> I believe that sports have the unique ability to unite people from different backgrounds and beliefs, without requiring them to compromise their values. While

> I believe that sports have the unique ability to unite people from different backgrounds and beliefs, without requiring them to compromise their values. While it may be tempting for athletes to use their platform to advocate for their causes, doing so will mostly divide rather than unite people. “You’re being paid to dance, so dance. Nobody wants to hear what else you have to say.” If a person has been put on a pedestal because something they do brings them to the public’s attention, even with the help of some private organization, it’s their pedestal to make use of. If you’re an F1 driver with a megaphone, you get to be heard. That’s how it works right now. F1 is a private organization, so they make the rules which govern the sport, and that’s fine. The rules listed in the article appear to be limited to what drivers can do during races/events. That’s up to them. Any attempt to quash the personal speech of drivers outside of those events should be aggressively struck down. They can always remove the driver by putting out a statement: “what X said will divide rather than unite people.” The driver can choose to put their career on the line by standing up for what they believe in. This has always been the case.