Front Burner - Naomi Osaka vs. the French Open

Episode Date: June 3, 2021

Tennis star Naomi Osaka announced last week that she wouldn’t go to postmatch news conferences over mental health concerns and this week she dropped out of the tournament altogether. Caitlin Thompson of Racquet Magazine walks us through how this led to controversy in the tennis world and highlights broader problems surrounding the media culture in the sport.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. I want to take you back to a moment at the US Open in 2018. The trophy was about to be presented for the women's final. A 20-year-old Naomi Osaka had just beaten the greatest of all time, Serena Williams. It was a contentious game. Serena even got into an argument with the umpire.

Ramos just said game penalty. Correct. Are you kidding me? Because I said you're a thief. Because you stole a point from me. And as Osaka was named champion, the crowd booed. And as Osaka was named champion, the crowd booed.

She cried. She tried to hide her face. It was really tough to watch because you could tell how uncomfortable she was. It was supposed to be this celebration, but it so obviously wasn't. I know that everyone was cheering for her. I'm sorry it had to end like this. And you could see it then, Naomi Osaka's discomfort with being in the spotlight. It was something that was made really visible this week when she said she wasn't going to do post-game press conferences during the French Open and eventually dropped out altogether. This whole saga has raised a lot of questions about the demands on athletes and the media culture

they inhabit. I'm Jamie Poisson and today Caitlin Thompson from Racket Magazine is here to walk me through this controversy. Hi Caitlin, thank you so much for being with me today. My pleasure. Thank you for having me. So Naomi Osaka is more than just a talented tennis star. She's the highest paid female athlete working today, for one. And before we dig into this controversy at the French Open, can you remind us of what makes her unique as an athlete? Yeah, I mean, there's a couple of different things. You know, I think for number one, she's somebody who came up largely in the States. But her parentage is, her father is Haitian, and her mother is Japanese. And she chose to represent Japan,

a place that she was born, largely because they were giving her more support as a junior. And she really emerged on the scene kind of fully formed as a 14, she was born, largely because they were giving her more support as a junior. And she really emerged on the scene, kind of fully formed as a 14, 15-year-old, hitting tennis balls faster than many, many had hit from a young person's perspective in a very long time. 15 years old. Keep your eyes on Naomi. I've been playing tennis since I was three years old. My goal is to become a tennis legend. I'll do anything in my power to get there.

So I'll see you soon. Bye. And also was a pretty fully formed athlete. So even from the early years, I think she established herself fairly quickly as a real contender. And then, you know, obviously, as you note, in 2018, really a full year and a half after she'd begun playing full-schedule professional tournaments, found herself in a final against the greatest of all time. The second time they played that season, Naomi famously rampaged against Serena and beat her very soundly a couple months before in Miami. Oh, it's hitting from another world. Dragging Serena Williams all around the court there. You know, and really was thrust onto the big stage at the U.S. Open.

A lot of people sort of thought maybe this was one and done, but she backed it up with a win at the Australian Open very quickly thereafter. And then last summer won the U.S. Open again after having won another Australian Open. Oh, she saw it. Blistered. She saw it coming. So she's already won four Grand Slams. And I think what really makes this an interesting moment is her tennis on court has been impeccable and really hard to argue with.

But she's also, because I think a little bit in part of the way she means so much to so many different people, she's been positioned and has stepped into the role of being really a transcendent star. You know, she's somebody who's been an activist. We saw her wearing Black Lives Matter protest masks at her seven matches at the U.S. Open last year and really educating an entire country of Japan about the struggle in the U.S. for racial equity. I feel like the point is to make people start talking. I mean, for me, I've been inside of the bubble, so I'm not really sure what's really going on in the outside world.

All I can tell is what's going on on social media. And for me, I feel like, you know, the more retweets it gets, or that's so lame, but, you know, the more people talk about it. You know, and she's somebody who, as you noted, is incredibly sought after as an endorser because she's so authentic. She's not somebody who comes with the same kind of media polish that I think is really emblematic of yesteryear. She's somebody very fresh and very new and very real.

And I think along with that realness comes some vulnerability, which is kind of the perfect storm for what we're kind of left to parse now after this Roland Garros situation. Take me through how the story unraveled over the last week, I guess starting with the announcement that she wasn't going to participate in news conferences during the French Open. The opening salvo of this saga began when Naomi Osaka sent both to the FFT, which is the French governing body, which puts on the French Open Roland Garros, as we know it, and simultaneously released to social media,

an announcement saying she'd been having some struggles. She wasn't feeling like she was up for the real scrutiny that comes with having to deal with the post-match press conference, which I want to just make sure that people understand the post-match press conference is something very specific. It's not necessarily saying I'm not going to be available for TV. I'm not going to go up to the desk. I'm not going to talk to, you know, an interviewer on court after a win or a loss. Basically, she said, I'm not going to be participating in this out of a preponderance of concern for my mental health, and I'm happy to pay the fine. Paying a fine has been the de facto sort of punishment or structural, you know, caution put in place for years, and many players choose to avail themselves of that option and have for years. The Williams

sisters themselves very famously dodge press a lot. Venus Williams, more than most other players I can think of, partially because of the racist and misogynist stuff that she was getting on the regular, but also, you know, she felt like she would rather pay the money. Novak Djokovic walked out after the U.S. Open. He was defaulted last summer and chose not to attend a press conference and gladly took the fine. And so the idea that this is something never done before is not on its face true. What is different about this is that she let them know. So she made this announcement, went out, won her first match, so much to the surprise of a lot of people because Clay isn't really one of her favorite surfaces, was met with a very very stern message of response from from the french tennis federation and the tournament itself saying not only are you going to have to pay a fine but we are taking this as an affront

and we are going to escalate the punishments up to but not not necessarily excluding uh defaulting you from the tournament. They decided to immediately come down with the harshest possible response and kind of, like I said, changed the rules on her. That hadn't been a possibility in years past. Skipping press was, again, just a bill to pay,

whether you liked it or not. And by saying that this could lead to a possible default, they got one out of her, just not in the ways that they intended. And she withdrew from the tournament. And then they were very quick to sort of release other statements saying like, hey, you know, we support her mental health, you know, we're willing to work with her. But I think had they started with that response, instead of the sternest possible reaction, we could have avoided all of this. Did they explain why they did that? Yeah, I mean, I think part of it was in the notes and in the statement that was read by Gilles Monteau, the French Tennis Federation president, which notably he did not take questions from the press after he made the announcement, which was, you know, we sell these rights,

the rights to this tournament to media, to stakeholders, to broadcast rights holders. And part of that package, part of what they pay for is access to athletes. Furthermore, the health of the sport, and this is true, it's undeniable at this point, the health of the sport really is dependent upon these athletes being ambassadors for the game, being in conversations both within but also on the outside of the sport and helping to pull more people in. You know, at this point, Naomi Osaka, between her endorsements and her sort of social media following, has a much bigger platform, certainly than the French Open, I would argue, maybe even the tennis world combined. And so they are right to recognize that these athletes, even when they get so big, they transcend the sport,

can and should be assets for the sport to stay healthy, for to attract new fans and to, you know, on a more sort of transactional level, be part of the value that is given to a broadcast partner like, you know, Eurosport or Tennis Channel or ESPN or whatever it is, when they pay to broadcast the matches. The WTA, the ATA, the ATP and the ITF, we remain very committed to all athletes' well-being and to continually improving every aspect of players' experience in our tournament, including with the media, like we have always tried to do. Frankly, I'm disappointed that the tennis world didn't do better.

They treated this in the worst possible way and essentially doubled down when they didn't have to with somebody who, in my experience, and frankly, more importantly, their experience is a good faith, thoughtful, you know, gracious champion and human person who has given us no indication that she's out to do this for malice, but anything other than just trying to perform as best she could on the court, which is ultimately the product that is most important in all of this. I know that Naomi released a statement on Monday when she pulled out of the French Open. What did she have to say about all this? Well, it's interesting because she clarified further that she has said she's struggled with mental bouts of depression between now and, you know, since the 2018 US Open that you spoke about. And it was really hard for her to have to sort of feel vulnerable and picked apart by a press corps, again, different than the broadcast media, different than radio or television

necessarily, but specifically the print and digital journalists who are in that press corps who at times do go for blood. And I read that as a bit of a reaction to the fact that a lot of people were dubious about how seriously to take this mental health stand. You know, the most cynical response I saw to her initial statement, which is why I think she felt the need to clarify with a second statement, is a lot of people, certainly other athletes and people within the press, for sure, their first reaction was sort of to question, well, is this really mental health? Or does she just not want to talk to us?

Is this her dodging, or seeing part of her job as being disposable? And you know, the truth is, she just she doesn't have a very good record on this surface at this tournament. And so is this just another way of creating an advantage for herself by not having to do this, when no other players would be so advantaged? That was certainly the response I got privately from a lot of the athletes I spoke to over the weekend. It costs you almost nothing to a contemporary conversation and understanding and empathetic response to somebody who's who's going through something mentally that maybe you know they don't want to further clarify they shouldn't need to further clarify i don't think she needs a doctor's note to be able to tell people that

she's struggling In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem, brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo, 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast,

just search for Money for Cops. You mentioned before the environment in these post-game press conferences. And can you give me a little bit more of a sense of what they are like and what Naomi's relationship with them have been like over the years? Yeah, it's a really interesting question, because I have a very particular viewpoint. I came to tennis. I've played it all my life, and I was a D1 college athlete. But I began professionally covering tennis and getting access to those press rooms only as recently as five years ago when we started the magazine. And I came from the world of politics. And the leap from one to the other was really shocking to me, because as old and white and male as any traditional press corps is, the political one was so far better than what I encountered in those tennis press rooms.

It was especially ossified, especially male, especially cynical, especially jaded, and especially white in a way that I think was shocking at the time. And I remember saying early, I couldn't believe the people, not all the people, but certain people who were getting credentialed into these tournaments. You know, there's a really specific anecdote I want to bring up only because I think it illustrates this point, which is, I found myself after years of trying finally credentialed for the 2018 US Open. And instead of spending most of my time in the press room, which is where most of these folks live and die, they don't leave, they don't go out and watch tennis, they shuffle to the press room, ask at times very professional and good questions, but at times appalling questions. And I spent my time, you know, mostly walking around the grounds and

gathering sort of feature ideas, meeting with reporters, etc. And I went out to court 17. And I was actually watching Naomi Osaka bagel, which is, you know, beating oh, no, Alexander Sastrovich. And I saw a couple friends there, I saw a guy called Alex Jung, a woman called Chloe Cooper Jones, and a guy called Gary Nathan. And in that order, they write for New York magazine, GQ, and Gary at the time was writing for Deadspin. And now is a defector and write some for us, all three people, millennials, all people of color. And I was shocked to see them. They're not because they weren't, you know, excited to watch Naomi Osaka, but because I hadn't seen them in the press room. And I said, Hey, guys, what's going on? I haven't seen you.

And they all said, Oh, yeah, our credentials have been rejected. And I was my jaw fell to the floor, because I had just come from this insane context in which this old, bored, jaded, you know, at times not subject matter expert body of people were being so defensive about who gets through their gates. And then three young journalists who by anybody's measure, social following, cultural relevance, quality of their narrative journalism, is just so much better weren't allowed in the door. Before we move on, I wonder if you can think of any other examples that, you know, perhaps Naomi Osaka was subjected to or other tennis players. When they are asking questions in press conferences, their names don't appear next to the

question. You can always tell, I can always tell now who the bad actors are, but the fact that they're in there asking question tournament after tournament, but they're protected by anonymity is really problematic to me because if somebody like the one who asks the question literally last week of Coco Gauff, a young woman of color, and asking her to talk about Serena Williams and they're both similar because they're black, no substance to the question, no reason to bring up Serena Williams in the context. They weren't about to play a match. They weren't chasing the same record. They weren't even at the same tournament.

But the fact that this person felt the need to have her speak on race, I highly doubt that was a person of color. I highly doubt it was a woman. I highly doubt it was somebody under 60. I know pretty much who it was, but I will never know for sure because I wasn't in the room and the journalist's name did not appear next to the question. So somebody can't weed that person out for the next tournament. And so that to me is such an example of something tennis media could do better starting tomorrow. And it has really been resistant to do it. And I'm hoping we can take this opportunity to address it and do better.

Right. I just that example that you just said, I have a quote right here. So the journalist said to Coco Gauff, you're often compared to the Williams sisters, maybe it's because you're black, but I guess it's because you're talented and maybe American too. you're reminding me that i didn't answer the second half of your question which is what has naomi osaka's relationship with the press brand like and what's interesting and sort of ironic about all this is she's actually enjoyed a pretty soft gloves treatment with the media she's not a particularly controversial figure she hasn't been accused credibly i might add

of domestic violence like somebody like alexanderverev. She's unfailingly sort of game and thoughtful, and she really does internalize a question in an attempt to answer it really thoughtfully. Ugh, your question making me emotional. Um, okay because i know that this like she really wants to have the 24th grand slam right everyone knows this it's on the commercials it's everywhere and like when i step onto the court i feel like a different person right i'm not a serena fan I'm just a tennis player playing another tennis player. But then when I hugged her at the net, sorry. Which I think possibly is why she kind of finds herself in a, I don't want to use too woo-woo of a term here, but like maybe psychically kind of damaged by this, because I think she really takes it seriously and takes it on. When somebody asks her question she's going to in good faith really try to give them a good answer there is no

excuse now for somebody like Naomi Osaka who can go immediately to her own fans both through the brand channel she commands but also on her own and supersede the tournament supersede the tours and I hope instead of losing her to that, where she's only going to speak in protected environments, we instead reform. And do you have a sense that that reckoning is happening, and that any change might result from it in the press corps and also, I guess, in the sport at large? Yeah, it's interesting, because prior to this, whenever some kind of kerfluffle happened, and tennis would react to sort of in a pearl clutching manner, kind of whatever it was, you know, whether it can you say that? You know, Nick Kyrgios tanking matches. You know, tennis has tended to be so, so traditionalist in a way that's so disappointing, whereas it's not hard for them,

and it shouldn't be hard to sort of realize a larger discussion. What is so amazing about this, and it's been a through line in our conversation today, Jamie, which I'm so grateful to have is Naomi Osaka really is a different beast. She's the first real millennial superstar. And she is somebody who connects worlds, she's going to be in a Netflix documentary, she's somebody who, you know, again, resonates with all of these brands, she means something that I don't think the tennis world quite totally understands. And the kind of blowback that they are getting and the tennis world is getting not only from other athletes like Steph Curry, or some of the NBA players who feel very supported that she joined their boycott of games last summer during the US Open that also coincided with the NBA playoffs. You know, I don't think they understand how seismic a player they have on their hands and who the people that she is

connecting and bringing to the sport, you know, how much their voices weigh. Like just today, I was seeing tweets from Ava DuVernay and Roxane Gay and politicians. Like we're getting to a place where tennis is really looking like the bad guy and they deserve it. Well, I'll just ask you then as a final question, and you just sort of alluded to it, what you think should happen? Because I do think that there are people who would argue that there is also a lot of value in hearing from these athletes, you know, even right after a game. And there is a lot of value in reporters being able to ask whatever they want without, you know, the athletes having their managers and their teams around them sort of controlling the narrative. So how do you kind of walk that line? Like, what changes would you like to see? Yeah, I think it's a good question. And I think I'm one of those people. I

agree that hearing from these athletes is additive. And I think there's not that many things that need to happen to make that part of the game better. I think policing credentialing and figuring out how to involve new voices that are a little bit more attuned to understanding somebody, putting Naomi in context, as opposed to this very ossified body that's basically just been allowed to be grandfathered into the conversation by virtue of the fact that they've been there for years, is an immediate place to start. I would revoke everybody's credentials and make them reapply. Putting names next to questions on transcripts is another very easy way to do it.

And, you know, going beyond that, diversifying the commentary. It's typically older athletes who don't have the experience of being a sort of seismic star the way that the Serena Williams is and the Naomi Osaka's and the Roger Federer's are. So a lot of that can change immediately and for the better. And more importantly than anything else, having a real voice of the players at the table in a unified manner, looking something like what we have here in the NBA, where the league is 50-50 ownership between the players and the team owners. They sit down every year and go over rule changes, updates. They create policies that both protect players, but also put punitive measures in place if somebody's not following the rules, like a credible domestic violence investigation that should have sidelined at least two players in the men's draw, or protecting players from what they

see as vicious press that doesn't add anything constructive. There's a place for players to have a voice there. And I think there's a very, very clear example from these other leagues about how that can happen. And I would love to see it happen. I would love to see the men and women come together to form a joint body and really be able to advocate for themselves. Because I because I think again the sport could only benefit by having their voices more included and keeping them really bought in nobody wins if Naomi Osaka walks away from tennis nobody okay Caitlin thank you so much for this this is really fascinating you're very welcome my pleasure Jamie All right, so before we go today, an update on the coroner's inquiry into the death of Joyce Echaquan as it came to a close yesterday. More than 2,000 people marched in the streets of Trois-Rivières in Quebec, calling for justice after the 37-year-old died in hospital last year, shortly after she took a video showing nurses hurling racist comments at her. In the next 30 days, the coroner who

oversaw the inquest will provide a report with final recommendations. If you want to hear more about Joyce Echaquan and what happened in the final days of the inquiry, you can listen back to our Wednesday episode. That's all for today. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening to FrontBurner. Elaine Chao is sitting in for me tomorrow. We'll talk to you next week.