A few days ago I intended to post some thoughts on the Naomi Osaka affair, but didn't get around to it. The next day I didn't get around to it either. Ditto for the day after that, and then I gave up.
But now another couple of days have passed and my Twitter feed has annoyed me into changing my mind. As you might expect, it's completely pro-Osaka and full of dripping contempt toward all the old men who run the French Open. So let's roll the tape:
- Out of the blue, just a couple of days before the tournament began, Osaka announced that she would not be meeting with the press after her matches. This is a requirement for all players and always has been, since press coverage is one of the things that drives the millions of dollars top players get for competing.
- Osaka released a statement saying that she was tired of reporters sowing "doubt" in her mind and she no longer wanted anyone doubting her. She tried to pass this off as a "mental health" issue, which it most certainly is not. She also failed to acknowledge that skipping press briefings gives her an advantage over fellow players who still had to do them.
- Tennis officials tried repeatedly to contact her to discuss the issue. Osaka refused to take their calls.
- Osaka then played (and won) her first round match and, as promised, declined to show up for her press briefing.
Given this set of facts at the time, what do you think tennis officials should have done?
- Nothing, which would tacitly approve of what Osaka was doing.
- Issue a milquetoast statement that they would try again to get Osaka to take their calls after the tournament.
- Issue a statement fining Osaka for missing the press briefing and further warning her that if she keeps this up she risks being defaulted from the tournament.
Response #3 sure seems like the appropriate one to me. Even if you concede—and I do—that tennis officials made a mistake or two along the way, they pale in comparison to Osaka's. She's been a top pro for eight years, after all. She's well aware of all of this stuff and knows who to contact to hash it out.
In any case, after all this Osaka released another statement saying that she had suffered from "long bouts of depression" for the past three years and now planned to take some time off tennis. This is when everybody suddenly took Osaka's side, but of course tennis officials had known nothing about this since she had refused to talk to them. Once they did know about it, their response was every bit as empathetic and understanding as you'd expect it to be.
Aside from a couple of minor hiccups, I just don't see that the tennis authorities really did anything wrong. Osaka certainly did, and I seriously wonder about the quality of the advice she gets from her team. Was there really not a single person near her who could have cautioned her to take a different approach?
At this point, there's nothing anyone can do except wish Osaka the best and hope that she overcomes her depression. If that's really what's driving all this, it's a serious problem. But none of that means she was treated unfairly at any point in this process. She wasn't
I don't think people are taking Osaka's "side" in this as much as they are questioning the purpose of all the post-match, post-game sports press conferences are about in the first place.
Either the athlete spouts a bunch of storied sports cliches which leave writers with nothing more than they had before or the athlete answers a questions truthfully, upon which the media sensationalizes those answers and creates an entire news cycle about how the athlete should "know better than to say something like in a post-game press conference."
Witness all the idiotic doofishness at White House press conferences that Jen Psaki has to deal with every day, multiply by 10, and that's what athletes have to put up with constantly. Nobody is watching the French Open due to the media coverage of athlete press conferences -- they're watching it for the tennis and the athletes who play it. Eliminating post-match press conference with athletes will only enhance the tennis on the court and will take basically nothing off of it.
I mean, do we know more about John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors from the answers they gave in press conferences? Or about how they played tennis on the court and all their histrionics and rants and raves during matches?
Definitely the latter.
For athletes, that should be their expression, not some cliche'd blurb of an answer to a stupid and unanswerable question from a writer or sports pundit.
"You can't be serious!"
Are the players contractually obligated to take part in a post game interview? If yes, sue them for the violationof their contract. If not, hands off.
Yes, they are obligated. Its a fine. Most players can't afford the fine, really. Osaka could. The one reason you can pull out of a tournament is injury without another fine (Osaka was obligated to play in the French Open, absent injury).
So now she is out and claimed an injury of sorts.
That does not make the press conferences better, but that's what happened.
Also, I would strongly suspect the tournament had no idea what to do if a top player, who could afford the fines, decided to not go to press conferences.
" Most players can't afford the fine, really"
Not really. The only ones who might have some trouble are those just starting their career and who are doing their first Major appearance. Any player that has been in the tour for a few years and is a regular presence at Majors (especially if they make it past the first round) earns enough to afford the fines if they wished to do what Osaka did.
To put it in context, Ena Shibahara, who is ranked 496 right now already has career earnings of nearly half a million Euros.
"I would strongly suspect the tournament had no idea what to do if a top player, who could afford the fines, decided to not go to press conferences."
This is the big thing. Other players in the past have made similar comments as the ones Osaka made (that the rules about press events need to be modified to give more power to the players), but she is the first truly high profile player to act on it, so they thought they could strongarm her and threaten her to comply.
To put it in context, Ena Shibahara, who is ranked 496 right now already has career earnings of nearly half a million Euros.
That's over her six year career, which works out to less than 100K a year. Add in expenses -- like the constant travel, coach fees, etc. It's an expensive profession.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/tennis-has-an-income-inequality-problem/
It's about generating interest for the sport on a personable level. It helps bridge the gap between "play i could never dream of doing" by allowing potential players to connect to the top dogs.
It’s business. The sports leagues demand the attention. And apparently it pays off for the media. Long long ago I worked for the almost late , once great United Press International in Dallas, and the boss was constantly on a tirade about how, as small as our staff was, we still had to devote one precious body to do nothing but cover the Dallas Cowboys. Boss thought the cowboys should pay us for the pub. … Also, as newspapers cut back drastically in recent years, sports departments have been almost untouched. Draw your own conclusions.
I agree with Kevin. Osaka could also simply follow hockey’s Wayne Gretski’s example (intended or not) - be supremely boring always. Then, on a personal level, she’d be left alone. Doing what she did only made her more interesting to the press and people like me who couldn’t name a single current tennis player with the exception, now, of Osaka. In sports, it is the public who ultimately pays their salaries and the press provides free advertising to gain the public’s interest in a sport. These are all interconnected, the rest is up to the individual players, her behaviour only gained her more attention.
"Osaka released a statement saying that she was tired of reporters sewing "doubt" in her mind and she no longer wanted anyone doubting her."
*sowing
😏
Lots of sport reporters ask questions just for the sake of provoking an emotional response. Weed out those reporters first, then, fine players who refuse to speak to reporters, don't you think?
I was about to suggest that if reporters were actually "sewing" doubts into her mind, she's entitled to be PO'd.
Good grief. I guess Drum no longer has the help of the anonymous friend he once told us copy-edited his posts.
Maybe Hopper's on strike.
🙂
Hopper's usual no-nonsense visage has been extra dour lately.
If she were white and male and American, she could simply refuse on the grounds of “fake news” then blather about “deep state” tennis officials and “which hunts.” Then, after enough controversy is generated, insist that the tennis media needs her around to attract eyeballs.
No, the Frenxh Open would have told Tennys Sandgren to fuck right off, too.
I'm even less sympathetic to Osaka I think. I read this as just the conflict you expect these days between the giant stars (New York Times says Osaka made $55 million last year) and the sports leagues. Social media has given the giant stars their own world which they control. She has 10s of millions of followers, Nike supporting everything she does etc. At this point, the tennis playing is only a small (but important) part of Naomi Inc. It's no wonder, in that situation, she says "I'm not doing the press conference. I'll use Twitter and Instagram."
She's a shy person by all accounts, I can understand her struggles even though I'm not shy. But press conferences are part of the job and a vehicle to promote tennis which needs it. If you can't do the job then pull out which she did.
As far as I'm concerned that's the end of it.
The only people watching press conferences are people who are already watching the tennis.
There is more background to this that casual followers of tennis may not realize.
The modern tennis tour is the result of a decades long negotiation between individual tournament directors and players, and between players.
The negotiations being that individual tournament directors have no incentive to help either lower ranked players or other tournaments, and higher ranked players need the tournaments to survive generally, and to survive tournaments need all players, not just the couple who at any given time will sell tickets.
Top players like Osaka have always wanted to set their own schedules which includes both which tournaments to play and how the tournaments they do play are run, and whether or not to do press is certainly part of that.
Osaka, of course, can easily afford to skip the French open, and now has. Allowing Osaka to skip press briefings is sort of a slap in the face of all the players who attend them, and of course, no player wants to attend them.
I find it completely plausible that Osaka thinks press conferences are sub-optimal for her, specifically her in-tournament prep and maintenance.
I find it sort of implausible that they are actually any more damaging than playing the actual matches.
No one has mentioned this, but often top players have to come up with something, like say, an "injury," to avoid playing a tournament that they really don't want to play but as to which they are scheduled.
Its not a question of whose side you may be on, this is just part and parcel of the sport, really. She will probably be back in no time.
There's the theory that she just didn't want to deal with it since she sucks (relatively speaking) on clay.
The problem is not that Osaka was wrong for not conforming with media availability rules that all tennis players are expected to follow. The problem is the rules themselves. Why should media dictate to tennis authorities that the athletes by rule have to participate in the silly ritual of talking with people that many of them don't want to talk with? It's demeaning, it's boring, and it has nothing to do with why people are tuning in in the first place -- to watch a match. Shouldn't playing a sport at a championship caliber be enough?
There was a time athletes played the game and that was all that was expected. Some were friendly with the media, some shied away. But to be forced to play the media game is ridiculous and indefensible. It takes away any freedom the athletes have and gives all power to the media.
Who else in society is forced to answer media questions? Politicians aren't, not even the president. Pols talk with media when the pols want, not when the media want. Same for everybody else. The only exceptions are athletes and a few other entertainers (if you're starring in a franchise movie, you'll be expected to go on TV and promote it).
I think people support Osaka because she refuses to be a media puppet. Good for her.
There was a time athletes played the game and that was all that was expected.
Oh, that's laughable. Press access used to be much *more* than it was now. Reporters used to go into the locker rooms and talk to the tennis players there. Now, it's much more contained and constrained -- players want to have total control over their images and so they want to reduce *any* access to someone who might ask annoying questions.
Nobody fined athletes in the old days if they went home after a game without answering reporters' questions.
The locker room ritual changed when women reporters were denied access.
Forcing athletes to play the media game tells you who's in charge. Media is. The media game becomes more important than the game on the field. Let athletes choose to engage with media if and when they want, or not. The sports world will surely survive.
Nobody fined athletes in the old days if they went home after a game without answering reporters' questions
Sure they did.
The locker room ritual changed when women reporters were denied access.
Hoo brother. You really don't know anything at all about this history, do you?
Can you name any other sport in which a player or coach is disqualified from competition for failure to perform required press duties? Fined, yes. Kicked out? I can't think of that ever happening. By pulling out, Osaka saved them from the embarrassment of kicking a top player out because she wouldn't do press conferences. If she was willing to pay a stiff fine every time she skipped the post-match press conference, they should have left it at that.
My guess is that there will be changes in how "mandatory" press conferences are in the future. Forcing someone to do something that makes them profoundly uncomfortable does not seem very enlightened to me.
btw, it's sowing, not sewing.
Well, I’ll apologize in advance for this snark. After reading this, the only thing Kevin says which will surprise me is that he has turned Republican.
That said, I think Kevin sorely needs an editor!!
—r
I don't think she was treated unfairly either, and she was forthright in willing to take the lumps for her decision. That's easier to do when you have bucks to burn. That said, I'm glad she's brought a spotlight to requiring players to do post-match interviews. They are worthless to fans. They only seem to make news when a player breaks down or criticizes an opponent or tournament directors. As a longtime pro tennis follower, they do nothing to enhance my enthusiasm and support for the game or the players. They should not be required.
I'd add that the post-match press availabilities are particularly bad in tennis and especially bad for women players.
In football, a fan might actually want to know at the end of the game why a coach called a particular play or put in/took out a particular player.
In tennis, the questions are frequently along the lines of (1) you sucked today, what's up with that; (2) so are you out of shape; (3) did you not practice enough; or (4) what about your outfit.
The questions are sometimes worse at the big 4 tournaments because frequently those events are covered by generalists who lack sufficient insight to ask a better question.
Long story short: I am sympathetic to the notion that this is part of a coach or athlete's job but the situation in tennis is not great and warrants reconsideration.
A few people now have said the same. And, as a sometimes-tennis watcher, I agree. Also, if I like a sportsman, I don't particularly want to be confronted to the fact that he's a bit of a moron (obviously, he could be unexpectedly smart and humane but that seems less common).
On the other hand, I tend to trust businesses like the media to know what's best to extract maximum $$$ from the crowds. If post game interviews were useless at drumming business and an inconvenience to the majority of sportsmen, I suspect they'd have been dropped by now.
So I'm tempted to believe that, like press tours before big movies or book tours, they serve a function even if people like me don't care about them.
Can you name any other sport in which a player or coach is disqualified from competition for failure to perform required press duties
Well, first off, the French Open didn't disqualify her. They fined her, and there are numerous sports that do the same: football, basketball, etc. And if a player announced that they weren't going to talk the entire season, I imagine a suspension would be threatened.
Forcing someone to do something that makes them profoundly uncomfortable does not seem very enlightened to me.
No one is forcing Osaka to participate in the French Open. It's a sporting event that players voluntarily participate in. Part of that is media availability.
Wrong. The French Open threatened to forfeit her if she continued to skip press conferences.
She's a tennis player. Let her, and the rest of the players, play. I wonder how many of the people here are tennis fans. Would any of you who are care one bit if there were no more post-match press conferences. I wouldn't. She was willing to take her medicine by paying a fine. Why was more than that deemed necessary?
“Wrong. The French Open threatened to forfeit her if she continued to skip press conferences.”
Uh, yes, as I said they didn’t disqualify her. Whether they would have acted on their threat, I don’t know, but they didn’t disqualify her.
I watch a lot of golf on TV. The players are subjected to the same sort of annoyances--the interminable questions about how/why they screwed up, the silly questions about their "strategy" to avoid hitting into the water so much, etc.
Almost all pro golfers, and most of the good amateurs these days, have memorized the simplistic pat answers:
(1) I screwed up because I lost my focus on my "process."
(2) My strategy for tomorrow is to focus better on my "process."
Every once in a while, a Phil Mickelson comes along. He gives real answers. He explains why he tried some shot that all the professional announcers thought was absurd, and most of the viewers went wild with anticipation. And when it doesn't work, he forthrightly states, "Yeah, in retrospect I wish I hadn't done it just then, but y'know, next time I'll probably do it again, because in the long run, I think the odds favor me more than you realize."
You can't teach an athlete to be a Phil Mickelson, but you sure can teach them a few pat answers, and that will relieve 99% of that feeling of angst Ms. Osaka feels when she knows some annoying reporter asks here, in essence, "why the heck did you screw up that way?"
"Your going to have to learn your cliches . . ."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeVca9MwDX8
Hard to choose the best scene from that movie. Another favorite of mine is the "conference" on the mound.
https://youtu.be/diX4myfR6vU
Re: 'She tried to pass this off as a "mental health" issue, which it most certainly is not.' What expertise in this field are you drawing on that led you to decide that she was not being truthful about having a mental health issue?
Re: 'In any case, after all this Osaka released another statement saying that she had suffered from "long bouts of depression" for the past three years and now planned to take some time off tennis. This is when everybody suddenly took Osaka's side, but of course tennis officials had known nothing about this since she had refused to talk to them. Once they did know about it, their response was every bit as empathetic and understanding as you'd expect it to be.' Officials knew nothing about it? Except for the fact that she told them it was a mental health issue.
Mental illness is still a real illness. When you're experiencing a bout of depression or anxiety, you may have a harder time communicating appropriately. For example, you might dodge phone calls. You might have a hard time talking to friends and family, let alone reporters, or officials from the French Open who want to outline the fines they're going to impose if you won't talk to those reporters.
I just find it rather churlish to get worked up over sympathy for Osaka in this scenario.
When someone says they're having mental health challenges, let's just default to believing them and work from there--ok?
Reminds me of the Seattle Seahawks in the 2014 Superbowl. Press conferences were mandatory, and Marshawn Lynch showed up for his answering in monosyllables except for the phrase "I'm just here so I won't get fined". Seattle fans loved it but the national sports press thought it was the end of the world; except it wasn't. Turns out no one really pays that much attention to the stupid pressors with their cliche answers anyway. Many athletes will jump at the chance to get the publicity, particularly if they get to wear a shirt with their major sponsor's logo prominently displayed. Let the ones who don't want to appear go their own way.
For all of you complaining about how press conferences don't add anything, I give you a news story from 1983. McEnroe played and was fined $350 for general bad temper, even though he won. When asked afterwards (at the press conference!) why he didn't like the French, rather than dissembling, he said "It would be undiplomatic of me to answer that." The French umpire was asked about McEnroe swearing at him during the match, said he hadn't heard the curses, or at least, he said (in French): "At any rate, if I heard them, I did not understand what they meant."
Both of those are great quotes the spice an ordinary day of tennis up a great deal.
(And that's leaving out one of the great quotes of all time, from 1980. Vitas Gerulaitis finally beat Jimmy Connors after losing the first sixteen(!) times they played. Asked about it afterward (at a press conference!), he deadpanned "Nobody beats Vitas Gerulaitis 17 times in a row.")
Sports isn't just about watching the games, it's about knowing the players playing the games. You can stay with the sterile, carefully manicured plastic images that their PR teams want to put out. I'll always love a good quote from a journalist getting a good answer to a good question.
This has become the role of social media today, and Naomi has considerable presence there. Perhaps, for her mental health, she shouldn't. Like Kevin I'm an old fuddy-duddy; the whole institution of tennis is run by folks like us. But what do we know? OK, boomer.
Social media gives us the plastic. I’ll take the real people, thanks.
Social media gave us El Jefe Maximo de Maralago.
You, as a longtime MAGAT, might want to reconsider your opposition to it.
a longtime MAGAT
We know each other from somewhere? And I’m about as far from a Trump-lover as it's possible to get, so, er, no.
As I said, I'll stay with the real player rather than the PR plastic.
Editorial comment: I think we are past the time when it is obvious what the meaning of this statement is: "Once they did know about it, their response was every bit as empathetic and understanding as you'd expect it to be". I for one don't expect the people running professional sports to be either empathetic or understanding, and so I have a hazy guess about what their expected PR response would be. So I had to look up what "their response" was.
I have mixed emotions about this. I was asked once to give a press conference about a very big local story. I was told by the higher ups in my organization - you are mature, you have the experience so you have the ability to answer the questions they will most likely ask. So I said "Do I have to, by policy do this with my seniority and my maturity?" Of course the higher ups started stammering "On it's not REQUIRED, but you know..........."
I said No, I do NOT want to talk to the press now, or in the future. Not because I can't - but because I don't want to. The higher ups backed off and shortly thereafter they gave out a survey to us in the organization and one question they asked was "Would you be willing to be interviewed by local TV and radio reporters if the situation was important?" Only 2 out of the entire field staff of 100 said yes. They quietly changed the policy to read only supervisors and middle and upper management are to give interviews.
I believe they handled it the right way
But I wonder if sports organizations like the French Open are afraid of what they would find out if they surveyed their players? I would guess that most would NOT want to be interviewed. What would the Tennis organizations do if all the players anonymously told them NO we don't want to do this?
Sports have become too big a business and big business doesn't usually give a damn about their individual employees - UNLESS it makes the big business MORE money.
Sorry but this is wrong
big business doesn't usually give a damn about their individual employees
You're clear that the tennis players aren't employees of tennis in any way? They're competitors in the events that tennis organizations put on. Naomi Osaka is not required to participate in the French Open. She's free not to. If she does, then she has to follow its rules, including media access.
w/o the tourney she has no job.
Since she is NOT an employee then how can they fine her for not "performing"Now i her duties?
Now if she were an employee with a health care plan and she was covered for her depression she wouldn't have to give the conference due to medical conditions unspecified under HIPPA. She could simply get a doctors note so to speak
She is an employee as she has no income if she doesn't play.
Personally I hate that the organization has this much power over the players on a subject that is not a "skillset" a tennis player may or may not have. I get they can regulate clothing on the court - actions on the court and determine monies earned depending upon how far you go in the tourney.
After that? Meh
Press conferences are nothing more than reporters looking for a "gotcha moment" - and after playing a 2 or 3 hour set in the hot sun I don't know of too many people who would be on their game for answering questions.
There are hundreds of other tournaments for her to play in. They’re fining her from any prize money she might have won at the French Open
Do try to have even a basic understanding of the tennis economy before you spout nonsense.
They are contractual employees
W/o the benefits of being covered by healthcare that would have prevented the press from finding out she suffers from Chronic depression and anxiety both was which are exacerbated by having to stand in front of a crowd of reporters looking for a quote or a screw up.
She is entitled to the privacy of her medical and mental health conditions.
Nike is stepping up as are other players.
I wonder what happens when they start pulling their monetary support for the tournament for being too intrusive - by requiring players to subject themselves to this?
She can talk - on HER terms to who SHE wants to.
They are contractual employees
No, they're not. They're freelancers entering a competition. There's no employer/employee relationship. If there was, French employment laws (which are famously strict) would apply. They don't.
Again, understand the economics before you spout off.
"skipping press briefings gives her an advantage over fellow players who still had to do them."
This is almost certainly not true, and even if there is a smidgen of truth to it, there's no tangible way to prove it. It's not like they're required to run a 10K or dig coal during their press briefings. Some players may not like to do them (most probably don't care, some might actually like them), but there's no way that holding a press briefing after a match has any measurable material impact on how the player performs in their next match.
Ah, so the press conference really isn't that big an issue?
I don't think that's correct. If you have an anxiety disorder, for example, and it's exacerbated by speaking in public, being forced to do so can very definitely have a long-term impact on your physical health.
Come on Kevin, your take here is being terribly disingenuous.
When Osaka first announced that she wouldn't be participating in the press events, she immediately referred to mental health issues as the reason for it (so no one could pretend they didn't know the motive), and it's not like she was just looking out for herself, since she openly advocated for every player to be able to skip them if not feeling mentally up to it at the moment (she is not wrong that often times they are opportunities for the press to kick on those who are already knocked down), and she is not the first player to suggest similar things, it just happens that she is the most high profile one to publicly admit to mental health issues, and suggest changes to press event requirements. It also was not a simple "I'm not doing it" tantrum as you seem to imply, since she described in detail her reasons, cited what normally goes through players heads at the time, and encouraged organizers to put more attention to those concerns instead of simply looking out for the almighty dollar. She even mentioned that if fined as the organizers had initially threatened, she hoped the money would be put to help mental health charities.
The problem, is that just like you did, the organizers dismissed her concerns as no big deal, and not truly "mental health" issues, and simply threatened her with fines.
After she carried through and skipped the press event after her first win, the problem became worse not because the organizers fined her (which is what was expected by everyone, including her), but because they actually doubled down by saying that the tour already provides a lot of mental health support to players (basically telling her that her requests were without motive), and threatening not just further fines but actual suspensions if she remained uncooperative with their demands.
They behaved like typical bully and careless companies that say "There is no discrimination/sexual harassment/(or whatever issue) in our company, so get back to work or else" when someone raises a concern about their rules, protocols, guidelines, etc.
Now that she has withdrawn from the tournament, and Osaka has received a cascade of support, this is what the Grand Slam organizers said:
“Mental health is a very challenging issue, which deserves our utmost attention. It is both complex and personal, as what affects one individual does not necessarily affect another. We commend Naomi for sharing in her own words the pressures and anxieties she is feeling and we empathize with the unique pressures tennis players may face.”
Had they said exactly this from the beginning, even if they kept fining her after each match due to contractual reasons, everyone would be happy, but instead they acted like greedy jerks who did not care about the well being about the people that make them earn money.
For as long as businesses are allowed to act like this, and are excused for acting like this, they'll continue to do it. It should not need massive public outcry for people to act like decent human beings.
“ Had they said exactly this from the beginning, even if they kept fining her after each match due to contractual reasons, everyone would be happy”
Hahahahahhaahh…what world do you live in?
"what world do you live in?"
The real world. Like I said, that is how things should be, but I realize it isn't, which is why this was my last sentence:
"It should not need massive public outcry for people to act like decent human beings."
Hahahahhahhh. Sure.
If Osaka* had existed during WWII they would have had to build her her own relocation camp.
*The tennis player, not the city.
Yes, you asshole, because a massively rich tennis player having a disagreement with an even more massively rich tennis tournament is just like the racist US interning Japanese Americans during an existential war for survival.
Why don’t you shut the fuck up and let the adults talk?
Technically the vast majority were not interned, they were relocated from a 100 mile exclusion zone bordering the Pacific ocean.
Technically, you’re still an asshole.
While I take your and KevinD's side of this issue, you really need to re-think this commenting tone.
I really don't, thanks.
Having a contractual requirement that all athletes be required to submit to the attention of the press, because it generates money, would only pass muster with me if there were a requirement that the performance of the press be of the same caliber as that of the players.
This is typical contrarian Kevin. What is atypical is that this is a rare instance in which I agree with him. This strikes me as an act of pure entitlement by a person who, I assume, has lived within a retinue of enablers since before she was a pre-teen and thinks that her success and celebrity allows her to avoid even the least unpleasantness of life. Her refusal to engage with tournament officials after they reached out to her multiple times is telling for me.
"Her refusal to engage with tournament officials after they reached out to her multiple times is telling for me."
According to her, she did reach out to them privately after she first announced she'd be skipping the press events, and in the communication asked them to discuss the matter with them after the tournament to not add more stress to the situation. The tournament could have very easily simply kept fining her (a repercussion she understood would happen) for every skipped press event instead of doubling down on the threats and publicly dismissing her claims. It wasn't until after she withdrew and the public response was mostly supportive to her that they completely changed their tune to this:
“Mental health is a very challenging issue, which deserves our utmost attention. It is both complex and personal, as what affects one individual does not necessarily affect another. We commend Naomi for sharing in her own words the pressures and anxieties she is feeling and we empathize with the unique pressures tennis players may face.”
"I'm breaking the rules and causing you problems, and I won't discuss it with you until the event is over and there isn't anything to discuss."
The discuss the issue further afterward was more focused on the possibility of making changes to the rules for press events, which was her main request, how to change things going forward.
Regardless of that, saying let's talk about this afterwards is exactly what happens in every job when for whatever reason you can't fulfill a requirement or can't show up to a scheduled event. You state you can't make it for X reason (which she did, it just happens that for a lot of people mental health issues aren't considered a real issue), subject yourself to whatever penalty there is, if there are any (which she had already accepted she'd do beforehand), and you offer to provide more details about it and talks things further at a later date once the crisis is over (which is what she intended to do).
However the organizers first dismissed her claim, and to make it worse, decided to up the ante by saying they wouldn't just fine her, but threatening not just disqualification from this particular tournament, but a suspension from future ones. It was a literal "We don't care how you feel, show up or else" threat.
The issue was so badly managed by the organizers that they had to do a 180 in their public statements and are now talking publicly about how much they support her and want the issues she brought up discussed, and given the outpour of support for her and the media attention brought to the issue, it seems very likely that the changes she wanted implemented are very likely to be widely discussed and possibly implemented in the near future, and all because they chose to act like a jerk demanding boss instead of showing a little empathy towards one of the people they rely for the success of their events.
If what the organizers wanted was to make sure players are always available to do press events after their matches no matter what, their response seems to have massively backfired.
"...meeting with the press...is a requirement for all players..."
"Requirement" ? Surely there is a signed contract. The rest is noise.
Why yes, actually. Players apply through a formal process, including agreeing to abide by the rules of the tournament. Jesus, do a minimal amount of homework, would you.
Osaka wasn't allowed to have a childhood. She's a victim of the Richard Williams school of raising elite athletes, which starts intensive training at 4 years of age to transform kids into assets that will make the family rich and famous. It would be astonishing if she didn't have mental health issues. But I bet they're nothing compared to the mental health issues of an unknown number of young adults who were subjected to a similar upbringing but never managed to crack the pro circuit even though dad made them hit volleys until their fingers bled.
At least she's better off than young female gymnasts, most of whom seem to have been sexually abused by their coaches. Like young female swimmers. Compared to them, footballers have it easy. They just get to die young from the cumulative effects of being concussed from time to time.
Elite sport in the 21st century is grotesque exploitation of a nation's youth.
I'm unclear how not talking to reporters gives her an advantage. Otherwise, sounds about right.
Because the press conferences take time and energy that the athletes would prefer to conserve.
I am also less sympathetic to Osaka, because she did take questions from the media organization that sponsors her. She's willing to talk to people that pay her directly, just not the ones that pay her indirectly. Yes, there is probably a mental health element involved, but this is also about prominent people believing that they should have the power to control how they are covered in the media, and that journalists should have to pay them in order to cover them.
The Players Tribune has entered the chat.
I can tell you've (probably) never suffered from depression, nor been around mental health clinicians (most people haven't), because this is way off the mark:
"In any case, after all this Osaka released another statement saying that she had suffered from "long bouts of depression" for the past three years and now planned to take some time off tennis. This is when everybody suddenly took Osaka's side, but of course tennis officials had known nothing about this since she had refused to talk to them."
The very last part - it's entirely common for those suffering from depression to not talk to people about it, especially not until it's accumulated to such a degree that a crisis occurs. Often, that crisis is the first that anyone in the life of a person suffering from depression even knows about their depression.
You're being extremely ignorant/dismissive of the symptoms and characteristics of depression with this attitude.
I have suffered from depression, and I don't find it off the mark at all. Yes, it is true that people commonly don't talk about depression. It's very difficult for others to take their depression into consideration, because they don't know that the individual is depressed. That's not a statement that they don't take depression seriously; they may or may not. But they have to know about it in order to take an instance seriously.
To be clear, what I found off the mark was "tennis officials had known nothing about this since she had refused to talk to them."
Because I agree with you - that's why that's off the mark to me.
And to be clear on another part, I don't necessarily think she's been treated terribly unfairly here, but I also know how issues that should/could have been addressed ahead of time (e.g., advocating against the pressers and making her intentions clear earlier in an attempt to change the practice at the upcoming tournament) can build up and become much harder to address, or how a condition can "flare up" quickly, just before a trigger.
“She tried to pass this off as a "mental health" issue, which it most certainly is not.”
Is there another subject where Kevin Drum would take this authoritative tone without even a hint of expertise on the issue? Or is he just an old man?
Idunno, the housing market maybe? Homelessness (mental health in general)? There are a few.