Business

Congress eyes college sports fixes. Are student-athletes on board? on August 26, 2023 at 10:00 am Business News | The Hill

Published

3 years ago

August 26, 2023

If lawmakers have their way, change is afoot in college sports.

After the Supreme Court in 2021 opened the floodgates for money into college sports, Congress appears ready to impose guardrails on universities and force transparency around deals that are making some student-athletes rich.

But it’s unclear how much these changes will benefit the more than half-a-million student athletes competing in NCAA championship sports.

“There’s so much money in collegiate sports, but the voice and the well being of the athlete has historically not been taken into account,” Nicole Goot, a synchronized swimmer for Stanford, told The Hill.

The Supreme Court decision for the first time allowed college athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness, opening the way for multi-million “NIL deals” for some of the star players at major schools. But the benefits aren’t being felt by the vast majority of NCAA athletes.

“Under the mask of NIL, the idea that athletes are being better supported is beginning to exist, but the realities of that support aren’t being actualized,” Goot said.

Goot was among seven current and former Division 1 student-athletes who spoke to The Hill in recent weeks about their own experiences with NIL and what they would like to see from federal legislation.

They agreed with the thrust of much of the legislation aiming to prevent recruiting from becoming a bidding war among a few powerhouse universities.

“If the school is offering a million to get me there and I need that money, I’m going to go there over a school that might be a better degree because I’m setting myself up for success,” Goot said.

“I’m worried that that’s going to completely reshape collegiate athletics, because it becomes less about talent, team, culture, community and becomes more about who has the most money and most connections.”

But the student-athletes disagreed with other proposals, such as one from Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), a former Auburn football coach, to restrict transfers before three years of eligibility.

And they want to see Congress put the onus on universities to provide their student-athletes with the education, resources, health care, and financial aid guarantees to succeed during and after college — regardless of whether they are benefiting directly from NIL deals.

Reining in recruiting

Recruiting inducements such as direct payments or promises of profit are technically prohibited by the NCAA’s interim NIL policy — imposed after the Supreme Court decision — and would be explicitly outlawed in each bill.

But there are widespread questions about enforcement.

“They can say don’t do it. But already there’s a rule that says, ‘Don’t do it,’ and it’s being violated. What does adding this law do that really help the situation get better?” said Boston College law professor Alfred Yen. “The answer to that depends entirely on its enforcement.”

One recent case of punishment for inducement involved Florida International University’s women’s soccer and softball programs, which included a $5,000 fine and suspensions for those involved.

Perhaps the highest-profile punishment of late was doled out to the University of Tennessee’s football program in July following more than 200 violations of recruiting rules and direct payments to prospects.

The program was fined $8 million, put on five years of probation, and will be subject to an annual compliance review by an external group, among other punishments.

However, experts and athletes say the problem is still widespread. Yet no one had an answer to what would deter agents, boosters, or third parties from inducing recruitment.

Though each bill explicitly prohibits such inducements and some create a new entity outside of the NCAA to investigate and enforce the prohibition, both the punishments and methods of enforcement remain unclear.

However, simply having the prohibition as a federal law could act as a deterrent, said Bryce Choate, one of three student-athlete representatives on the NCAA Board of Governors.

UC Berkeley gymnast Elise Byun, who represents the Pac-12 Conference on the Division I NCAA Student Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC), said SAAC has proposed that Congress require every student-athlete to disclose the contracts they enter into, creating transparency around the NIL marketplace. Each bill includes this requirement but under different time restrictions, and no punishment is outlined for missing the deadline.

Though not directly related to inducements, Elise said the SAAC also discussed whether narrowing the transfer portal – which allows students to transfer from school to school during a specified period of time postseason — will deter last-minute transfer deals related to NIL money.

Tweaking the transfer portal

Manchin and Tuberville propose forcing players to sit out a season if they transfer before three seasons with their initial team.

Choate called the proposal “ridiculous.”

“I would be surprised if that goes through,” Choate said. “If it does, we have a legislature that doesn’t care.”

University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) volleyball player Tatum DeMann’s initial reaction to the potential change was similar, noting how transferring can sometimes be crucial for a students’ mental and physical health.

“If you’re just not right for a program, then you’re not right for a program,” DeMann said.

Erin Morley, an incoming freshman who will row for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), saw a benefit to limiting transfers motivated by money.

“When NIL deals come into the equation, sports kind of take a backseat and the money and the fame kind of take the driver’s side,” Morley said.

Search for equity

According to University of Iowa track and field runner Armando Bryson, the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) has been focusing its discussions on transparency and equity.

That includes a streamlined process to vet and register agents, boosters, collectives, and third parties that will be entering into NIL deals with students.

Bryson said student-athletes should have to disclose the types of deals signed, the annual activities performed, and other components it entails — something that each bill requires, to a certain extent.

On the equity front, Bryson noted that not all sports have the same opportunity to enter into NIL deals. And even in sports that are huge money-makers, not all positions are lucrative.

Washington Commanders offensive lineman Chris Paul recalled that it was hard for him to access NIL deals at University of Tulsa because of his relatively low visibility. And that hasn’t changed at the professional level.

“(My position) is just not a position that most people pay attention to unless something goes wrong,” Paul said. “I have played the same position my whole life so I’ve never been in a position where brand deals are just being thrown to me.”

While these inequities are unlikely to change, legislators are looking to level the playing field in other ways.

Covering health care and injuries

For example, two of the bills would require institutions making more than $20 million annually from athletics to contribute to a fund or pay for student-athletes’ injury-related out-of-pocket medical expenses.

This would be “a wonderful plus” according to Morley, the incoming UNC rower.

“They [athletes] are putting a lot of time and effort, and honestly risk, into the sport that they’re competing in for the school,” Morley told The Hill.

When University of Tennessee basketball player Tamari Key was diagnosed with a pulmonary embolism—blood clots in the arteries that send blood to the lungs—her university-provided insurance took care of her medical expenses.

“I know not a lot of athletes feel as though they’re taking care of health-wise when they’re not eligible or available to play,” Key told The Hill. “But I had all my doctor’s appointments, I had physical therapy, everyone was really hands-on, even from the mental health side of things as well.”

According to Choate, the NCAA adopted new rules for D1 schools in March that will require schools to cover out-of-pocket costs for sports-related injuries, among other provisions, beginning in August 2024.

Last Wednesday, the NCAA also announced it will provide member schools with injury insurance coverage for student-athletes for two years after they are no longer eligible to play.

Safeguarding scholarships

One of the bills also proposes guaranteed tuition aid for athletes. The act stipulates that financial aid for a student’s education cannot be terminated under circumstances, like if a player sustains a career ending injury or is cut from the team.

DeMann, the UPenn volleyball player, was in full support of this measure despite not being able to benefit from it as UPenn is part of the Ivy League conference, which prohibits athletic scholarships on account of their “commitment to academic excellence.”

“I think under the condition that a student isn’t feeling like their sports are serving them anymore, like for their mental health, they shouldn’t be scared of losing their ability to attend a school financially because of that,” DeMann told The Hill.

Choate echoed DeMann’s sentiments, underscoring the importance of mental health.

“I can say from my time, if I was able to take a month off or a week off or a few practices off to focus on my mental athlete and I knew my scholarship wasn’t going to be threatened, I might have taken it,” Choate said. “But right now, that’s not a guarantee so our student athletes aren’t taking care of their mental health like they could be because if they take time off… some coaches would probably punish them.”

However, law professor Yen said schools may not be as receptive to the idea.

“I don’t think that NCAA institutions are in Congress saying, ‘Please force us to extend medical benefits to our athletes,’” Yen told The Hill. “I actually rather suspect that there would be objection to those provisions should any of these bills seriously come up for consideration.”

Financial literacy

Some of the bills also grapple with helping students understand how NIL deals work and what to do with the money they receive. One would require students to take classes on financial literacy and life skills, which was met with mixed reactions from different athletes.

Byun, the Berkely gymnast, said some student-athletes aren’t aware they have to pay taxes on the money they receive from NIL deals. However, she said that mandating more classes would add unnecessary work into the already packed schedules of student-athletes.

“Grouping all athletes into a category of needing classes and needing education on this and that when the general public isn’t required is slightly unfair, considering we already have a very beefy and built up schedule,” Morley said.

According to Key, her team has found other ways to increase their financial literacy. First Horizon Bank, one of the team’s corporate sponsors, comes to campus every year to teach the team about taxes, saving money and opens free accounts specifically for NIL revenue.

Goot said programs could also help the situation by embracing NIL deals, so that players don’t feel judges when they sign on.

“(Success in NIL) depends a lot on the culture of your school: Is it going to be something that’s going to be celebrated like you going out and making money… or is it something that you’re going to be judged for?” Goot posited.

“The fear of judgment holds a lot of people back and the lack of clarity makes overcoming that fear of judgment even harder,” Goot added. “There needs to be a community of athletes that are trying to support each other, have these conversations, and make sure that people of all backgrounds have access.”

Education, Business, News, college athletes, college sports, NIL deals, scholarships, transfer portal If lawmakers have their way, change is afoot in college sports. After the Supreme Court in 2021 opened the floodgates for money into college sports, Congress appears ready to impose guardrails on universities and force transparency around deals that are making some student-athletes rich. But it’s unclear how much these changes will benefit the more…

Business

Building a 10 Million Army: One Leader’s Mission to Save Tomorrow

Published

6 days ago

May 24, 2026

Bolanle Media Staff

Sustainability is often spoken about as if it belongs only to scientists, policy experts, or environmental activists. On the Roselyn Omaka Show, Otto Cannon makes the case that it belongs to everyone. His message is both urgent and deeply human: sustainability is not just about the environment, but about creating a world where people, planet, and profit exist in balance.

Cannon’s mission is striking in its scale. He wants to build what he calls a global army of 10 million sustainability leaders—people across industries and communities who choose to think beyond short-term gains and take responsibility for the future they are helping shape.

My biggest mission is to raise a 10 million global army of sustainability leaders.

Otto’s understanding of this work did not begin in a conference room. It began in childhood, shaped by a father who taught him to see the world’s problems as personal assignments. That early influence instilled in him the belief that real leadership means stepping forward, identifying what is broken, and dedicating yourself to fixing it.

That mindset later became deeply personal. In one of the interview’s most emotional moments, Cannon shares how the death of his dog after swallowing a plastic bottle cap changed his life. What might have seemed like an isolated tragedy became, for him, a doorway into a much larger truth: waste is never just waste when it destroys ecosystems, harms wildlife, and threatens the future.

Instead of turning away, he turned pain into action. Through his work, he helped build a recycling company that processed over 10,000 tons of plastic and supported tree-planting efforts that have already reached more than 500,000 trees. His story reflects the broader idea of sustainability leadership, which is commonly framed as the integration of environmental, social, and economic responsibility into real-world decision-making.

What makes Cannon’s perspective especially compelling is the way he challenges common misconceptions. He argues that sustainability is too often boxed into environmental language alone, when in reality it applies to every sector—fashion, construction, energy, transportation, manufacturing, and beyond. This broader understanding aligns with current sustainability leadership thinking, which emphasizes systems, collaboration, and long-term value creation across sectors.

Profit should never come at the expense of people or the planet.

That belief is central to everything Cannon describes. For him, sustainability is not anti-business. It is about designing business, innovation, and progress in a way that does not leave harm behind for future generations. A solution that helps today but creates a deeper problem tomorrow, he argues, is not truly a solution at all.

This is also the thinking behind the Global Sustainability Summit and Awards in London, where Cannon brings together leaders from government, business, and civil society to share ideas, showcase innovation, and inspire action. Cross-sector collaboration is widely recognized as a core part of effective sustainability work, especially when the goal is cultural and systemic change rather than isolated projects.

The power of Cannon’s message lies in its accessibility. He is not calling only on policymakers or executives. He is speaking to creators, founders, farmers, designers, builders, and everyday professionals—anyone who has influence over materials, waste, systems, sourcing, or the choices that shape modern life.

By the end of the conversation, one image lingers: the idea that one person is a drop of water, but many drops together can become a wave. That is the future Otto Cannon is working toward—not a movement powered by one voice, but one built by millions who decide that sustainability is not optional, but necessary.

Business

GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT RETURNS FOR ITS 5TH EDITION AT THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT – HOUSE OF LORDS, PALACE OF WESTMINSTER

Published

2 weeks ago

May 16, 2026

Bolanle Media Staff

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Theme: “People, Planet, and Profit in the Age of AI and Innovation”

London, United Kingdom — The Global Sustainability Summit (GSS) is officially back for its landmark 5th Edition, continuing its legacy as one of the leading international platforms driving sustainable development, climate action, ethical investment, innovation, and global collaboration.

Convened annually at the prestigious British Parliament, House of Lords, Palace of Westminster, by Ambassador Canon Chinenem Otto, the Summit has, over the last four years, successfully fostered international dialogue and partnerships that have contributed to the advancement of global sustainability goals, the establishment of sustainability-focused ministries, departments and policy structures across national and subnational governments, and the attraction of major investors into sustainable development projects, corporations and emerging economies.

This year’s summit, themed “People, Planet, and Profit in the Age of AI and Innovation,” will explore how emerging technologies, responsible leadership, sustainable finance, innovation, and global partnerships can shape a more inclusive, resilient and environmentally conscious future.

The 5th Edition promises to be the most impactful yet, bringing together world leaders, policymakers, diplomats, investors, academics, innovators, climate experts and youth leaders from across the globe to discuss actionable solutions toward achieving a sustainable and equitable future.

Among the distinguished speakers, delegates and honorees already lined up for the Summit are:

• His Excellency Mallam AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq — Executive Governor of Kwara State, Nigeria and Chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum

• His Excellency Senator Prince Bassey Otu — Executive Governor of Cross River State, Nigeria

• Ambassador Patricia Espinosa Cantellano — Former Executive Secretary of UN Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Former Foreign Minister of Mexico

• Lord Marvin Rees, Baron Rees of Easton OBE — Member of the House of Lords, United Kingdom

• Hon. Neema K. Lugangira — Secretary-General of Women Political Leaders (WPL), Brussels and Former Member of Parliament

• Her Excellency Dr. Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah — President of the Republic of Namibia

• His Excellency Nangolo Mbumba — Former President of Namibia

• Former President of Tanzania

• Her Excellency Ambassador Professor Olufolake AbdulRazaq — First Lady of Kwara State, Nigeria and Chairperson of Nigeria Governors’ Spouses Forum

• Your Excellency Dr. Dikko Umar Radda, PhD, CON — Executive Governor of Katsina State and Chairman of the Northwest Governors Forum, Nigeria

• Hon. Sam Shafiishuna Nujoma — Governor of Khomas Region, Namibia

• H.E. Mr. Veiccoh Nghiwete — High Commissioner of the Republic of Namibia to the United Kingdom

• Her Excellency Ms. Macenje “Che Che” Mazoka — High Commissioner of Zambia to the United Kingdom

• Ms. Danielle Newman — Partner Lead, ICT, World Economic Forum

• Leanne Elliott Young — Co-founder, Institute of Digital Fashion & CommuneEast

• Ms. Chloe Russell — Producer & Presenter, Art, Science and Nature

• Professor Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger — University of Cambridge & University of Waterloo

• Dr. Alexandra R. Harrington — IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL)

• Professor Payam Akhavan — Massey College, University of Toronto

• Mr. Mallai C. E. Sathya — President, Dravida Vetri Kazhagam and International Movement for Tamil Culture Asia

The Summit will feature high-level panel discussions, strategic investment conversations, sustainability awards, policy dialogues, innovation showcases, youth engagement sessions and international networking opportunities focused on climate resilience, ethical financing, food-water-energy sustainability, circular economy, artificial intelligence, diplomacy and sustainable development.

Speaking ahead of the Summit, Convener Ambassador Canon Chinenem Otto noted:

“As the world rapidly evolves through artificial intelligence and technological innovation, we must ensure that sustainability remains people-centered, environmentally responsible and economically inclusive. The Global Sustainability Summit continues to serve as a bridge connecting governments, institutions, innovators and investors to accelerate practical sustainability solutions globally. Our fifth edition is not only a celebration of progress made over the years, but also a renewed call for global collaboration and actionable impact toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and Net Zero ambitions.”

The Global Sustainability Summit continues to position itself as a catalyst for transformative partnerships and sustainable global progress, reinforcing the urgent need for collective action toward a more resilient and sustainable future.

More announcements regarding additional speakers, partners and summit activities will be unveiled in the coming weeks.

Business

What the Michael Biopic Means for Every Indie Filmmaker

Published

3 weeks ago

May 10, 2026

Bolanle Media Staff

The Michael Jackson biopic Michael is more than celebrity drama; it is a real-time lesson in how legal decisions can quietly rewrite a story that millions of people will see. You do not need a $200M budget for the same forces—contracts, settlements, and rights issues—to shape or even erase key parts of your own work.

“The Michael Jackson Movie Is A HUGE HIT!” by Adam Does Movies, CC BY, via YouTube.

What Happened to Michael

The film Michael originally included a third act that addressed the 1993 child sexual abuse allegations and their impact on Jackson’s life and career. Trade reports say this version showed investigators at Neverland Ranch and dramatized the scandal as a turning point in the story. After cameras rolled, lawyers for the Jackson estate realized there was a clause in the settlement with accuser Jordan Chandler that barred any depiction or mention of him in a movie.

Because of that old agreement, the filmmakers had to remove all references to Chandler and rework the ending so the story stopped years earlier, in the late 1980s at Jackson’s commercial peak.

According to reporting, this meant roughly 22 days of reshoots, costing around 10–15 million dollars and pushing the total budget over 200 million.

Meanwhile, actress Kat Graham confirmed her portrayal of Diana Ross was cut for “legal considerations,” showing how likeness and approval issues can wipe out an entire character even after filming.

For audiences, the result is a movie that intentionally avoids one of the most controversial chapters of Jackson’s life, which some critics argue makes the portrait feel incomplete or selectively curated.

The Hidden Power of Contracts and Rights

The key detail in the Michael story is that a contract signed decades ago could dictate what present-day filmmakers are allowed to show. That settlement clause did not just affect the people who signed it; it effectively controlled the narrative of a big-budget film made years later. This is how legal documents become invisible co-authors: they quietly set boundaries around what your story can and cannot include.

Creators face similar invisible lines with:

Life-rights and defamation: If you dramatize real people, especially in a negative light, they can claim defamation or invasion of privacy if your portrayal is inaccurate or harmful.
Copyright and trademarks: Unlicensed music, clips, logos, or artwork can trigger copyright or trademark claims that block distribution or force expensive changes.
Distribution contracts: Some deals give distributors the right to re-edit, retitle, or repackage your work without your approval unless you negotiate otherwise.

Legal commentary warns that fictionalizing real events and people carries heightened risk because audiences tend to connect your dramatization back to actual individuals. That risk does not disappear just because you are “small” or “indie”; impact, not audience size, usually determines exposure.

Why This Matters for Indie Filmmakers and Creators

Independent filmmakers often choose the indie route precisely to maintain creative control, but they can face more risk if they skip legal planning. Common problems include unclear ownership of the script, missing music licenses, handshake agreements with collaborators, and no written permission to use locations or people’s likenesses. These are the kinds of issues that can derail distribution, block a streaming deal, or force last-minute cuts that fundamentally change your story.

Legal guides for indie filmmakers consistently emphasize a few realities:

You do not fully “own” your film unless you have clear contracts for writing, directing, producing, and underlying rights.
Unregistered or unlicensed creative elements (like music and logos) can make your project uninsurable or unattractive to distributors.
Fixing legal problems after the fact is almost always more expensive and limiting than planning for them at the beginning.

So when you watch Michael skip over certain events, you are seeing, in exaggerated form, the same forces that can shape an indie short, web series, documentary, or podcast episode.

Practical Legal Lessons You Can Apply Now

You do not need a law degree, but you do need a basic legal strategy for your creative work. Here are practical steps drawn from entertainment-law and indie-film resources:

Clarify who owns the story
- Use written agreements with co-writers, directors, and producers that state who owns the script and finished film.
- If your work is based on a real person or memoir, secure life-rights or written permission where appropriate, especially if the portrayal is sensitive.
Be intentional with real people and events
- When telling true or inspired-by-true stories, avoid making specific, negative claims about identifiable people unless they are well-documented and legally vetted.
- Change names, details, and circumstances enough that the person is not clearly identifiable if you do not have their cooperation.
Lock down music and visuals
- Use original scores, licensed tracks, or reputable libraries; never assume you can keep a song just because it is in a rough cut.
- Clear artwork, logos, and recognizable brands, or replace them with generic or custom-designed alternatives.

Protect yourself in contracts
- When signing any distribution or platform deal, read the clauses about editing, retitling, and marketing carefully; ask for limits or at least consultation rights.
- Include terms that let you reclaim rights if a partner fails to release the work, goes dark, or breaches key promises.
Document everything
- Keep organized copies of releases, licenses, and contracts; these documents are part of your project’s value and proof of your rights.
- Register your work where applicable (for example, copyright), which strengthens your ability to enforce your rights if someone copies you.

Education-focused legal resources repeatedly stress that preventative steps—basic contracts, clear permissions, and simple registrations—are far cheaper than dealing with takedowns, lawsuits, or forced rewrites later.

The Big Takeaway: Story and Law Are Connected

The Michael biopic illustrates what happens when legal obligations and creative vision collide: whole characters disappear, endings are rewritten, and the public only sees a version of the story that fits within old contracts.

As an indie filmmaker, writer, or content creator, you may not have millions at stake, but you do have something just as valuable—your voice and your ability to tell the story you meant to tell.

Understanding the legal dimensions of your work is not a distraction from creativity; it is a way of protecting it. When you know where the legal boundaries are, you can design stories that are bold, truthful, and still safe enough to reach the audiences they deserve.