Stay Connected
Atlanta Black Star/Entertainment
EntertainmentSports

Colin Kaepernick Fires Back at Michael Vick, Leading Ex-Falcon to Clarify His Remarks

Posted byBy Kiersten Willis | Published on: CommentsComments (0)

Colin Kaepernick (center) is at the heart of a discussion involving Jason Whitlock (left) and Michael Vick about why he hasn’t been signed to a new team. (FS1 screenshot/Scott Cunningham/Getty Images Sport/Wikimedia Commons)

 

Colin Kaepernick seems to think Michael Vick’s suggestion that he cut his hair is an indication the former Atlanta Falcon quarterback suffers from Stockholm syndrome and that idea has Jason Whitlock fired up.

The free-agent quarterback posted the definition of the condition on Tuesday, July 18, following Vick’s Monday appearance on FS1’s “Speak For Yourself,” co-hosted by Whitlock.

According to Kaepernick’s screenshot, Stockholm syndrome “usually happens because the victim sees the smallest act of decent behavior as an extracted event which makes them see their captors as essentially good.”

“We’ve got to get Colin to do is cut his hair,” Vick said of Kaepernick getting rid of his afro on “Speak For Yourself” Monday, July 17. “Even if he puts cornrows in there. I don’t think he should represent himself in that way in terms of just the hairstyle. Just go clean-cut.”

Many applauded Kaepernick’s subtweet.

Meanwhile, Vick responded by clarifying his remarks and said he was not being malicious.

But one person who wasn’t a fan of the subtweet was Whitlock.

“It’s needlessly adversarial,” the “Speak For Yourself” co-host says Tuesday. “It’s ‘I’m putting my fingers in my ear and anybody that criticizes me or gives me any advice I don’t like, they’re idiots and they’re sellouts and they’re captors of the white man.’

“Maybe the dude that was raised by a lovely white couple, maybe he’s got Stockholm syndrome,” Whitlock adds. “Maybe he’s the one whose been captured and brainwashed.”

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.

Give once Give monthly Support another way

Related Stories

Back to top