Tennis star Naomi Osaka’s decision to refuse post-match interviews during the French Open and then to withdraw from the event, had me all kinds of conflicted.
As an old white dude, controversies of this sort see me embarking on a personal journey from adamant reactionary, to confused equivocator, to slowly enlightened advocate for change. This case has been no different.
When Osaka announced she would be stopping her press conferences to protect her mental health, my initial thought was that she should toughen up. She has a duty to attend media conferences, does she not? Unpleasant as they can be. Because the media are responsible for making tennis a global sport and she is one of its superstars.
Then I thought about the post-match interviews I have witnessed and I realised they are generally the most banal, boring-ass pieces of media content available. Tennis interviews are no better or worse than rugby, football or cricket, marginally improved because there is less scope for “all credit to the team” cliches.
It’s also true that mental health is a critically important modern challenge. No one should be criticised for self-care. And psychological pain should be treated no differently to physical injuries. The issue then becomes, if Naomi can secede from the process, everyone should have that right and, ultimately, do we need mandatory press conferences at all?
I am a sports nut of sorts. Would I miss these post-match chats, stilted and generic. With perhaps just enough time for one defiantly insensitive question to ruin a player’s evening?
Would I miss these things? Not particularly. Jurgen Klopp has some insightful comments sometimes and I seem to remember enjoying a Bobby Skinstad interview in about 2003.
The fact is, the media are not the same as they were 100 years ago. The most powerful part of media’s development has been its disintermediation, the removing of layers and profit centres to bring content sources closer to content consumers.
Today, we have a media landscape where Naomi Osaka can post photos, videos and indeed eloquent media statements on her own platforms, to be consumed unmediated directly by her audience, aka the fans.
Of course the content will be direct from Naomi and thus biased towards her views, but that is the kind of thing you look for in “news about Naomi”. You could make a case for professional journalists being able to add value through probing questions asked at press conferences, but whether these would be more useful than the honest, considered self-expression of the subject herself is debatable.
Don’t get me wrong, there is a need for media conferences. Where would we be today without the Aussie ball-tampering scandal media events, for instance! That was a proper media moment.
But routine post-match media events are bland beyond belief when everyone, including the subjects are going through the motions. “Good” press conferences are usually the ones with the embarrassing questions – informative, in a sadistic kind of way.
It is also true that social anxiety is a very real challenge that many of us face in the course of our work and family lives. Each of us should be granted the right to manage and address our mental health challenges and Naomi Osaka is no different. Not least because she is expected to address media broadcasting across the entire planet immediately after every game, win or lose.
Perhaps cowboys don’t cry and some people are better at battling through a presser than she is, but it hardly makes for compelling news, let alone entertainment. It’s asking a lot of an athlete to perform at a physically elite level, then immediately afterwards deliver comments sparkling with wit and intellectual vim. That’s like chess-boxing!
So if Naomi Osaka’s defiance of sports convention leads to the ultimate death of the post-match press conference, I will not mourn. I will thank her.
All credit to Naomi for putting an anachronous tradition out of its misery.
When that day comes, I will continue savouring the joy of live sport, the quick fix of highlights clips and the illusory joy of being friends with famous sports people on Instagram. Pretty much as I always have.
TV channels will continue to broadcast, journalists will continue to report, investigate and interview. Advertisements will be bought and sponsorships secured.
… and sports people will continue to compete at sport. Which is the point of sport, after all.
Hagen Engler.
from The Citizen https://ift.tt/3uTDoDW
0 Comments