Naomi Osaka refusing to speak to the media - Is she right or wrong?

[I'm With Stupid]

No as 99% of the worlds population don't watch tennis , but the media coverage in print , TV & social media gives them exposure to make their vast wealth vis sponsorship

So you think they wouldn't write about her if they couldn't interview her after each round? They write about the queen all the time, and I've never seen her give an interview.

 

[jazzy]

So you think they wouldn't write about her if they couldn't interview her after each round? They write about the queen all the time, and I've never seen her give an interview.

In the world of sports sponsorship you need good media stories as per the scum if they don't write about you or only do stories that show you in a bad light then your market value becomes very limited . The old maxim that there is no such thing as bad publicity is nonsense when it come to sponsorship as its clicks that count . Once you are not the story you become irrelevant

 

[BimboBob]

Fair fucks to her but it's only tennis.

 

[Dubai Blue]

In the world of sports sponsorship you need good media stories as per the scum if they don't write about you or only do stories that show you in a bad light then your market value becomes very limited . The old maxim that there is no such thing as bad publicity is nonsense when it come to sponsorship as its clicks that count . Once you are not the story you become irrelevant

Winning matches and tournaments makes her the story, not spending 10 minutes after every match answering banal questions from journalists.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Aye yeah, the money is coming from the Daily Mail write up, not Sky buying the TV rights to show the actual sport. Press coverage is advertising at best. But let's not pretend that these desperate-for-content sports journalists are going to stop writing about the tournament because they're not allowed to ask loads of questions. But perhaps they'll have to write about the actual game, rather than something controversial that someone said after they poked them with a stick enough.

There is a particular issue with these sit-down press conferences too. In football, they might get two minutes with a player, so they have to be quick and ask "what went wrong today" and maybe a quick question about a refereeing decision. But in these sit-down interviews, you get these armchair critics trying to analyse the loss themselves and asking ridiculously personal questions. I mean look at the state of this ffs:



The first two questions are about the actual match, but then we get questions about her confidence, whether it was a mistake to split with her coach, how she's going to pick herself up, whether she's been good enough in practice, how she's bounced back from defeats in the past, whether it's difficult to be famous. It's bollocks, and it's entirely caused by the fact that they know they've got this long sit down with multiple media outlets, rather than just a quick standing interview with the company that actually bought the rights to the competition.

Anyway, they've now lost their top draw for one of the biggest TV markets in the world, so well played the French Open.

The third interviewer (disabled bloke with a physical disability that affects his speech) works in sainsburys as a sales assistant in my town. Part-time sidegig I think.

 

[shemnel]

there seems to be an in-built position that she is the one who needs the media so she can go around the companies with her portfolio begging bowl asking for sponsorship, and so by rights she should earn by the media and therefore die by the media. I dont really know the ins and outs of her contracts, but it could be the case, as with many of the top athletes, that the companies are queueing up to sponsor her and of course she will take the contract but perhaps cant be arsed with it and is happy to let it all go. dunno. Also really dont think we need all of this post match interview crap, it's inane. I think we're on the cusp of things changing with regards sports media.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

there seems to be an in-built position that she is the one who needs the media so she can go around the companies with her portfolio begging bowl asking for sponsorship, and so by rights she should earn by the media and therefore die by the media. I dont really know the ins and outs of her contracts, but it could be the case, as with many of the top athletes, that the companies are queueing up to sponsor her and of course she will take the contract but perhaps cant be arsed with it and is happy to let it all go. dunno. Also really dont think we need all of this post match interview crap, it's inane. I think we're on the cusp of things changing with regards sports media.

whilst companies still pay for rights they'll want their access. These days, I think leaving conferences for monetising fan interaction with questions is the way forward with the valued exclusive content being more topical in-depth pieces of analysis and interviews around a specific theme.

 

[jazzy]

Winning matches and tournaments makes her the story, not spending 10 minutes after every match answering banal questions from journalists.

But she is not playing , therfore not winning which means her market value shrinks as the next best thing comes along and takes her place

 

[domalino]

But she is not playing , therfore not winning which means her market value shrinks as the next best thing comes along and takes her place

And what's that got to do with the tournaments and WTA?

She's not playing because a bunch of Piers Morgan types got outraged they no longer had the power to ask he whatever they liked after every match, and couldn't stand the fact that someone almost said out loud that the Tennis is the main event and not the media circus around it.

 

[jazzy]

And what's that got to do with the tournaments and WTA?

If you best player is not playing , your brand perception dips , ask yourself how why the premier league keeps the rags relevant even though they are shite . Answer it all about market share