Board 8 > What's your stance on the naomi osaka situation?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Can't you see that the tournament organizers and sports media have reasons and that gently pressuring them to adapt in a time when they are already losing bargaining power is so cruel to them, can't you see that

---

The TOs have changed rules in the past.
They can change this media obligation rule as well.


---

foolm0r0n posted...

She has to fulfill the media obligations OR pay a 15k fine. That's the contract she signed, and she followed it to the letter.

What you are arguing is that regardless of her contract, she must do the interview or else she can't play tennis, and the tourney can harass her for it. You're gonna have to really step it up to convince people that she is a slave to the media and society because she's good at hitting a ball.

I'm not siding with the French Open here. I was just responding to Kenri who asked "why do people have to do press conferences just because they are good at tennis?" and the answer is they don't, they have do them if they enter tournaments that require them

It was stupid to ban her anyway because now she's not playing and still not doing press conferences and I don't see how the French Open benefits from one of the sport's bigger stars not being there.

---

No can't you see

---

RPGlord95 posted...

The people saying suck it up buttercup in here have clearly never dealt with depression or anxiety.

100% with Naomi here.

Having anxiety should not preclude people from being successful at things like sports or acting. Just because you can do one thing in front of millions doesn't mean another task is instantly easy for you.

Plus post and pre game pressers are generally a waste of time and only ask trash questions. Tennis especially they are awful to the players and ask stupid shit all the time. Even more so the French media to the women. Even even more to the ones that aren't white.

There will always be players more than happy to talk. Let them. Make it voluntary. Just because its past practice doesn't mean its right. We live in a different world now where people are allowed to feel uncomfortable and have emotions without being told fuck you do your job. You can adapt a workplace to make people comfortable.

Would it cause a loss of money? Maybe. Maybe not. I think media would adapt because they have to.

1000000% this. Very well said.

---

I don't feel bad for her. Not going to fully doubt it, but does she really have mental health issues, or does she not realize the pros and cons to stuff she does on and off a tennis court? I also don't feel bad for the French Open. Kind of harsh to want to disqualify for not going to a press conference.

---

I don't side with either.

I've never liked the media nor the emphasis on the media in sports.

But players sign a contract as far as sports goes that media availability is mandatory. We can't put them on a pedestal above that contract, but players are also free to walk away if they need to.

Part of why players get paid so much is to interact with the media and give the talking heads their content. I can't put the blame on an organization for holding someone to a contractual obligation, and I can't put the blame on her for prioritizing her mental health.

It's dickish, but sports leagues are well within their rights to pressure the players, who are well within their rights to walk away. There are no "sides" here.

---

I understand the contractual obligations for pro athletes, but if she's willing to pay the fines, then just let her. Tennis went too far by threatening DQs and having all the majors basically gang up on her because that's just a lose-lose for everyone. It was essentially a "You think you're bigger than US?" reaction.

---

Crescent-Moon posted...

I don't side with either.

I've never liked the media nor the emphasis on the media in sports.

But players sign a contract as far as sports goes that media availability is mandatory. We can't put them on a pedestal above that contract, but players are also free to walk away if they need to.

Part of why players get paid so much is to interact with the media and give the talking heads their content. I can't put the blame on an organization for holding someone to a contractual obligation, and I can't put the blame on her for prioritizing her mental health.

It's dickish, but sports leagues are well within their rights to pressure the players, who are well within their rights to walk away. There are no "sides" here.

She's paying the fines, doing what the contract said would be the penalty if she didn't do it. The issue is the banning and the harassing of her for it on top of that which def wasn't in the contract.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

She's paying the fines, doing what the contract said would be the penalty if she didn't do it. The issue is the banning and the harassing of her for it on top of that which def wasn't in the contract

Oh.

Then she has grounds for a lawsuit for violation of contract.

---

foolm0r0n posted...

She has to fulfill the media obligations OR pay a 15k fine. That's the contract she signed, and she followed it to the letter.

What you are arguing is that regardless of her contract, she must do the interview or else she can't play tennis, and the tourney can harass her for it. You're gonna have to really step it up to convince people that she is a slave to the media and society because she's good at hitting a ball.

If you get a speeding ticket you pay a fine, it doesn't mean speeding is okay, and won't be followed by further punishment if you are a repeat offender. What a pointless statement this post is

---

Ok, I feel the need to point out that everyone saying that fines were the only penalty that were ever on the table, contractually, is just flat out misinformed. Media access is governed by the player Code of Conduct, which calls for escalating penalties, up to and including disqualification, for repeat violations.

---

Well thank you Naomi Osaka for disrupting the status quo, which could possibly lead to adapted/improved player codes of conduct, further irrelevance of television/print sports media, and fewer personalities like Steven A. Smith and Skip Bayless acting like insufferable buffoons on TV.

She may be one of the sporting heroes of our time.

---

redrocket posted...

Ok, I feel the need to point out that everyone saying that fines were the only penalty that were ever on the table, contractually, is just flat out misinformed. Media access is governed by the player Code of Conduct, which calls for escalating penalties, up to and including disqualification, for repeat violations.

No, I get that they're within their rights to DQ her, but it does them no good to openly threaten to do so. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face because you want to act like no one gets special treatment.

---

LeonhartFour posted...

No, I get that they're within their rights to DQ her,

Sure, but several others were under a different impression.

---

Who cares if they were within their rights to DQ her? Just because it's a rule doesn't mean it's a good or fair one. Bad rules should be changed, not blindly followed.

---

foolm0r0n posted...

When she started getting good at tennis, she knew that she was signing up for a life of interviews. Everyone knows tennis is about the interviews. It's her own fault. If she didn't want to be famous she could've just failed at all her life goals like the rest of us.

While this might be in jest, it is part of the job. When someone has a networth of $25 million+ like Naomi does, a bulk of that is thanks to sponsors and prize money (also due to sponsors). It's a media circus from the start. If you want to get absurdly rich without giving back to the circus that put you there...I don't know what to say.

---

TomNook posted...

While this might be in jest, it is part of the job. When someone has a networth of $25 million+ like Naomi does, a bulk of that is thanks to sponsors and prize money (also due to sponsors). It's a media circus from the start. If you want to get absurdly rich without giving back to the circus that put you there...I don't know what to say.

You're misunderstanding something. The "circus" she wants to avoid is the vulture-plagued press conference following a match. It has nothing to do with her sponsors. If they want to interview her one-on-one, she welcomes it. And she also welcomed the idea of a smaller press conference so her sponsors' people could be there, whereas the "sports journalists" who ask demeaning, intrusive, and/or irrelevant questions would not. It's not part of her job to deal with harassment.

Her options were laid out for her: Attend the press conference or pay up. She chose pay up. And then they violated that contract by attempting to humiliate her, which basically proved her point.
---

BlueCrystalTear posted...

Her options were laid out for her: Attend the press conference or pay up. She chose pay up. And then they violated that contract by attempting to humiliate her, which basically proved her point.

Ah, well if they are breaking a contract they agreed upon, they are clearly in the wrong.

---

BlueCrystalTear posted...

Her options were laid out for her: Attend the press conference or pay up. She chose pay up. And then they violated that contract by attempting to humiliate her, which basically proved her point.

This is incorrect. See post #112

---

redrocket posted...

This is incorrect. See post #112

Well, she only skipped one press conference. Are you saying that should result in a DQ, threats, and harassment?
---

Yeah, while I think the DQ threats, especially for future events - not just the current one, are completely uncalled for - it is within the rights of the rules/contract for them to do so.

Just, "they're contractually allowed!" isn't a good argument to me when I think the thing they're allowed to do is wrong and uncalled for.

---

BlueCrystalTear posted...

Well, she only skipped one press conference. Are you saying that should result in a DQ, threats, and harassment?

She wasnt actually DQd. She was warned that missing more conferences could result in harsher penalties, including a DQ. The Open took some actions (such as that tweet) that were in poor taste, but its quite a stretch to argue that anything the tournament officials themselves did rises to the legal definition of harassment.

Lets be clear about something. I am not on the side of the French Open. All Im saying is they did nothing involving an actual breach of contract.

---

They're well within their right to move ahead to the ban punishment, and likewise if Osaka doesn't want that ban but doesn't want a presser she's free to dip - as she very respectfully did.

Also their decision to start talking bans can be criticized regardless of their right to do so - and that's before getting into their petty attempts at bullying someone struggling with depression.

---

Mac Arrowny posted...

And what consequences should there be for the French Open, since the tournament director refused to take questions after making his statement?

Different aspects of the business. Naomi's press conferences are meant to promote the event (someone says it gives journos content, so it's that). The director wasn't there to promote the event, but rather to give a statement about why one of their top draws wasn't going to be playing anymore.

Also, while this is tangential to me, idk maybe it'll mean more to those more sympathetic to "but the contract!"

I read a Forbes article here ( https://www.forbes.com/sites/douglaswigdor/2021/06/01/naomi-osaka-and-the-french-open-a-tale-of-disability-discrimination/ ) that lays out the argument that had this been the US Open that pulled this there's a good likelihood that the Open would be found discriminating under the ADA and lose the case based on an earlier precedent involving the PGA Tour being sued and losing on ADA discrimination grounds.

As the articles, obviously US law doesn't apply to the French Open, but if there's a good chance the Slam Events (which obv include the US Open) were threatening action that ran afoul of legal discrimination (at least in the US)...

---

MZero posted...

I don't think you're getting my point. If she (or any other player) wants to play in the tournament, she has to fulfill the media obligations. If she's fine with just the endorsements then she doesn't need to enter the tournament, and thus doesn't have to do any press. (granted I imagine she would lose a lot of endorsements by not playing)

So why is she entering the tournament to begin with? Money? Fame? Legacy? The chance to play other top players? Regardless, if she can get whatever it is she wants without entering the tournament, then she can decide whether she wants to do media or not.

I mean I get what you're trying to say. I'm just saying it's a shit practice. It's not something that should be contractually obligated when it serves no real purpose. Money isn't really the issue, though you make a fair point that her endorsements might be hurt by her not playing; conversely, they might support her because ultimately they might not want to alienate fans of the number two ranked player in the WTA.

As others have also pointed out, she's not against media in general, it's just this aspect of it that she doesn't like, and again, most people, even those arguing against her not wanting to do this, have not given a single good reason why other than "Because it's the done thing."

The done thing is stupid and if she wants to say enough is enough, I'm happy for her, and I hope it results in a positive outcome.

---

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

If you get a speeding ticket you pay a fine, it doesn't mean speeding is okay, and won't be followed by further punishment if you are a repeat offender. What a pointless statement this post is

Oh ok, you're comparing her action to a literal crime

You're really smart man, thanks for participating in this discussion

---

TomNook posted...

While this might be in jest, it is part of the job. When someone has a networth of $25 million+ like Naomi does, a bulk of that is thanks to sponsors and prize money (also due to sponsors). It's a media circus from the start. If you want to get absurdly rich without giving back to the circus that put you there...I don't know what to say.

Yeah I get that's what lots of people believe, my post was parodying that exact belief

---

BlackJackCat posted...

I mean I get what you're trying to say. I'm just saying it's a shit practice. It's not something that should be contractually obligated when it serves no real purpose. Money isn't really the issue, though you make a fair point that her endorsements might be hurt by her not playing; conversely, they might support her because ultimately they might not want to alienate fans of the number two ranked player in the WTA.

As others have also pointed out, she's not against media in general, it's just this aspect of it that she doesn't like, and again, most people, even those arguing against her not wanting to do this, have not given a single good reason why other than "Because it's the done thing."

The done thing is stupid and if she wants to say enough is enough, I'm happy for her, and I hope it results in a positive outcome.

It must serve a purpose (or at least a perceived purpose) or else they wouldn't keep doing it. These billionaire tournament organizers aren't just doing these press conferences for no reason. They aren't paying her cause she's good at tennis, they're paying her (and other benefits such as exposure etc.) because she can generate revenue for them, and one way she does that is through press conferences. It's a business.

I'll repeat, if she can find fulfillment (monetary or otherwise) as a tennis player without entering these tournaments good for her. Or if she can change the tennis world for the better that would be great!

---

MZero posted...

It must serve a purpose (or at least a perceived purpose) or else they wouldn't keep doing it.

I fail to see how giving bullshit journalists fodder for clickbait somehow puts money into the sport. I suppose you could argue any publicity is good publicity, but I doubt anyone who didn't know who Naomi Osaka was to begin with gives a damn about any drama around her. There are ways of promoting the sport that don't need to be this prone to toxicity, and it has been proven, within tennis, and without. So once again, this is only done because it's the done thing, and that's okay because...?

But I am glad we can at least agree that if she changes things for the better that would be great.

---

Press conferences served a purpose when newspapers were the main way people got news.

---

It will never make sense to me that anyone wouldn't support Naomi Osaka in this situation, even if you believe that press conferences are something that the players should reasonably be expected to do (which is not an unfair position to take). It's really not clever at all to point out that Osaka is contractually obligated, and that it's part of her job. You think she, and everyone else in this discussion, isn't aware of that? The fact that it's part of her job doesn't mean that it ought to be, or that the French Open and the press are actually facilitating an environment that has her best interests at heart. And shouldn't they? Why does it make any sense for the French Open to be an environment where one of the biggest stars of tennis isn't having her needs met? Why would you side with the French Open and their ability to make whatever demands they want out of players on the basis that "well, they don't have to participate if they don't want to" - but NOT side with Osaka's ability to use her leverage as one of the best tennis players in the world to get what she wants out of this arrangement? Spare a thought for the possibility that the pressure of having to face the media constantly, a media that doesn't always have the players' interests at heart, might actually affect her ability to play a very mental and emotional game at the highest level. Does she not have every right to negotiate a situation in which she doesn't face extra pressure on top of the already crushing pressure of winning tennis matches? As a tennis fan and a fan of Naomi Osaka herself, I want nothing more than for her to be 100% going into every match and to be able to play at her best without petty distractions getting in the way of her preparation. Any fan should want that. I can't understand why you would be against this, unless you're simply bitter and petty about the fact that Osaka has more leverage over her profession than you do.

MZero posted...

It must serve a purpose (or at least a perceived purpose) or else they wouldn't keep doing it. These billionaire tournament organizers aren't just doing these press conferences for no reason.

You can't be that naive

---

Fine, I'll open my own tennis organization! With no media scrums! And blackjack! And hookers!

---

Paratroopa1 posted...

It will never make sense to me that anyone wouldn't support Naomi Osaka in this situation

It gets a lot easier when you realize how many people are corporate bootlickers

---

BlackJackCat posted...

I fail to see how giving bullshit journalists fodder for clickbait somehow puts money into the sport. I suppose you could argue any publicity is good publicity, but I doubt anyone who didn't know who Naomi Osaka was to begin with gives a damn about any drama around her. There are ways of promoting the sport that don't need to be this prone to toxicity, and it has been proven, within tennis, and without. So once again, this is only done because it's the done thing, and that's okay because...?

But I am glad we can at least agree that if she changes things for the better that would be great.

If it was just tennis doing them, I could see the argument that they're stuck in the past. But there must be a reason every sport does this and tons of media outlets show up every time. Even during the pandemic they've set up virtual ones rather than cancel them. It doesn't make sense for every league/organization to be doing this if it's not benefitting their business.

---

I think that the rules need to be changed regarding press conferences if it's legal that the slams committee can force defaults and future bans like they were threatening to over something as nothing as a presser. The things they were threatening with are not worth the crime at all. Nothing vague like "conduct detrimental to the game" if that's what they were lording over her as the grounds for their threats, I want specific outlines as to what the penalties are for missing pressers, and they need to be minor if anything at all. Or as it's been suggested, turn it the other way and give bonus cash to people who choose to do pressers and don't punish the people who don't want to waste their time, because these are wastes of time unless you want to call someone out during one in which case they're mildly entertaining.

Yes, as presented, it is in the rules that they have to attend. And they should stick with fines if they have to have a penalty, because it's a problem for sports when someone starts having to suffer on the field of play for something completely unrelated to how good they are on that field of play that isn't like a crime or something, and an even bigger problem when that someone is the best in their field.

I think you can tell that the slams committee was trying to bully her into attending them by how they reacted after she called their bluff and withdrew herself. They know damn well they can't be having the best women's player in the world not playing in their premier events because of this nonsense, and they should've just fined her as she was expecting and even welcoming and been done with it. Instead they tried to be the big boys and forgot that whoops, they not only don't have leverage over someone like osaka who's willing to just walk away, but it makes them look terrible in turn.
---

MZero posted...

If it was just tennis doing them, I could see the argument that they're stuck in the past. But there must be a reason every sport does this and tons of media outlets show up every time.

Do you know the reason why they continue to do it despite how there are more positive ways to promote the sport and pick a players brains?

---

BlackJackCat posted...

Do you know the reason why they continue to do it despite how there are more positive ways to promote the sport and pick a players brains?

No, I don't run a sports league/tournament nor am I an extremely successful businessman. I assume though if the people who are successful at those things are all doing it there must be a reason, though. It seems like a few people in this topic are just casually dismissing them as worthless despite having no experience running such an operation. If anyone can point me to research showing that they don't help the sport than I will admit I'm wrong!

I'm not saying I like them or think they're the best way to handle it, but it's part of the exchange of services between the players and the league or tournament. If enough players decided to challenge it they could probably negotiate something (Osaka by herself might even be enough tbh)

---

MZero posted...

No, I don't run a sports league/tournament

Then you don't know if it's a pointless and toxic affair that is perpetuated for no good, silly reasons. Okay.

I get your reasoning. It's just naive to assume that people in authority do things 100% of the time for sound reasons, which sometimes is incredibly wrong.

---

BlackJackCat posted...

Then you don't know if it's a pointless and toxic affair that is perpetuated for no good, silly reasons. Okay.

I get your reasoning. It's just naive to assume that people in authority do things 100% of the time for sound reasons, which sometimes is incredibly wrong.

No, I'm assuming every sport league in the world isn't doing the same thing for no reason. If it was one or two leagues, sure.
The logical explanation is that it's effective. If there is evidence to the contrary please feel free to post it

---

Sports organizations aren't something holy- they're just normal commercial organizations

If an employee skips work, it seems logical that they would be fired

I was on the open's side when they were adhering to their pre existing rules and slapping her with fines, given how much they were paying her

But they went and escalated it too far imho


---

Continuing in the cursed tournament timeline, the top seed had to drop out and a Russian player was caught fixing matches.

---

FFDragon posted...

Continuing in the cursed tournament timeline, the top seed had to drop out and a Russian player was caught fixing matches.

To be fair, I'm now paying more attention to this tournament than I would have before!

---

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

If you get a speeding ticket you pay a fine, it doesn't mean speeding is okay, and won't be followed by further punishment if you are a repeat offender. What a pointless statement this post is

Damn you put no thought into that

like you just hit post

---

hey man a crime's a crime

---

skipping work isn't a crime exactly, but i get your point

---