IX’s application to athletic departments.
Table 22
Title IX Overview
Data Point
“Did You Know” Title IX’s applications
Selection
Highlights Title IX’s application to athletics
Reflection
Align the NCAA with Title IX in regards to opportunities in athletics
Deflection
Title IX’s application to sexual harassment
In this section (see table 22), The NCAA utilizes language to maintain its frame of Title
IX. The NCAA states, “although it is the application of Title IX to athletics that has gained the
greatest public visibility” and then continues to describe other applications of Title IX (NCAA
“What You May Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). However, this statement alone can
have multiple implications than seen at a first read. The statement implies the vast majority of
conversation surrounding Title IX is in relation to athletics. Then, as if in order, the NCAA lists
each application in the education system ending with sexual harassment. As critics, we wonder
why. When we consider the scene, we can better understand why the public and general
conversation has been around Title IX as it applies to athletics. The scene is the NCAA’s Title
IX media campaign. As previously noted, the campaign only highlights Title IX’s application to
athletics regarding resources and gender equity. Therefore the NCAA created the conversation so
the public’s focus was on athletic resources and opportunities. When the Title IX conversation is
predetermined and influenced by the NCAA it is limited and creates the perception the public is
more interested in Title IX as it applies to general athletics. As previously discussed, the medium
creates a feeling of expertise and trust between the NCAA and its audience. The NCAA does list
85
all of Title IX’s applications, but it does so strategically. What the purpose is doing is
demonstrating to the audience the NCAA is an expert in Title IX and the focal point of Title IX
is its application to athletics, not all other impacts Title IX has such as sexual harassment.
Table 23
The Task Force
Data Point
NCAA Gender Equity Task Force assembled
Selection
Highlights the first study conducted by the NCAA on gender equity and the
formation of the Gender Equity Task Force
Reflection
The NCAA taking true action on gender equity
Deflection
The removal of Title IX from their language and the lack of true regulations
or policies from the Task Force
The NCAA highlights a study on gender equity (see table 23). The first study conducted
by the NCAA on gender equity took place in 1992. The survey found a disparity between men's
and women's athletics in relation to enrollment. Rather than a media post, this was action and a
step toward gender equity. This is a place we see the NCAA truly aligning with Title IX, even
though the NCAA is not legally liable for member school’s compliance with Title IX they are
assessing where they are regarding gender equity. However, it is important to note this is, again,
a space where the NCAA aligns with only one aspect of Title IX. They also never mention Title
IX in the study or this specific highlight, rather they use “gender equity”. Leaving out Title IX is
notable because it would ruin the NCAA’s positioning if they had claimed it as a Title IX study.
After all, that would need to include other applications such as sexual harassment.
The second section is the creation of the Gender Equity Task Force. This, again, shows a
time when the NCAA was attempting to impact gender equity but refused to use the terminology
Title IX. In addition, when we look at this act through the lens of the highlight itself as the act,
86
we see where real change may still not be accomplished. Rather than make policies or
regulations on gender equity, the Gender Equity Task Force could only make
“recommendations”. Rather than allow the task force to make policies and regulations, the
NCAA as a whole is still maintaining their power to not choose Title IX when it would be
inconvenient for them. This shows the purpose of the data point is to seem like the NCAA has
true intentions for action in gender equity, when they actually may only have recommendations.
Table 24
NCAA Defines Gender Equity
Data Point
NCAA Gender Equity Task Force defines gender equity
Selection
Highlights how the NCAA defines gender equity
Reflection
Aligning with gender equity and progress
Deflection
The actual tools and ways to measure gender equity at member schools and
the consequences for not being equitable
The NCAA provides a definition for gender equity (see table 24). In 1992 the NCAA
Gender Equity Task Force defined, and continues to define, gender equity as below:
An athletics program can be considered gender equitable when the participants in both
the men’s and women’s sports programs would accept as fair and equitable the overall
program of the other gender. No individual should be discriminated against on the basis
of gender, institutionally or nationally, in intercollegiate. (NCAA “What You May Not
Know about Title IX and Athletics”)
This definition is very important because it becomes the marker for what the NCAA can claim as
equitable or inequitable. The question is how does the NCAA measure or collect the information
87
needed to ensure equity? They would need to either prove or disprove participant’s perceptions
of the other gender’s athletic program. It is unclear how the NCAA collects this information.
However, it does expose why the NCAA had to respond to the media of the 2021 Women’s
Basketball Tournament. Players were taking the stage to call for more equitable resources,
explaining in each post they published how the resources were inequitable. Since the NCAA
utilizes this definition of gender equity, they had no choice but to act and be held accountable for
inequity, according to their own definition. However, what happens when there is no platform
for students to call out inequities? In addition, the NCAA utilizes language from Title IX, “No
individual should be discriminated against on the basis of gender…” yet they do not credit or
simply state their compliance to Title IX. If the NCAA wanted, they could have defined gender
equity as alignment with Title IX. This would provide a more solidified and already enforceable
policy. However, due to the NCAA’s need for positioning, and concerns regarding legal
ramifications, they utilize their own definition which they can control.
Table 25
Cohen v. Brown
Data Point
Federal Court rules in favor of Cohen
Selection
Outlines the court decision in Cohen v Brown that Brown University did not
meet any part of the three-prong test
Reflection
The NCAA’s expertise and alignment with the application and use of Title
IX to regulate gender equity
Deflection
The lack of the term Title IX and actually labeling the case for what it is, a
violation of Title IX
The federal court decision in Cohen v. Brown ruled that Brown University did not meet
any part of the Office for Civil Rights’ three-prong test (see table 25). As mentioned in a former
88
item, the Office of Civil Rights decided the three-prong test would determine Title IX
compliance. This helps us to understand the purpose is not only to enforce gender equity but to
enforce Title IX itself. It is not just a trial of Brown University, but also a trial of Title IX itself
and a test of its application. The NCAA’s highlights in an interesting way. Although they
highlight the failure of Brown University to pass the three-prong test, and then the need for the
University to reinstate women’s gymnastics and volleyball, the NCAA does not mention Title IX
here. As observed earlier, this situation is not just a test of gender equity, but a situation where
Title IX was truly applied and had legal power. The NCAA’s choice to mention that Brown
University “was not accommodating the interests of its current female student-athletes”, rather
than say Brown University “violated Title IX” (Public Justice). This language would have
brought attention to Title IX and its power in the legal realm. The choice to leave out Title IX
from the act and purpose is motivated by their intention to bring attention to gender equity but
not Title IX’s power.
Table 26
Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act
Data Point
Congress passes the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act
Selection
The passing of the act, which makes gender equity from college athletic
programs publicly available
Reflection
The encouragement of programs to be honest and open in the compliance
with Title IX
Deflection
There is no data regarding sexual harassment in athletic departments
In this section, the NCAA highlights the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act did make
gender equity data public (see table 26). The passing of the law made it mandatory for federally
funded schools to annually report their gender equity data to the Department of Education. If we
89
have context here, we learn the Department of Education is one of the entities tasked with
enforcing and interpreting Title IX. The data provided in these reports aids in the Department of
Education’s enforcement of Title IX. This reveals the motivation for this act, but what about why
the NCAA uses it on the timeline? This section has a link directly to the public data for each
school. The majority of these schools are in the NCAA, and they are held accountable by Title
IX. The purpose of sharing this link allows the audience to feel as though the NCAA is open
about their data. It also gives us the reassurance that the member schools are Title IX compliant.
However, the data is limited and does not apply to the full scope of Title IX. There is no data
relating to sexual harassment in the gender equity data, although this is a part, according to Title
IX, of gender equity.
Table 27
Commission on Opportunities in Athletics
Data Point
U.S. Department of Education Appointed Commission on Opportunities in
Athletics
Selection
President Bush requesting a Commission on Opportunities in Athletics to
review Title IX
Reflection
This again aligns the NCAA as an expert in all major work on Title IX
Deflection
The concern of the Commission actually weaking Title IX
The NCAA provides information on President George W. Bush requesting a Commission
on Opportunities in Athletics (see table 27). The reason provided was to review Title IX and
obtain feedback on it, according to the NCAA. However, when we look deeper into the purpose
we see how it impacts our perception of the situation. The NCAA states the goal of the
Commission was to collect information, analyze issues, and obtain broad public input. However,
since the Commission led to no changes or updates, it was curious the NCAA decided to include
90
this data point. When I researched further, I escaped the limited view the NCAA put the audience
into. According to multiple sources, including NPR and the New York Times, many advocates
for Title IX were concerned about the Commission as they believed it would attempt to weaken
Title IX’s impact (Litsky) (Babin). These sources explained Bush, like Reagan, did not want
Title IX to impact men’s opportunities in athletics. It is said the advocates feared the perspective
of Title IX reducing men’s athletic opportunities would cause them to weaken Title IX’s power
and reverse a lot of the work already accomplished. Through the Commission, it was found no
changes were needed and Title IX remained the same. From the perspective of the NCAA, it
seems like the Commission is there to make sure Title IX is providing opportunities for women.
This is another way the NCAA is working to reinforce their narrative and control over the
conversation surrounding Title IX.
Table 28
Central Images
Data Point
Large image of the 2016 Division I, II, and III Basketball Championship and
a large image of Maria Taylor
Selection
Highlight the success of the 2016 Women’s Basketball Championship and
highlight women’s accomplishment’s in sports
Reflection
Display the opportunities the NCAA provides their women athletes
Deflection
The failure of equity in the 2021 Women’s Basketball Championship
In the first image it is noted the reason all the Divisions were playing here was because it
was the 35th anniversary of the NCAA Women’s Basketball Championships (see table 28).
When we consider the scene, we can see why the image is included in the timeline. Prior to the
publication of this timeline, the NCAA was under scrutiny for their resource allocation in the
2021 Women’s Basketball Championship. Understanding this item of the scene, makes us see
91
the image as a way to highlight a positive the NCAA contributed to the women’s basketball
championship, rather than the focus on the 2021 failure.
The next image is of Maria Taylor. The caption next to her photo provides information on
women in broadcasting. It is noted that more and more women are becoming sportscasters.
Taylor, herself, is recognized for her career at ESPN and SEC Network where she covered both
men’s and women’s sports. This section in context with the rest of the timeline gives the
audience a feel the success of women in any sports industry job is directly related to Title IX and
gender equity. In addition, the caption reads, “Most, if not all [sports broadcasters], have had a
collegiate athletic experience” (NCAA “What You May Not Know about Title IX and
Athletics”). In stating this, the NCAA is connecting themselves to the progress of women in
sports broadcasting. This, in turn, connects the thought that if Title IX would not have enforced
gender equity in collegiate sports, where sports broadcasters have their starts, women would not
have the same opportunities they have now in sports broadcasting. This, again, connects the
NCAA to gender equity, Title IX, and women’s success in athletics.
Table 29
Equity Task Force Meets Again
Data Point
“NCAA Gender and Equity Task Force Reconvened”
Selection
The second meeting of the NCAA Gender and Equity Task Force to create a
process for giving continuous recommendations to the NCAA Board of
Governors
Reflection
The NCAA’s active work to be more gender equitable
Deflection
The “policy” created on sexual harassment and the reason for the Task Force
convening
92
The Task Force was to create a structure where they could make direct recommendations
within the NCAA governance structure (see table 29). The purpose the NCAA presents us is that
they are continuously finding ways to be more gender equitable. However, there is more than
one interpretations to this data point. The choice to reconvene tells us the Gender Equity Task
Force did not just meet to increase communication and power within the NCAA’s governance
structure, but it also met because there were ongoing gender and equity issues within the
NCAA’s member schools. The NCAA is not liable under Title IX for these issues, but they are
an organization with high visibility and power in athletics. Many fans, athletes, and schools look
to the NCAA to solve gender equity issues, so the Task Force became a way to field those
questions. In addition, the NCAA mentions an additional act, one of the recommendations made
by the Task Force. According to the NCAA, “One of the success stories of these
recommendations occurred when Division I legislates that its member schools had to attest to
doing a diversity, equity, and inclusion review once every four years” (NCAA “What You May
Not Know about Title IX and Athletics”). Despite the questions surrounding the act, are the other
Divisions not required to attest to doing a similar review, why does it only happen once every
four years, the NCAA is establishing another purpose. The NCAA is now displaying their power
over their member schools and their power in enforcing gender equity. This is the first time the
NCAA mentions making any regulations for gender equity, as previously it was all on member
schools to enforce regulations. This act, tells us they can enforce regulations and policies to
improve member school compliance with Title IX. Although this first regulation is vague and
limited in scope, it still demonstrates the NCAA's power in this matter.
Through further research, we can find one item developed was the NCAA Board of
Governors Policy on Campus Sexual Violence. However, this item is not noted in the timeline.
93
This item is the policy and regulations the NCAA enforces regarding Title IX and sexual
violence/harassment. The policy forces all member schools to attest to their compliance with the
policy. If the school fails to attest by the deadline, they are prohibited from hosting any NCAA
championship competitions for the next academic year. The items they have to attest to revolves
around the following; 1. Education of Title IX and institutional sexual prevention processes and
resources to athletic department staff members 2. Policies regarding sexual violence prevention
and adjudication and the contact information for the school’s Title IX coordinator are available
in the athletic department and provided to students 3. Student-athletes, coaches, and staff are
educated each year on sexual violence prevention, intervention, and response (in alignment with
state laws) 4. All incoming and transfer students disclosure conduct resulting in discipline
through Title IX proceeding or in a criminal conviction for sexual, interpersonal, or other
violence 5. Institutions took steps to confirm if the student-athlete was disciplined through Title
IX or criminal conviction 6. The institution must have a procedure that directs staff to gather
information on recruited student-athletes and transfer athletes from it’s former institution on any
Title IX proceedings/disciplinary action or criminal convictions (NCAA “NCAA Association-
Wide Policy on Campus Sexual Violence Annual Attestation”).
This policy demonstrates exactly what the NCAA is willing to regulate in regards to
sexual harassment and Title IX. The NCAA’s policy focuses on member school responsibility.
This means the NCAA is not themselves regulating or enforcing Title IX or prevention against
sexual harassment, but making the member schools responsible for it. They do not provide
specific resources or processes for the implementation of Title IX or sexual harassment
prevention but rather give the power to member school Title IX offices. It also is important to
mention here what the NCAA leaves out. The NCAA mentions a lot of regulations regarding
94
student Title IX investigations, but nothing about coach Title IX investigations. In regard to
coaches, the NCAA does not mention any process for documenting when a coach sexually
harasses or has an ongoing or previous Title IX case. This policy provides some regulations and
repercussions for member schools that do not follow the regulations, but the policy fails to
provide resources, programming, consequences for individual staff or athlete sexual harassment,
or direct guidance on coach-specific Title IX cases. The items the NCAA leaves out allow them
to remain not legally liable for negligence regarding Title IX cases of sexual harassment and
provides some resemblance of policy to “protect student-athletes” as the NCAA states is their job
(NCAA “Overview”).
This piece of information regarding the act is not included in the timeline. The act as
presented by the NCAA does not mention sexual harassment, violence, or Title IX. The lack of
conversation around this aspect of the task force’s recommendations adopted by the NCAA
removes sexual harassment from the perception of gender equity. Thus, making it something the
public does not consider in alignment with the power of the NCAA’s jurisdiction over athletic
programs. Yet, if an audience were to question the NCAA’s responsibility in athletic program
sexual harassment cases, the NCAA can point to the policy as their due diligence and concede
they are not liable under Title IX, as seen in the previously outlined court cases. The purpose of
hiding sexual harassment recommendations and policies from this section of the timeline is to
reinforce what perception the audience has of Title IX based on the terministic screen the NCAA
created.
95
Table 30
Tokyo Olympics
Data Point
Image of Tokyo 2020 Olympics
Selection
States the Tokyo Olympics as a gender equal, and includes an image of a
woman NCAA track athlete competing in the games
Reflection
Creation of the NCAA as the best-of-the-best while maintaining their
narrative around support for women
Deflection
The other athletes and sporting events taking place at the same time
This data point (see table 30) is in the middle, and largest section of the final page
features a large where there is an image of a NCAA woman track athlete. The NCAA titled this
section, “Tokyo 2020 - First ‘Gender-Equal Games’” (NCAA “What You May Not Know about
Title IX and Athletics”). This makes the connection between the NCAA and the Olympics. This
connection maintains the perception that the NCAA produces some of the world’s best athletes
and provides some of the best women athletes. The scene of the event itself was 2021, due to
COVID-19 the games were delayed a year. This would have been just following the 2021
Women’s Basketball Tournament, where gender equity was on everyone’s mind. The scene also
includes the page set-up, the timeline has been going in order until this section. The NCAA put
the image in the middle of the page, making it the forefront of the page, rather than in the
chronological order of the timeline. This makes it seem like the most important item on the page
and is used to gain our attention to the accomplishment. In the image, we see an agent, Aliyah
Abrams, one of the NCAA’s athletes who competed in the Olympics. The NCAA had multiple
athletes competing in the Olympics, including men. Utilizing a woman in the image highlights
the NCAA’s narrative of women's success and pulls together the purpose of the section. Overall,
96
we can see the purpose of the section is to shape the audience’s perception of the NCAA as a
top-tier athletic organization, with outstanding women athletes.
Table 31
External Gender Equity Review
Data Point
NCAA calls for external gender equity review
Selection
The response of the NCAA to student-athlete gender equity concerns at the
2021 Women’s Basketball Tournament.
Reflection
They NCAA listened to their athletes and took action through the gender
equity review, demonstrating their commitment to gender equity
Deflection
Sexual harassment in the gender equity review, and actual policy
The NCAA responded to student-athlete concerns around gender equity by getting a law
firm to conduct an equity review (see table 31). The NCAA notes they are the ones who took
control and called for the review. The way the situation is framed by the NCAA impacts the
perception the audience has of it. The NCAA in the title states they called for the equity review.
This is interesting because it is true, the NCAA did ask for the review, but the review came
directly after student-athletes raised awareness of gender inequity at the basketball tournament.
The NCAA, again does note the athletes brought it to their attention but does not reveal the scale
at which it happened. It seems this is a way for the NCAA to take accountability for their
inequitable practices, but it is uncertain if this review would have happened had it not been for
the mass media surrounding the student-athlete complaints. In addition, this timeline is an exhibit
to be displayed for years, and as we know, almost everything on the internet can be permanent.
The focus on the review, rather than the media backlash and true inequities, rewrites the history
of this event from the NCAA’s point of view and response, rather than the student-athletes who
were the ones impacted. This allows the NCAA to control the narrative, and tell a limited story.
97
The NCAA also shifts the narrative of the 2021 women’s basketball tournament by using
the scene of the timeline to change the audience’s perception. Directly next to the column on the
gender equity review, the NCAA has a large image with two women coaches. In the caption, it
reads:
The 2021 Women’s Final Four Tournament featured two Black female head coaches
for the first time in the history of the championship. South Carolina’s Dawn Staley, left,
and Arizona’s Adia Barnes, right, coached their way to the final weekend. (NCAA
“What You May Not Know About Title IX”).
This image and caption are about the same scene of the column next to it, but two completely
different acts. This act focuses on a positive aspect of the tournament and finds a reason to
celebrate it rather than examine the issues. The two women coaches serve as tokens in the
narrative of the timeline. Since they made history as being two black female head coaches out of
four total head coaches at the Final Four, they become the main story the NCAA wants
audiences to remember. This purpose becomes evident when we look at the scene. This section
directly lines up with the previous section about the NCAA’s gender equity review following the
tournament, and it is a large, eye-catching image. This causes the focus to shift from the gender
equity review to the coaches and makes a positive connection between the NCAA’s tournament
and gender equity rather than a negative one.
98
Table 32
50 Years of Title IX
Data Point
50
th
Anniversary of Title IX
Selection
The celebrations across the nation put on by the NCAA for Title IX’s 50
th
anniversary
Reflection
The NCAA’s celebration of Title IX’s impact on women in athletics
Deflection
How Title IX applies to sexual harassment and policy to actually enforce
protections for student-athletes against sexual harassment
This data point (see table 32) focuses on how the NCAA will celebrate Title IX, and how
far we have come in women's athletics since Title IX. This act finalizes the tie between the
NCAA and Title IX. Historically, as seen even in this timeline, the NCAA had not been on board
with Title IX, and now they are closing with a change of narrative. They are now celebratory of
Title IX and all it has done for women. The scene is the final portion of the timeline. Since it is
the end of the timeline, it becomes the last thought the audience gets of the NCAA and its
relation to Title IX. It demonstrates how the NCAA currently aligns itself with Title IX, and also
how it will over the next year, as outlined in the section. The NCAA has crafted the timeline
about Title IX and their connection to Title IX. This allows the section to be fully about how the
NCAA plans to celebrate Title IX. The purpose is to bring awareness to the NCAA’s plans
regarding Title IX and to leave the audience with the final chapter of the NCAA and Title IX. It
is as if we have gone through the journey of Title IX, and are now coming to a close. This gives
the audience the feeling of closure and complete understanding of the history of Title IX and the
NCAA, even if they were not given the full history outside of the NCAA’s created terministic
screen.
99
Through this analysis, we were able to provide further explanation on when the NCAA
communicates about Title XI, how and what they communicate about Title IX, as well as the
motivations behind their communication. We discover, the NCAA’s motivation in their
communications on Title IX is 1. to provide a single history of gender equity in athletics 2.
reinforce their construction of Title IX 3. remove themselves from legal liability of Title IX
while maintaining credibility. All of these items demonstrate how powerful storytelling can be in
creating new realities or terministic screens for our audience to understand the world. Although
the NCAA attempts to remove sexual harassment from the conversation of Title IX, as seen in
the above analysis, it is vital we do not let this terministic screen continue. Otherwise, education,
awareness, and policy against sexual harassment between coaches and players will never
improve.
100
Chapter 8: The Danger of a Single Story
As discussed, the control over the Title IX and gender equity conversation the NCAA
has, allows them to build a specific perception and terministic screen for audience members to
understand Title IX. It creates new meaning of Title IX and mystery around other aspects of Title
IX, such as its application to sexual harassment. Throughout the entire timeline, the NCAA
referenced sexual harassment only twice. Once, as a sexual harassment case against a University,
and one other mentioned at the end of a list of Title IX’s application. Yet, we know sexual
harassment is a big gender equity issue. As noted previously, one in four collegiate athletes
experience sexual harassment from an authority figure, found in a 2021 survey of 1,500 college-
educated athletes (men and women) under the age of 45 conducted by Lauren’s Kids Foundation
in cooperation with attorneys Ben Crump and Richard Schulte. Yet, the NCAA consistently
chooses not to communicate about sexual harassment when highlighting Title IX. Along with the
lack of conversation on the timeline, the NCAA also never mentions sexual harassment in
connection to Title IX in their social media. This includes over 80 posts and over 30 stories, none
are about sexual harassment, found on the NCAA’s Instagram (@ncaa). This is the effect of their
power, “...power is created and reinforced when activities, routines, and belief systems are
replicated in other times and places” (Faber 120). The continuous lack of sexual harassment
dialogue reinforces the NCAA’s power to control the narrative regarding Title IX.
Without the conversation on sexual harassment, the NCAA’s narrative of Title IX
becomes about women’s opportunities in athletics, resource allocation to women's athlete
programs, and the overall success of women in athletics. When Title IX becomes only connected
to these items, it limits the audience's perception of its application as a whole. The repetition of
Title IX’s connection only to women’s athletic opportunities and success creates meaning for the
101
audience to understand the scope of Title IX, even if it is limited. This allows the NCAA to
continue to highlight Title IX as it pertains to women’s athletic successes because the NCAA
wants to be connected to those successes. As previously noted, the NCAA has a monetary stake
in women’s athletics, so they want to continue to encourage the progress of women’s athletic
successes. In addition, the NCAA’s reframing of Title IX means it is easier for them to choose
not to communicate about sexual harassment. Since the NCAA does not mention sexual
harassment protections for student-athletes in their Title IX communications, the audience does
not even question this application to athletics. When it previously was questioned, the NCAA
quickly silenced the conversation.
Previously, we had discussed mystery. Mystery applies to large audiences and a larger
scale or idea. A mystery is created and sustained through stories and constructions of reality.
When ideas and conversations are dismissed or not even mentioned, mystery begins to form. As
seen, the NCAA positions themselves in alignment with Title IX, if and only if Title IX is solely
applied to women’s success in sports and resources the NCAA can provide to women. If the
NCAA were to highlight Title IX’s application and relation to sexual assault, it would begin to
question if they are liable to legal ramifications for coaches who sexually harass players. Since
this would be detrimental to the NCAA’s monetary success, and they in their current state have
no policy or rules regarding sexual harassment, the NCAA creates a mystery around Title IX’s
application to sexual harassment. However, mystery is not the only tool used by the NCAA to
position themselves, they also use silence.
Silence is not at the large systemic scale mystery is, silence applies to individuals. Silence
is not just the absence of words, but “all silence has meaning” (Glenn 11). In Cheryl Glenn’s
book, Unspoken: A Rhetoric Of Silence, she explains how in our Western culture, speech is
102
directly related to power. Those who speak more are perceived as having more authority and say
in society. Throughout the book Glenn expresses how silence can be interpreted by the public,
but also how it can be utilized as a rhetorical device. Glen notes, “Those silenced by power -
whether overt or covert - are not people without anything to say but are people without a public
voice and space in which to say it” (Glenn 10). Power and silence work hand-in-hand, both are
rhetorical tools used against student-athletes. When three student-athletes brought the lawsuit
against the NCAA for their negligence in sexual harassment by a coach, the NCAA silenced the
athletes. They responded by noting they were not legally liable under Title IX, and the case was
thrown out. This demonstrates the NCAA’s choices in when and how they align with Title IX
applications. They choose to stop any conversation around sexual harassment and assault,
including silencing sexual harassment cases. Since the case is quickly thrown out, it does not
gain media attention except for brave athletes who tell their stories. Yet, without the same power
and platform of the NCAA, the student-athlete's stories only reach a small audience. This
continues the single narrative of NCAA and Title IX only as it relates and applies to women’s
athletic success.
Continuing a single narrative of Title IX feeds into binary thinking, something we, as
rhetoricians try to break away from. In my freshman year of college, I was shown a TedTalk that
would shape not only my love for communications but continue to be my inspiration for my
experience as a rhetorician. The TedTalk was Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s, “The Danger of a
Single Story”. Throughout her speech, Adichie describes what may very well be every critic’s
and rhetorician's goal, to discover all stories of a person or situation. When I first saw the
NCAA’s media campaign on Title IX, it felt like a single story. Yet, I had personal stories,
second-hand stories, and uncovered articles all relaying other stories of Title IX and the failure of
103
the NCAA in upholding their mission to “foster life-long well-being” (NCAA “Overview”). This
did not align with their celebration of Title IX and the meaning they constructed of Title IX.
According to Adichie, “...that is how to create a single story, show a people as one thing, as only
one thing, over and over again, and that is what they become” (The Danger of a Single Story).
The NCAA repeats their story of Title IX through the use of the Title IX logo, the 50th-year
anniversary social media campaign, the website, and the timeline. This, as noted by Adichie, are
the repetitive steps the NCAA takes to create a single story. This story is reinforced by their
website's commitments to athletes well-being and policies. However, when we dig deeper at
what actions the NCAA takes in their efforts to protect student-athletes, we only find the sexual
violence policy. This policy maintains the distance between the NCAA’s liability to Title IX. It
puts all of the work onto member schools to monitor student-athlete Title IX compliance. The
policy also never mentions coach regulations or repercussions regarding sexual harassment
(NCAA “Policy on Campus Sexual Violence”).
In the lawsuit brought against the coach, Rembao, the student-athletes were all from
different schools. The students had filed Title IX complaints against the coach, but before the
Title IX investigations could be completed the coach moved to a new school. This allowed the
coach to remain in contact with other student-athletes and continue to sexually harass students
(Thomas). This is not the only case where this has happened, in my experience assistant coaches
have been under investigation and still allowed to coach elsewhere. The NCAA, without
repercussion or monitoring, allows coaches with sexual harassment history to jump from school
to school. This creates a continuation of unsafe circumstances for student-athletes. Yet, the
NCAA continues to claim they care for the life-long well-being of student-athletes. If this were
accurate, the NCAA would work to protect student-athletes from sexual harassment by staff
104
members, provide complete and honest stories of Title IX and gender equity, and not utilize
positioning tactics to remain not liable to any legal repercussions. However, the NCAA has
utilized positioning to seem as though they are gender equitable while removing themselves from
legal liability when they are negligent to or directly discriminatory based on gender.
The NCAA communicates information on Title IX only when they want to highlight it
through their social media, website, and timeline. The information they communicate on Title IX
pertains to women’s opportunities in athletics, current women’s success in athletics, and other
NCAA-related gender equity work. The NCAA communicates this to create a new reality and
terministic screen for the audience to understand Title IX through, as well as to maintain their
credibility as a gender-equitable organization. There are multiple interpretations of the NCAA’s
motivation for this communication and these tactics. Due to their revenue, scope, and former
responses to lawsuits, my hypothesis remains the NCAA’s motivation is for positioning. Thus,
the NCAA remains not liable to Title IX nor do they face any other repercussions to sexual
harassment cases. Through the look at the symbolic meaning of the Title IX logo and the
pentadic analysis of the timeline, what and how the NCAA communicates about Title IX is
further explored. The pentadic analysis also gives a deeper understanding of the NCAA’s
purpose and motivation for their communications on Title IX. By examining what the NCAA
communicates, what they leave as a mystery, and what they silence, we are better able to
understand how the NCAA wants to be connected to Title IX and how they do not want to be
connected or liable to Title IX.
As a critic and rhetorician, it is important to look at all possible meanings and
interpretations of a text(s). To label any of the NCAA’s communications as “good” or “bad”
regarding Title IX would be against the purpose of this study. Rather, the purpose was to further
105
unearth the meaning that can be drawn from the NCAA’s communications on Title IX and
sexual harassment, as well as the motivations behind the communication or lack thereof. When
we dismantle a single story, we are shedding light on another story, not negating the story that
already exists. Although the NCAA presents a single story of Title IX, it is still a story to be told.
As rhetoricians, we ask the NCAA to present all stories of Title IX, including sexual harassment,
without the motivation of self-preservation. Presenting all stories breaks away from binaries, and
allows others to share their stories. Many of these stories need to be heard because 1 in 4 student-
athletes experience sexual harassment and many of the perpetrators continue to harass student-
athletes. When we expand the narrative, we provide a platform for sexual harassment to be in the
conversation. This leads to more productive conversations on student-athlete safety and ways to
enact true policy to prevent sexual harassment by coaches or staff. If we share all stories, change
can start, and the little girl who dreamed of being a college athlete won’t have to fear for her
safety once she gets there.
106
Works Cited
“50 Years, 50 Moments: Tracing Title IX’s Impact on Women’s Sports over Its First Half
Century.” Sports Business Journal, Sports Business Journal, 20 June 2022,
www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2022/06/20/In-Depth/Timeline.aspx.
Aristotle, and Edward Corbett. The Rhetoric and the Poetics of Aristotle. Translated by W. Rhys
Roberts and Ingram Bywater, Modern Library, 1954.
Austin, Montheith, and Micah Friez. “Players: We Warned Bemidji State of Softball
Coach's Inappropriate Behavior.” MPR News, MPR News, 25 July 2019,
www.mprnews.org/story/2019/07/25/players-we-warned-bemidji-state-of-softball-
coachs-inappropriate-behavior.
Babin, Janet. “Title IX and the Bush Administration.” NPR, 10 Jan. 2003,
www.npr.org/2003/01/10/913282/title-ix-and-the-bush-administration.
Bell, Richard C. “A History of Women in Sport Prior to Title IX.” The Sports Journal, 2008.
Big Vape: The Rise and Fall of Juul. Directed by R.J. Cutler, Amblin Television, This Machine,
Time Studio, 2023.
Blakesley, David. The Elements of Dramatism. Longman, 2002.
Book, Lauren. “College Athletes Report High Incidence of Sexual Abuse by Campus
Authority Figures, Survey Finds.” Lauren's Kids, 17 Nov. 2021, laurenskids.org/college-
athletes-report-high-incidence-of-sexual-abuse-by-campus-authority-figures-survey-
finds/.
Brummett, Barry. In Dimensions of Popular Culture. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of
Alabama Press. 1991.
“Cohen v. Brown University.” Public Justice, 19 Feb. 2021,
107
www.publicjustice.net/case_brief/cohen-v-brown-university/.
Department of Education. “The Federal Register.” Federal Register : The Daily Journal of the
United States Government, May 2020,
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/05/19/2020-10512/nondiscrimination-on-the-
basis-of-sex-in-education-programs-or-activities-receiving-federal#p-452.
Faber, Brenton D. Community Action and Organizational Change: Image, Narrative,
Identity. Southern Illinois University Press, 2002.
Festle, M.J. Playing nice: Politics and apologies in women’s sports. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1996.
Figure 2. Semantic Triangle from C. K. Ogden et al.; The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the
Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism.
Routledge/Thoemmes, 1994.
Figure 5. TodayShow. “Billie Jean King Recalls What Bobby Riggs Told Her after Their
Historic ‘Battle of the Sexes’ Match.” TODAY.Com, TODAY, 25 Aug. 2023,
www.today.com/news/sports/billie-jean-king-bobby-riggs-battle-sexes-match-rcna101765.
Foss, Sonja K., et al. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. Waveland Press, Inc, 2014.
Gough, Christina. “College Sports (NCAA) - Statistics & Facts.” Statista, 2022,
www.statista.com/topics/1436/college-sports-ncaa/#topicOverview.
Glenn, Cheryl. Unspoken: A Rhetoric of Silence. Southern Illinois University Press, 2004.
Griffin, Emory A., et al. A First Look at Communication Theory. McGraw Hill, 2023.
Heiss, Sarah N. “A ‘Naturally Sweet’ Definition: An Analysis of the Sugar Association’s
Definition of the Natural as a Terministic Screen.” Health Communication, vol. 30, no. 6,
2014, pp. 536-544.
108
Kaufer, David S., and Brian S. Butler. Rhetoric and the Arts of Design. Routledge, Taylor &
Francis Group, 2010.
Kaplan Hecker & Fink. “Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLC.” www.kaplanhecker.com, New York,
2021.
Litsky, Frank. “Bush Administration Says Title IX Should Stay as It Is.” The New York Times,
The New York Times, 12 July 2003, www.nytimes.com/2003/07/12/sports/colleges-bush-
administration-says-title-ix-should-stay-as-it-is.html.
Meyer, John. “Seeking organizational unity: Building bridges in response to Mystery.” Southern
Communication Journal, vol. 61, no. 3, 1996, pp. 210–219,
https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949609373016.
NCAA [@ncaa]. Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/ncaa/
NCAA. “Gender Equity and Title IX.” NCAA.Org, 2016, www.ncaa.org/sports/2016/3/2/gender-
equity-and-title-ix.aspx.
NCAA. “History” NCAA.org, 2021, https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/5/4/history.aspx.
NCAA. “NCAA Association-Wide Policy on Campus Sexual Violence Annual Attestation.”
NCAA.Org, 2022,
ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ssi/violence/202223NCAAAW_SVPAttestationFormandInst
ructions.pdf.
NCAA. “Overview.” NCAA.org, 2023, www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/2/16/overview.aspx.
NCAA. “Policy on Campus Sexual Violence.” NCAA.org, Pdf, NCAA Board of Governors,
Aug. 2017,
ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ssi/violence/NCAA_CampusSexualViolencePolicy.pdf.
109
NCAA. “Title IX at 50 Years.” NCAA.Org, 2023, www.ncaa.org/sports/2017/6/19/title-ix-at-50-
years.aspx.
NCAA. “Title IX at 50 Timeline Now Open at NCAA Hall of Champions.” NCAA.Org, 12 Apr.
2022, www.ncaa.org/news/2022/4/12/media-center-title-ix-at-50-timeline-now-open-at-
ncaa-hall-of-champions.aspx.
NCAA. “Theodore Roosevelt Award.” NCAA.Org, 2013,
www.ncaa.org/sports/2013/12/9/theodore-roosevelt-
award.aspx#:~:text=The%20%E2%80%9CTeddy%E2%80%9D%20is%20presented%20a
nnually%20to%20a%20distinguished,athletics%20award%2C%20or%20participated%20i
n%20competitive%20intercollegiate%20athletics.
NCAA. “What You May Not Know about Title IX and Athletics.” NCAA.Org, 2022,
ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/inclusion/titleix/INC_TitleIXMembershipShowcase.pdf.
Plato, and D. J. Allan. Republic. Bristol Classical Press, 1993.
Rothwell, J. Dan. In the Company of Others: An Introduction to Communication. Fifth ed.,
Oxford University Press, 2016.
“Tedtalks: Chimamanda Adichie--the Danger of a Single Story.” Performance by Chimamanda
Ngozi Adichie, The Danger of a Single Story, TEDGlobal, 2009,
https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story/tran
script. Accessed 2023.
Thomas, Summer-Solstice. “It Could Have Been Me: The NCAA Must Do More to Protect
Student-Athletes from Sexual Abuse.” Fortune, 2021,
https://fortune.com/2021/11/03/ncaa-sexual-abuse-student-athletes/. Accessed 2023.
110
United States Court of Appeals. Alexander v. Yale. 2016, https://clearinghouse.net/case/12614/.
Accessed 2023.
Wallock, Roy M. “How Bobbi Gibb Changed Women’s Running, and Finally Got Credit for It.”
ESPN, 2016, https://www.espn.com/sports/endurance/story/_/id/15090507/endurance-
sports-bobbi-gibb-first-woman-run-boston-marathon. Accessed 2023.
