Lessons on posting falsehoods from the imaginary Ferrari dealership that dissed Steph Curry’s mother

A LinkedIn connection of mine recently reposted a story about Sonya Curry, the mother of the extremely talented NBA player Steph Curry. I clicked through to the original post, which had been posted by a lawyer who runs a foundation and is a visiting fellow at a major university — let’s call her “Mary” (not her real name).

Here’s a little of Mary’s post, which, to be clear, is about something that never happened:

Stephen Curry’s Mother Is Kicked Out of a Ferrari Store — What He Did Behind the Scenes Shook the Luxury World

She walked in to buy her son a Ferrari. She walked out humiliated. What Stephen Curry did next, away from the cameras, didn’t just make headlines—it changed everything. This isn’t just about a car. It’s about justice.

On a bright spring afternoon in San Francisco, salesmen in tailored suits glided across marble floors, greeting customers with practiced charm. Among the hum of whispered negotiations and admiring glances at luxury vehicles, one elegant woman stood alone—59 year old Sonya Curry! . . .

Despite her poised appearance, designer purse, and a confident demeanor that spoke of class and success, Sonya was met with skepticism. Dismissed. Ignored. And ultimately, insulted.

The sales staff subtly, but unmistakably, questioned her motives. One offered her a tour of pre-owned inventory, suggesting “something more accessible.” Another—identified only as Mr. Keller—coldly informed her they were closing early for a “private event,” despite the store being visibly open and mid-afternoon.

And when Sonya calmly stated her reason for being there—to purchase a Ferrari Roma for her son, Stephen Curry—the response was chilling:

“We’d appreciate if you didn’t invent celebrity connections. We’re very busy with serious customers today.”

Stunned but dignified, Sonya left in silence.

But she wasn’t alone for long.

Within hours, her son—one of the most recognisable athletes on the planet—had been informed. And what Steph did next didn’t involve shouting. He didn’t blast the dealership on Instagram. He didn’t threaten lawsuits or call in PR teams.

He did something far more powerful.

In collaboration with civil rights lawyers, brand strategists, and executives at Under Armour—his most powerful brand partner—Steph unveiled a campaign that would rock the luxury retail world: “Respect in Every Space.”

This wasn’t a hashtag. It was a blueprint.

Mandatory training on unconscious bias. Secret shopper programs to track customer treatment. Public accountability dashboards. Anonymous customer feedback systems. And most importantly: no tolerance for discrimination, regardless of how subtle. . . .

In the months that followed, his initiative grew. Over 200 luxury retailers signed on to adopt the Respect in Every Space protocols. Early data showed a 47% drop in discrimination complaints and a 31% increase in diverse clientele—without any loss in revenue. . . .

Mary should have done her homework

What a compelling story! This was nicely told in a way that designed to tap into the outrage of all people of color and anyone else who’s ever suffered discrimination. But was it true?

I was suspicious, since this was the first I’d heard of it, so I searched for articles about Ferrari and “Respect in Every Space.” There was nothing. I searched for “Respect in Every Space.” Nada. And there was nothing on Steph Curry’s social feeds.

Snopes had no comment about it (yet). But Mary’s post was accumulating dozens of comments and thousands of views. Many people commented about receiving similar treatment and supporting the Under Armour campaign, which according to all my web searches didn’t exist. There were also a few comments under Mary’s post calling its veracity into question. What would happen next?

Google’s Gemini appeared to believe it was true. Here’s an excerpt of what appeared at the top of a search for Steph Curry and Respect in Every Space:

AI Overview

Stephen Curry’s “Respect in Every Space” campaign is a movement focused on ensuring respect and dignity for everyone, particularly in luxury retail environments. This initiative, launched in response to his mother being mistreated at a dealership, aims to combat unconscious bias and discrimination through mandatory training, secret shopper programs, and public accountability, according to a post on X. 

Elaboration:

• Triggered by Mistreatment: The campaign was sparked by Steph Curry witnessing his mother being discriminated against at a luxury dealership, highlighting systemic issues within the industry.
• Focus on Transformation: Curry’s goal is not just retribution, but a fundamental shift in how people are treated, emphasizing the importance of respect and dignity in all spaces.
• Multi-faceted Approach: The “Respect in Every Space” campaign includes:
  • Mandatory Training: To educate staff about unconscious bias and discrimination.
  • Secret Shopper Programs: To monitor customer treatment and identify areas for improvement.
  • Public Accountability: To hold retailers accountable for discriminatory practices.
  • Anonymous Feedback: To gather customer feedback and identify instances of discrimination.
• Impact and Growth: The initiative has been adopted by over 200 luxury retailers, with early data showing a significant decrease in discrimination complaints and an increase in diverse clientele. 

But AI is even more easily duped than humans are. This isn’t evidence of truth, only evidence that there are other pages repeating the same information.

After a few days, Mary was beginning to have her doubts. She added the word “allegedly” into the headline. She added text to the effect that “some of this may be fictional.” And eventually, she added these words to the top of the post: “**This story is FAKE NEWS which was confirmed last night & so will be deleted.**” (But as I write this, it’s still there.)

Today, more than week later, it’s called out on Snopes and other fact-checking pages. And Sonya Curry has actually posted a denial on her Instagram feed.

But it remains up on Mary’s LinkedIn page. And she continues to post affirming replies to the comments on the post, for example:

Someone messaged me AFTER I had posted this to say that not every part of this is potentially true. As I was not there myself the disclaimer has been added just in case…but note this is TRUE for many including myself as recent as months ago!

[Responding to a commenter asking if it is true or false]: this is still powerful and there are many examples of shopping while black or mixed as I am sure you are aware where racial discrimination takes place. The feedback to this post has been very interesting and this is the first time I have posted about someone else’s “alleged” story. All the feedback has been noted to consider for future posts! Now back to work.

Would you rather be famous or accurate?

Mary made a mistake that each of has probably made from time to time. We repost something that seems important and feels true.

Confirmation bias is a problem. But when we see things we want to be true, it’s even more important to check them. It’s the poster’s job to find a reliable source. It’s not enough that you have no evidence that’s it’s false; you need evidence that’s it’s true.

Posting false information is a shame, but it’s fixable. When you find out you’ve shared something false, you delete it.

Yes. Even if you’ve gathered dozens of comments and thousands of views, and you feel passionately that you’ve contributed to an important dialogue. It doesn’t matter.

Because if you know it’s wrong and you leave it up, you’re saying your cause matters more than the truth.

And no matter what your cause it, if it’s not built on truth, I can no longer respect you.