That is up to the team though. This is closer to a TV station banning somebody so now they can't compete in a sport that will be broadcast on that station, forcing the team to kick them off.
That is sort of the start of a strawman argument because Twitch bans for a lot of things, not just being a convicted pedophile. But even in that case I don't think it is fair to completely disallow somebody from appearing on a TV network. That also isn't what I would consider "promotion".
I don’t know if it’s a straw man when the actual policy this article is about mentions it
> The company is currently defining “serious offenses” as incidents of violent extremism, credible threats of mass violence, membership in a known hate group, sexual exploitation of children, and nonconsensual sexual activities, among others.
Which effectively can also happen now. In fact the athlete is likely wealthy and will be ok despite his career crashing. This could in fact happen to the guy who waits on tables down town.
If he became internet infamous and the tv station covers it the business he works at might be obliged to fire him.
USADA is the definition of a third party is it not? He was banned from ALL sports, not just cycling. So it would be like Twitch banning you from YouTube as well.
Like I said it is a sporting agency. Not some TV network or something. Sports aren't forced to cooperate with USADA but they do it for the good of the sport. That doesn't apply with Twitch at all.
