Does Basketball Wives Exploit Athletes And Black Women?

Question: Does “Basketball Wives” exploit athletes and the black women they’re linked to? According to Gilbert Arenas and his attorney, “Basketball Wives” is exploiting “his name and image without his permission.”

Gilbert Arenas is the father to Laura Govan’s four children – the two have had a messy break-up and continue to bicker over their children. Laura Govan wants to share her story on Basketball Wives: LA, Gilbert says not on my name.

According to Court House News, “Basketball Wives” is not protected by the right to free expression, Arenas says: “Defendants are not ‘expressing’ anything other than their attempt to profit from plaintiff’s fame.” So Gilbert is suing Shed Media and Laura Govan for trademark infringement, false advertising, misappropriation of his likeness and publicity rights, and unfair competition.

He makes a fair case, no? Shaunie O’Neal, one of the executive producers of the growing franchise provided some insight on the shows potrayal of black women. Shaunie tells CNN she agrees “that the shows portrayal of black women is beginning to look somewhat negative.” But credits it to “when you put a group of strong, independent and vocal women who are going through or just came out of a bad relationship together, there’s bound to be a little drama.”

Not to worry, Shaunie knows there are other shows that portray a more positive image of black women like “Tiny & Toya” and “Monica: Still Standing.” Shaunie’s is plainly stating there are other shows that portray black women in a more positive light and “Basketball Wives” isn’t one of them….yet.

Shaunie concludes that she’s personally working with Shed Media to “strike a balance and have a positive message despite the drama.”

So there you have it…in the end do you think Basketball Wives exploit the athletes and portray black women in a negative light?

Still independent.

We hope this story was worth your time. For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed Black-owned and independently run. We didn't get here by waiting on ad budgets that were never built to prioritize us. Our readers did that.

Corporate support for Black media has always been thin. Outlets like ours get roughly 1% of the $170 billion spent on U.S. advertising each year, and that margin is shrinking further as advertisers walk back the DEI-linked commitments they made in 2020. That's the backdrop. It's not why we're asking.

The wider picture isn't any steadier. Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under, it's rarely the ones built to center a Black perspective from the ground up that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top