Naomi Osaka has this all wrong

  

Category:  Sports

Via:  john-russell  •  5 months ago  •  19 comments

By:   Rob Parker (MSN)

Naomi Osaka has this all wrong
Naomi Osaka is wrong.

Naomi Osaka withdrew from the French Open today, following widespread criticism of her decision to not talk to the media. 


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Naomi Osaka is wrong.

3755d4d0-c0e0-11e9-9fbd-31b4212970da

e151e5.gif © Image: Getty Images Naomi Osaka not speaking to the press at the French Open is wrong.

Her boycott of the media at the French Open is misguided. Worse, it's downright unprofessional.

If the tennis superstar is seriously dealing with a mental health issue — as she announced on social media before the tournament — she should have bowed out gracefully from the event and taken time for herself.

Fans would have been disappointed, but understood.

But to claim she can do everything else, but just can't talk to the media is bogus.

Bravo to the four Grand Slam tournaments who issued Osaka both a fine and a stern warning for her behavior.

The Grand Slam tournaments also said that if she continues to not talk to the media she could be subject to escalating punishment, including disqualification.

Here's a part from the joint statement.

"Naomi Osaka today chose not to honour her contractual media obligations," the statement read. "The Roland-Garros referee has therefore issued her a $15,000 fine, in keeping with article III H. Of the Code of Conduct."

The statement also said this: "As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3."

For sure, tennis' powers-that-be mean business and aren't taking this situation lightly.

Many fans will side with Osaka — who issued a warning before the event on social media that she wouldn't talk to the press — and say that she shouldn't be forced to talk to the media if she doesn't feel like it. But like Osaka, they just don't get it.

Osaka delivered a lame tweet in her defense on Sunday after her match. It read: "anger is a lack of understanding. Change makes people uncomfortable."

Osaka simply has this all twisted. Talking to the media and selling the game to fans is part of her job. It's what players sign up for before cashing all those million-dollar checks from playing professional tennis.

The attack on the media is so wrong and dumb. The media is there for the fans. Most media members are just trying to do a job. It's not about us. It's never been. When you blow off the media, you're telling fans they don't matter and don't count. Media members get paid whether they talk to the star players or not.

What can change, and the people who run the events understand, is that media outlets will stop covering events if they can't get access to the stars involved.

It wouldn't be good for the sport.

Osaka's act isn't new and has been tried by many athletes over the years, including stars as big, and bigger, than her.

They have tried to push the envelope with this and all eventually get a dose of reality that this aspect of their obligations is non-negotiable.

The great Michael Jordan once blew off media day at the All-Star Game. He was fined and reprimanded. It never happened again. This season, Brooklyn Nets guard Kyrie Irving tried pulling the same stunt, by refusing to speak to reporters who cover his team. The league jumped in and imposed fines. That nonsense stopped.

Here's the other part where athletes just don't get it. Working with the media is a two-way street. These same athletes who dislike the media will invite them to trumpet their good deeds in the community.

Some also want the media to listen and deliver their message, if it's about them fighting for social justice or against police brutality.

Osaka was front and center last year when people took to the streets in protest. The media wrote about her support for Black Lives Matter last June. Google it. But now she has no use for those same people. Fundamentally, it's wrong.

Dealing with the media is real simple. Answer a few questions. If there are questions you don't care to answer, you say "no comment."

After five or 10 minutes, you can bow out and go on about your business.

Sorry Osaka, not allowing sports journalists to simply do their job is unprofessional. And it's wrong.

Continue ReadingShow full articles without "Continue Reading" button for {0} hours. Microsoft and partners may be compensated if you purchase something through recommended links in this article.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    5 months ago

I dont follow tennis, but I guess this girl is the heir apparent to Serena Williams. 

She thinks , as the biggest star in women's tennis, she can get away with not speaking to the media? 

Thats not gonna happen. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 months ago

She is ranked number two in the world.  So what if she does not want to speak to the media.  They ask the same questions over and over.  She should be able to control her own career and if it means no interviews, so be it.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
1.1.1  pat wilson  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    5 months ago

I agree 100%. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    5 months ago

if she was an amateur that would be ok.   Professional athletes have an obligation to promote their sport. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
2  r.t..b...    5 months ago

Disagree. She is totally within her individual rights to speak to whomever, whenever, and wherever she chooses.

After the incidents experienced this week in the NBA...we so easily forget that these are people. They are not circus performers, they are making a living and owe nobody an explanation before or after their appearances. Imagine any of us being held to the same requirements after a crappy day at work. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1  TᵢG  replied to  r.t..b... @2    5 months ago

But her sponsors have the right to not sponsor her.

Bottom line, she is a celebrity and an entertainer — not exclusively an athlete.   To have the opportunity to compete in the big games and to enjoy $$$ from sponsorship, she needs to abide by the terms of her contracts.

It is her personal choice to either abide by the terms or not.   The consequences then ensue.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Krishna  replied to  TᵢG @2.1    5 months ago
But her sponsors have the right to not sponsor her.

Bottom line, she is a celebrity and an entertainer — not exclusively an athlete.   To have the opportunity to compete in the big games and to enjoy $$$ from sponsorship, she needs to abide by the terms of her contracts.

It is her personal choice to either abide by the terms or not.   The consequences then ensue.

What are yiu trying to say-- that peoples' actions have consequences?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
2.1.2  r.t..b...  replied to  TᵢG @2.1    5 months ago

She is first and foremost an athlete, not an entertainer, using her gifts to maximize her potential.

She most certainly does not determine the prize money nor has control over the requirements that that brings. She has made the decision to pay the penalties associated, just as she has made the decision to become an advocate for the AAPI community and numerous other charitable endeavors.

More power to her and the strength of her convictions.  
 
Our obsession with celebrity should never define an individual, lest they one day become President. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  r.t..b... @2.1.2    5 months ago
She is first and foremost an athlete, not an entertainer, using her gifts to maximize her potential.

Which is admirable.    And she can make the priority calls that best fit her needs.

She can continue to be an athlete.   But if she wants to engage in the big game then there are rules.   Every other big game athlete has to follow the rules.

There is a price to be paid for the chance to achieve fame and fortune.    And if she has no concern about endorsements, the opportunity to compete against the best in the world, etc. then she has the option to compete as an amateur.

Basically, the system is what it is.   I see no way it would change;  just like I see no way the world would systemically do away with advertisement as a source of revenue.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Expert
2.2  Bob Nelson  replied to  r.t..b... @2    5 months ago

She is a professional entertainer. Part of her job, according to the contract she signed, is contact with the media.

Y-e-e-e-e-sh.... 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
3  Perrie Halpern R.A.    5 months ago

Real life can suck. You have to learn to take the good with the bad. Sometimes you just have to be a grown-up.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
3.1  Krishna  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3    5 months ago
Sometimes you just have to be a grown-up.

"have to"?

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Principal
3.2  Raven Wing  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3    5 months ago
Sometimes you just have to be a grown-up.

But...but....that's no fun. And if you can act like a doofus it is easier to be forgiven. (hee hee)

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4  seeder  JohnRussell    5 months ago

Professional athletes cannot say they will not talk to the media. 

She might have got away with it once or twice by claiming  she had a headache or something like that. But the athlete cannot have it as a policy.  She makes money off the publicity that comes to her matches as then the prize money and her endorsement fees rise, and if she wants to keep making that money she will cooperate with the press. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
5  Tacos!    5 months ago

I think a lot of times, young athletes don’t fully appreciate the fact that it’s public enthusiasm that pays their contracts, and that part of their job is to cultivate that enthusiasm. You can be an elite athlete and not talk to the media, but you’ll be doing it for free.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
PhD Participates
6  r.t..b...    5 months ago

And now she has withdrawn. Please read her comments before commenting.

A lose, lose situation for tennis fans, but an opportunity for mental health experts to address the issues of expectations and depression that effect millions. 

Peace to her as she is obviously going through a difficult time while under a microscope on a world stage. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
6.1  Ronin2  replied to  r.t..b... @6    5 months ago

I am sure the media and Women's Tennis Association are scratching their heads trying to figure this out so that it doesn't look like they bullied her into withdrawing. Screw all of them.

Hopefully her fans will make sure they both feel their displeasure on social media; and in their wallets by not attending matches- and not watching on tv. That will be sure to get their attention.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
PhD Guide
7  Thrawn 31    5 months ago

I wonder what language is in their contracts as far as speaking with the press is concerned. Do tennis players even have contracts when it comes to these events? 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
8  Ronin2    5 months ago

The main stream media still trying to pretend it is all powerful and important.

Didn't they learn anything when Trump beat Clinton? They have been replaced by social media. They are as dead as the dinosaurs; they are just too stupid to figure it out yet.

As to the article's asinine premise:

The media is there for the fans.  Most media members are just trying to do a job. It's not about us. It's never been.

Tell that to Tim Tebow, Adrian Peterson, Michael Jordan, Lebron James, or anyone other player the media has decided to blacklist. The media is there to present their warped, slanted, and most of the time inane view on things.

When you blow off the media, you're telling fans they don't matter and don't count.

BS. Most fans love having more direct contact with the players through social media. Most fans could give a rats ass about the media; except to rail against them and their biases.

Media members get paid whether they talk to the star players or not.

More BS. If stars refuse to talk to a reporter; that reporter loses their damn job. I don't care what they are covering politics, sports, acting, etc. Their job is talking to the stars and staying on good terms with them. The author's statement shows how delusion the media has become.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



27 visitors