Team owners should reflect Bay Area vibe

This week: the 49ers released a talented but troubled player, while making a public statement about domestic violence. The Giants faced a boycott because their owner donated to a political candidate who made racist statements.

The A’s unveiled plans for a new Oakland ballpark but the owner wasn’t available to answer any questions.

What do these things have in common? They all reflect the relationship sports teams have to their communities. The responsibility sports franchises have to be not only moneymaking businesses located in our market, but also a reflection of the community.

The bond between community and team has always been there. In recent years, it has intensified and at times been damaged because of social media. We know more now than we ever did about what is happening inside the teams, more about who owns them and what their political

leanings are, more about what unsavory activities are taking place with members of the organization.

And with that knowledge, through the use of social media, fans are able to voice their opinions. To bring pressure on teams. To hold them accountable to the community they represent.

Last weekend, the 49ers released Reuben Foster after his second arrest in less than a year for domestic violence. I fully believe that head coach Kyle Shanahan and general manager John Lynch made the decision because of their own values and their inability to trust the player to make good decisions. But in a different climate they might have chosen, once again, to keep Foster and see how the situation played out. But they knew that would create an uproar in their community. That the issue wouldn’t just go away.

I’ve covered the NFL since the early 1990s, and back then criminal incidents, domestic violence allegations, substance abuse and all sorts of bad behavior often were swept under the rug by teams. That still happens, but it’s getting harder and harder for teams to do so. Word gets out, the information circulates on social media and the pressure mounts.

It’s worth noting that Jed York, the acting team owner, was invisible through the process as he mostly has been in the past. Though the players who work for him have, at times, damaged the team’s community relationship, York has been unwilling to be publicly accountable, letting his head coach and general manager face the heat.

This week, Charlie Johnson, the principal owner of the Giants who shies away from the media, became a public target and his team the focus of a boycott, because of his donations to a Mississippi senate candidate who made racially offensive comments. Again, the public knowledge of his donation and the reaction was primarily fueled by social media.

Johnson asked for his money to be returned and some have called off the boycott, but for others in the Giants fan base, the incident has left a bad taste in their mouth. One that can’t easily be washed away.

“On the whole,” Johnson said to The Chronicle’s Henry Schulman in a rare interview, “I don’t like the idea of politics affecting anything I do with the Giants.”

On the whole, that’s probably an outdated view to have. Johnson, 85, has operated in private, letting Larry Baer — whose political sensibilities are more in line with the liberal-leaning Bay Area — act as the face of the team. The truth is that many of the majority owners of sports teams are incredibly wealthy and tend to vote Republican. But a new generation of owners, whatever their political leanings, may be more careful about their donations and public support and how those could affect the bottom line of their sports business.

At least Johnson finally spoke, and responded to the community he counts on to make him even wealthier. That is not the case with the A’s owner. John Fisher was nowhere to be seen at a news conference held this week to announce the A’s plans for a new ballpark.

No financial specifics were released and no agreements are in place. Mayor Libby Schaaf called it “a gorgeous starting line.” But the plan includes two enormous pieces of prime Oakland real estate, will require the cooperation and support of the community, and will supposedly be privately financed by Fisher (though that may require a sweetheart deal to develop the Coliseum site). Yet the man didn’t think it worth his time to show up and answer questions about how all of this might work. Team president Dave Kaval is a great guy and a good public face, but — like Baer — he doesn’t make the decisions. Like Johnson, Fisher is the man ultimately responsible. But he has never, ever, been accountable to the fan base.

In this day and age, that’s inexcusable.

Sports teams are not like other business. They don’t make widgets. They profit off love and loyalty. Here’s one view: “Fans think they own the team. They think they make a difference in the outcome of the game. So, when you own a sports franchise, you’re building a relationship, not a transaction, with your audience. You enhance that by aiming not at their wallets, but at their hearts. You always want to be audience-centric — what’s in it for them? — because they don’t want to be passengers in this interactive world. They want to be participants.”

Who said those insightful words? Warriors co-owner Peter Guber, to a publication of the UCLA Anderson School of Management where he is a visiting professor.

It’s a lesson that all teams should heed.