On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations held a hearing with PGA Tour representatives to discuss the PGA Tour’s framework agreement with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) and how it would affect the future of golf.
Among the topics discussed was a non-disparagement clause tucked within the framework agreement that could be interpreted as an attempt to prevent the PGA Tour, and its players by extension, from saying anything critical of Saudi Arabia.
Each party agrees and covenants that it will not at any time, directly or indirectly, make, publish or communicate to any person or entity or in any public forum any defamatory or disparaging remarks, comments, or statements concerning the other Party, their affiliates and ultimate beneficial owners or their respective businesses, directors, employees, officers, shareholders, members or advisors.
Though vague, the clause sheds light on the legal tactics employed by the kingdom to muzzle potential critics. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, chair of the committee, shared his concerns regarding the clause during the hearing, stating during his opening remarks that “we also don’t know what will happen to players who may want to speak out against Saudi Arabia’s human-rights abuses; they apparently are bound by the non-disparagement clause.”
In a story co-authored with Tariq Panja for The New York Times last month, I revealed the details of Lionel’s Messi’s ongoing partnership with Saudi Arabia’s tourism authority. His contract included a clause stating that Messi could not say anything that may “tarnish” Saudi Arabia, a country with an atrocious human rights record.
What was the price of Messi’s silence, you ask? Approximately $25 million.
So why is Saudi Arabia so interested in silencing sports leagues and athletes? The answer is simple: the kingdom wants to control the global narrative.
By luring some of the world’s top athletes and sports leagues, Saudi Arabia is announcing itself as an essential hub for sports, entertainment, and tourism. It is a soft power strategy that helps presents the kingdom as a reformed nation and appealing destination for individuals and businesses alike. However, this ambitious strategy is a double-edged sword: while athletes can use their platforms to promote Saudi Arabia, they can also use it to advance social issues or raise concerns about human rights abuses.
By eliminating the latter under threat of litigation, the kingdom can preemptively protect itself from potentially embarrassing situations counteractive to its political aims.
Saudi Arabia's utilization of non-disparagement clauses exposes a concerning trend regarding the kingdom’s relentless pursuit to control the narrative. By silencing critics and safeguarding its image, the kingdom's influence has the potential to reach far beyond the playing fields.
This is the true price of silence.
Among the topics discussed was a non-disparagement clause tucked within the framework agreement that could be interpreted as an attempt to prevent the PGA Tour, and its players by extension, from saying anything critical of Saudi Arabia.
Each party agrees and covenants that it will not at any time, directly or indirectly, make, publish or communicate to any person or entity or in any public forum any defamatory or disparaging remarks, comments, or statements concerning the other Party, their affiliates and ultimate beneficial owners or their respective businesses, directors, employees, officers, shareholders, members or advisors.
Though vague, the clause sheds light on the legal tactics employed by the kingdom to muzzle potential critics. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, chair of the committee, shared his concerns regarding the clause during the hearing, stating during his opening remarks that “we also don’t know what will happen to players who may want to speak out against Saudi Arabia’s human-rights abuses; they apparently are bound by the non-disparagement clause.”
In a story co-authored with Tariq Panja for The New York Times last month, I revealed the details of Lionel’s Messi’s ongoing partnership with Saudi Arabia’s tourism authority. His contract included a clause stating that Messi could not say anything that may “tarnish” Saudi Arabia, a country with an atrocious human rights record.
What was the price of Messi’s silence, you ask? Approximately $25 million.
So why is Saudi Arabia so interested in silencing sports leagues and athletes? The answer is simple: the kingdom wants to control the global narrative.
By luring some of the world’s top athletes and sports leagues, Saudi Arabia is announcing itself as an essential hub for sports, entertainment, and tourism. It is a soft power strategy that helps presents the kingdom as a reformed nation and appealing destination for individuals and businesses alike. However, this ambitious strategy is a double-edged sword: while athletes can use their platforms to promote Saudi Arabia, they can also use it to advance social issues or raise concerns about human rights abuses.
By eliminating the latter under threat of litigation, the kingdom can preemptively protect itself from potentially embarrassing situations counteractive to its political aims.
Saudi Arabia's utilization of non-disparagement clauses exposes a concerning trend regarding the kingdom’s relentless pursuit to control the narrative. By silencing critics and safeguarding its image, the kingdom's influence has the potential to reach far beyond the playing fields.
This is the true price of silence.
