Do we put too much pressure on athletes to be media savvy on top of everything else?

[Imaybeoldbutstillrandy]

I used to be a competitive gymnast & competed for Team GB until I got an injury that put an end to my career.

I still coach though & part of the training for our young gymnasts is dealing with the media.

An example of which is the Wimbledon tennis players who are expected to make an announcement about their performance just after their game when all they want to do is have a drink of water & to relax.

I have issues with this.

As I said, my 'girls' get training in how to deal with the media. I feel that, although may be necessary should they become an Olympic medal winner, it takes away from the love of the sport & focusses on winning if they have to justify themselves within minutes (in the case of Wimbledon players) of losing a match. In the case of my gymnasts it means if they muck up a landing or fall.

Also not everyone is comfortable with having a camera shoved in their face & having to put a 'brave face on' when they know that they didn't perform to their best. Or even if they have & won a medal.

They know where they went wrong, their coach knows it & will work on it - they don't need it shoved in their face.

When I won competitions I just wanted to go back to the dressing room, change & spend time alone because I was emotionally & physically wrung out.

I know that if I'd performed less than I was able I just wanted to go & get changed & lick my wounds. The last thing I'd .have wanted to do was have a microphone pointed to my face & have to say 'so I've had a bad day & I messed that dismount or whatever.

I knew that I'd F*'d up I felt like I'd let everyone down & beat myself up for it. The last thing that I needed was a microphone in my face & someone asking me how I felt & what went wrong.

I feel that this puts even more pressure on these young people - not only to be the athletes that they are, but now they have to be media savvy.

Unfortunately many sports would struggle to be at the level they are were it not for tv money. I wish it was not that way, but it is not going to change. Interviews are part of that.

Definitely. Shawn Johnson commented in her book on how her coaches were very protective of her when she won AA silver not gold in the Beijing Olympics. She was only 16 years old and there was huge media attention on her, with the general consensus being she should be disappointed with silver.

Andy Murray also made that 'anyone but England' comment when he was very young. I was astounded by discussions with English friends later at how horrified they were by it because quite honestly he was only repeating what everyone in Scottish high schools was saying at the time. Perhaps it's naive but it didn't seem nasty, just a fact - you supported anyone but England and probably thought it went both ways. Obviously now I can understand why it was a dreadful PR moment but it was a massively unsurprising comment for a Scottish teenager from a small town without much media training.

I agree OP. Not enpugh time is given for people to calm down if need be and reflect, before obligatory press conferences.

As long as they don't promote themselves on SM or go for any advertising deals.

Yup. Go for it.

It's difficult. I do agree and there have been some painful interviews with athletes. I remember one at some past Olympics with a couple of sailors who were in tears. It was uncomfortable to watch and the interviewer asked the dumbest questions.

But...as someone earlier said, this is where the money now comes from to stage events. Many athletes need sponsorship to afford to participate, and sponsors want exposure.

I didn't realise people were actually bothered by that, I always just smirk and roll my eyes when Scots/Welsh/Irish people spit their hate of England.

Absolutely. There’s a basketball player that did a bit of comedy and the gist of one of his routines was “you try giving sensible answers when you’re exhausted after running around for ages”.

The other issue is the media and fans bemoan a lack of personality in sports stars and then when someone gives an answer with even a hint of controversy/outside of the bog standard norm those same people turn on them.

I'm not sure all sports peeps are media trained

😂😂

I can't remember her name now but didn't a successful tennis player give up for precisely this reason - the pressure of having to give interviews immediately after a match?

This was the story - Naomi Osaka

Naomi Osaka fined $15k for declining media interviews at French Open https://share.google/YM61qAybxQvFJL4Ge

It’s doubly invidious because what the news channels actually want isn’t a slick bit of coherent analysis; it’s the tearful overshare, or the adrenaline-high slap down that gets clicks. So they’re damned if they’re prepared, (‘robotic’, ‘emotionless’, ‘don’t want it enough’) and damned if they’re a hot mess.

I'm not sure, I get what you are saying but being a top sportsperson is more than being the best at the sport, whether you (and sportspeople) like it or not.

No one watches sport in a vacuum where they are focusing solely on how each individual performs physically, viewers are invested in teams and individuals because they want to get into their personality or psyche too. That doesn't mean they have to be a great entertainer or big character, just that they need to show a bit of who they are. I am thinking of Djikovic as a prickly, intense character vs Nadal as a straightforward nice guy, or Simone Biles who is strong and outspoken but charismatic too. These things matter, they draw people in, and without people watching, there's not much point in being the best at what you do. I'd go so far as to say they are as important as purely being the best at the sport.

Also they don't interview the defeated Wimbledon players immediately, only the victors. The loser gets a cool off period before press conferences (unless it's the final).

@Imaybeoldbutstillrandy
I think it’s part of the question around why, as a society we look so positively on competitive sport in general.
My understanding is that it serves multiple aspects, one of which is replacing the physical fighting and combat between peoples or individuals. I think there are psychological aspects too in terms of the supporters of said athletes and this is where the need for being more than physically able comes into it.

I suppose it comes down to this. If you want to become good at a sport, nobody is going to ask more of you, because you can be good and not stand out. If you wish to become one of “the best a nation has to offer” and manage to achieve this goal, you become a symbolic representation of society and therefore have other responsibilities. Everything has a consequence, right or wrong. If you happen to be amazing at sport, but, for whatever reason not great at public speaking say, then there may be a chance that you won’t be “loved” as much as someone who alongside athletic ability also is skilled at communication. It’s part of the role and for those exceptional athletes who spend years in the limelight, they know what is expected of them, even though they may not particularly want to participate in all aspects, that’s the same in any part of life.

I agree its not comfortable but it's definitely a trainable teachable skill - if you look at say football captains like Beckham they are great at saying something while saying nothing. You just keep it vague. Yes had some challenges. Definitely going to review and look to improve but did the best in the circumstances. That's all. The interviewers are just trying to get an emotional reaction so don't give them one.

If you are competing for your country who has paid towards your progression then I think it's part and parcel of being a top athlete, athletes also have sponsors so there's an expectation there to play your part and be available for media gigs. Same with captains/ managers of football/ rugby teams they're expected to be interviewed straight after the match. It's all part of the tv and sponsorship deals. It's what funds the sport so start refusing and the money will dry up and the sport suffer in the long run due to lack of investment. Of course none of them want to do it, who would? But they're happy to take the money. Most of us have aspects of our jobs we don't like but have to suck it up. For most being a top athlete in certain sports is unattainable not because of lack of talent but lack of money to bank roll your dream.

I think there’s a big difference between asking a 14 year old gymnast and a 25 year old Olympic sprinter. Gymnastics is an early realisation sport, a lot of them are still children when they reach elite level, so yes, it’s a big ask. I’d expect an adult track athlete or tennis player to be able to handle media as part of the job.

After thinking about this. It does depend on the sport.

Tennis (IMO) wouldn't be affected by ten minutes before an interview.
Footballers seem to be quite happy for a quick interview almost straight after the game.

But a lot of athletes have SM accounts that promote themselves and through them promote clothes, accessories and other things.

So if they are not already media savvy should they be doing this as well?