Asking the right questions

The Naomi Osaka episode is a deeply nuanced issue and calls for a larger conversation

June 03, 2021 12:10 am | Updated 12:46 am IST

Japan’s Naomi Osaka reacts during her first round match against Romania’s Patricia Maria Tig at the Roland Garros in Paris on May 30, 2021.

Japan’s Naomi Osaka reacts during her first round match against Romania’s Patricia Maria Tig at the Roland Garros in Paris on May 30, 2021.

Naomi Osaka attended a post-match press conference at Brisbane in 2019 in her usual style — a paradoxical mixture of uneasy calm and assured self-deprecation. A reporter questioned her on the upcoming round, and she answered in jest, “Do you have anything interesting to ask? I’m sorry. You guys are so serious.” The room burst into guffaws. “Just doing our jobs,” the reporter ploughed on.

It is this part of the job that has catapulted Osaka into a controversy, leading to an abrupt withdrawal from the ongoing French Open tournament. Predictably, the entire episode has garnered polarising reactions, most lacking any nuance or understanding of an issue that is comprised of many angles.

 

What went wrong

Osaka has been a voice of reason on several issues in the past. This time, too, with her media boycott , she stood up for the mental well-being of athletes. But the timing and method of her announcement left much to be desired. Osaka posted a poorly-worded statement on social media barely four days before the tournament. The Grand Slams are sticklers for tradition and post-match pressers, which are considered sacrosanct and which players are mandated to attend irrespective of whether they win or lose. Of course, rules pertaining to players can and must change in an ever-evolving sport, but that requires time and conversation.

Osaka was expectedly fined $15,000 after missing her round-one press conference. But being the highest-paid female athlete in the world as per the latest reports, she can afford penalties till the dawn of Championship Day. Other players, who may be living on a shoestring budget, struggling to merely qualify tournaments without any support system, cannot. The conversation surrounding players’ mental health must accommodate all.

The four Grand Slams, in a joint statement, threatened Osaka with defaults and suspensions in future tournaments. If the governing bodies were worried about optics, then firing such heavy artillery was hardly a genius move. It backfired horribly — they wanted Osaka to talk about the tennis she was playing, but she has now stopped playing because she does not want to talk about it.

Editorial | No comments: On post-match conferences

Osaka’s statement after her withdrawal was telling, hinting at larger battles such as depression and anxiety. But she acknowledged that the press has always been kind to her. The fact that Osaka could tell the media to do a better job by asking “interesting questions” and be rewarded with laughs and not scorn shows what she is — a media darling. Her popularity is as much about her forehand shots as it is about how the media has portrayed her, which has been fairly positive. It explains why several journalists are surprised at the suggestion that their questions caused her anxiety. It is yet another example of the disconnect between what critics and spectators interpret the gruelling nature of this sport to be and what it actually is.

There exists a larger question of what we expect from our sporting icons. Are we satisfied with them just doing their job — playing, winning — or do we want to get to know the person, the tactical genius, behind the champion? It takes a particular brand of mental fortitude to thrive in a punishing and lonely sport such as tennis. It is this trait that journalists most often want to probe and showcase. The ideal way to do that would be through long-winded, private chats. But those are offered only to a select few. Others are then left with only one avenue — the press conference. If it is such an integral part, the powers that be must then focus on making it more player-friendly and nurturing a connection with journalists based on trust and empathy.

The effect of a star’s presence, both on and off-court, permeates deeply. It means more coverage, and, in turn, more income for the sport, which trickles down to every player. A champion’s night match increases television ratings. In this case, a few minutes spent in an interview room can make millions in sponsorship deals. Hopefully, the sport and its players will be able to figure out ways to work together on this.

preethi.r@thehindu.co.in

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.