ABSTRACT
Throughout the twentieth century, sporting goods manufacturers shaped American perceptions of tackle football’s physical risks, especially regarding traumatic brain injuries. Equipment advertisements and manufacturers’ responses to product liability cases were particularly influential, in sometimes contradictory ways. In promotional material, manufacturers sought to portray football as sufficiently risky to require extensive protective gear, but not so dangerous as to be inappropriate for children. Advertisements associated equipment with desirable social values for boys and conveyed that protective helmets and pads were effective in mitigating risks. Yet in defending themselves against lawsuits, manufacturers emphasized the lack of relationship between their products and specific football injuries. Manufacturers further argued that coaches, parents, and children should take individual responsibility for preventing injuries because they had voluntarily chosen to assume the risks of the sport. They threatened that lawsuits would doom football by rendering sports equipment manufacturing and insurance prohibitively costly. Ultimately, manufacturers largely succeeded in framing the issue of football safety as a matter of individual responsibility, while presenting protective equipment as necessary and sufficient to address safety concerns. Developed over decades, this framework continues to influence youth football and American ideas about risk, masculinity, and concussions.
