Mbappé Controversy Reveals Beijing’s Long History of Censoring Athletes

Commentary

The controversy surrounding French soccer star Kylian Mbappé has revived a familiar question for elite sports and athletes: How far must athletes and companies go to protect their commercial interests in China, particularly when their public statements conflict with Beijing’s political sensitivities?

Mbappé’s reference to former Chinese leader Mao Zedong as a dictator prompted a slew of Chinese companies to terminate their sponsorship agreements with him and broadcasters to suspend coverage of his matches. Facing mounting backlash, the French soccer star issued a public apology on Oct. 27.

But the fallout is hardly unprecedented. Over the past decade, disputes involving the NBA, European soccer stars, and other international athletes have exposed the financial consequences of crossing political boundaries set by Beijing.

RELATED: CCP Censors Kylian Mbappé Over Viral Mao ‘Dictator’ Meme

A recurring pattern

For the best of our weekly content！

You are now signed up for our newsletter

Check your email to complete sign up

In October 2019, then-Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey posted an image supporting Hong Kong’s pro-democracy demonstrations. The message read, “Fight for Freedom. Stand with Hong Kong.” The reaction was immediate. Soon after, the Chinese Basketball Association suspended cooperation with the Rockets, sponsors withdrew support, and Chinese broadcasters halted coverage of the team.

Morey later clarified his remarks, while the NBA sought to contain the damage to its relationship with one of its most important international markets. But Chinese state television went on to suspend NBA broadcasts for an extended period. The dispute demonstrated how a single social media post could threaten lucrative commercial arrangements involving an entire professional sports league.

Two months later, German soccer star Mesut Özil faced similar consequences after criticizing China’s treatment of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang. Likewise, in December 2019, China’s state broadcaster CCTV removed Arsenal’s Premier League match against Manchester City from its schedule. Arsenal distanced itself from Özil’s statements, emphasizing that the club remained politically neutral.

In response, Chinese officials rejected his criticism despite human rights organizations documenting mass detention and restrictions on religious and cultural practices in China’s remote Xinjiang region. The incident showcased how consequences could extend beyond the athlete making the remarks, affecting teammates, clubs, and broadcast partners.

The cost of speaking out

Former NBA player Enes Kanter Freedom became another prominent figure in the dispute over political expression in professional sports. In October 2021, Kanter criticized Chinese leader Xi Jinping and expressed support for Tibetan rights, including wearing basketball shoes bearing the words “Free Tibet.”

RELATED: ‘We’ve Heard Enough’: Kanter Freedom Demands Action Against the CCP

As a result, Chinese streaming service Tencent removed Boston Celtics games from its platforms. But Kanter has continued to point out Beijing’s human rights record, including its policies toward Uyghurs and Tibetans. He has since argued that his activism effectively ended his professional basketball career.

Following Mbappé’s apology, Kanter Freedom expressed disappointment while acknowledging the commercial pressures facing high-profile athletes. His experience raises a wider concern: Whether athletes who speak publicly about human rights can realistically separate their personal views from the financial interests of the teams and organizations employing them.

Criticism seen as blanket accusations

A common feature of these controversies is the accusation that criticism of Chinese political figures or government policies constitutes an insult to China or its people. The distinction is significant.

Mbappé’s remark concerned a historical political leader, not the Chinese population. His reference originated from an internet meme portraying him as an authoritarian figure because of his perceived influence within professional soccer. Yet Chinese companies and media treated the comment as an offense requiring a public apology.

The Associated Press (AP) reported that the controversy also involved restrictions on Mbappé’s social media presence and the suspension of Spanish league broadcasts. Such responses can create an incentive for international organizations to avoid politically sensitive subjects altogether, even when the speech occurs outside China.

The commercial implications are substantial. Companies seeking access to China’s consumer market must weigh potential financial losses against their willingness to defend employees, athletes, or representatives who express controversial political views.

However, these cases do not establish that every corporate decision was directly ordered by Chinese authorities. Commercial partners may independently respond to public criticism, anticipated consumer boycotts, or concerns about government relations.

The boundaries of political speech

Mbappé’s controversy also highlights the sensitivity surrounding Mao Zedong’s historical legacy. Though Mao remains a central symbol of the Chinese Communist Party’s legitimacy, his leadership was marked by devastating political campaigns, including the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Historians estimate that tens of millions died during the Great Famine associated with the Great Leap Forward. The Cultural Revolution also led to widespread persecution, violence, and social upheaval.

The U.S. House Select Committee on the CCP responded to Mbappé’s apology by defending his characterization of Mao. “Mao was a dictator, and by orders of magnitude, he did more harm to the Chinese people than a comment from a soccer player ever could,” the committee stated on Oct. 27.

The committee also criticized companies willing to compromise on free expression to protect their business interests in China. For elite athletes and sports organizations, Mbappé’s experience is another reminder that even an offhand remark can carry serious financial consequences when it crosses Beijing’s political red lines.