The Tennis Press

[Tshooter]

Irrespective of your position on Osaka and press conferences the unprofessionalism displayed by some of the tennis "reporters" -- at a Major no less -- is jarring. We've seen the below performance before. Yes, it's always funny. But not only does this reporter not bother to watch even the ending of the match the reporter had so little interest in the assignment and/or respect for their job that they couldn't be bothered to check the scoreline on the way to the interview room. (Or they forgot which doesn't meet the minimum standards for the job.)

Yeh, the first question was stupid but not for the reason the reporter thought. And after demonstrating a complete lack of professionalism the reporter doesn't even have any shame. You would think the reporter would yield to someone else after making it clear they never saw the match. But instead the reporter has the nerve to then lob three auto-pilot questions that have nothing to do with any match in particular. Questions they must keep ready for those instances they are assigned to the press conference but prefer to skip the match.

And this is apparently the entire transcript, verbatim. No one that saw the match asked any questions or the scribe has a sense of humor.

US Open 2017:


Naomi Osaka

New York, NY, USA

K. KANEPI/N. Osaka

6-3, 2-6, 7-5

THE MODERATOR: Questions, please.

Q. Stupid question: Why did you win today?
NAOMI OSAKA: I didn't win.

Q. Oh, you didn't? Sorry. What do you think made the difference today in the end?
NAOMI OSAKA: Well, I think I was a bit emotionally unstable. Like, I think she would be more positive than negative. Like, she didn't have any outbursts or anything, and I had a lot.

Q. Where do you think some of those emotions were coming from? Maybe thinking too far ahead or the way you were playing?
NAOMI OSAKA: Oh, this sucks. (tearing up.)

I kind of feel like I didn't play as good. Like, in my match against Kerber, I played really well, and I just didn't feel the same level my last two matches. Sorry.

Q. What will you learn from this experience, ultimately?
NAOMI OSAKA: Just -- I think I stressed myself a little bit after playing Kerber, and I just had more expectations with myself. So I think the next Grand Slams, if I happen to beat a really good player, I'm just going to take that one match at a time and just play within myself.

ASAP Sports Transcripts - Tennis - 2017 - U.S. OPEN - September 2 - Naomi Osaka

ASAPSports FastScripts, a system using state-of-the-art technology created to produce verbatim FastScripts of press conferences and player/team interviews at sporting events around the globe.

www.asapsports.com

 

[Ray Mercer]

The majority of reporters are idiots. Very rarely do you watch a press conference and think wow what a great question. I rarely hear reporters ask about specific strategies players used or why they didn’t utilize alternative tactics etc. It would be far more interesting if they got some hardcore tennis fans who actually play the game to question them about the matches.

 

[Tshooter]

The majority of reporters are idiots. Very rarely do you watch a press conference and think wow what a great question. I rarely hear reporters ask about specific strategies players used or why they didn’t utilize alternative tactics etc. It would be far more interesting if they got some hardcore tennis fans who actually play the game to question them about the matches.

It's somewhat harder to ask that type of question if you didn't watch the match. I suppose you could always ask the loser why they didn't use alternative tactics but you would have to be ambitious enough to check the scoreline to know who lost. Though now that I think of it I wouldn't put it past some of these reporters to ask the winner the same question.

"Why would I use different tactics, I won ?"

"Just wondering if you think you could have won a different way ? More like Roger maybe ? If you had maybe I would have watched the match."

 

[Ray Mercer]

It's somewhat harder to ask that type of question if you didn't watch the match. I suppose you could always ask the loser why they didn't use alternative tactics but you would have to be ambitious enough to check the scoreline to know who lost.

Absolutely but that is why the press should actually be watching the matches. It’s a joke and an embarrassment that they go into these discussions unprepared and not having watched the match. It’s the equivalent of going into a business meeting with no game plan, notes or objective. The fact that they don’t even know who won the match is a disgrace. I can’t even imagine the amount of posters on this board that would kill to be able to watch the matches live, make observations and then have the opportunity to discuss the match with players.

 

[Tshooter]

Absolutely but that is why the press should actually be watching the matches. It’s a joke and an embarrassment that they go into these discussions unprepared and not having watched the match. It’s the equivalent of going into a business meeting with no game plan, notes or objective. The fact that they don’t even know who won the match is a disgrace.

I wasn't suggesting it was OK to not watch a match if you are going to do the presser. Like I said, it's funny but it's completely unprofessional. Then they let them go with follow up questions. If the reporter doesn't know who won you don't get anymore questions. In fact, the player should have the option of immediately ending the press conference and maybe the reporters would then discipline their own.

On the other hand, this is still one of the funniest I've seen and I'm glad we have it. Nadal just rolls with it.

 

[Oval_Solid]

reporters arent needed anymore they need to go
if any players has anything they want to say they can use a number of social media

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Why did you win today
I didn’t win.

My god the incompetence.

 

[USO]

Irrespective of your position on Osaka and press conferences the unprofessionalism displayed by some of the tennis "reporters" -- at a Major no less -- is jarring. We've seen the below performance before. Yes, it's always funny. But not only does this reporter not bother to watch even the ending of the match the reporter had so little interest in the assignment and/or respect for their job that they couldn't be bothered to check the scoreline on the way to the interview room. (Or they forgot which doesn't meet the minimum standards for the job.)

Yeh, the first question was stupid but not for the reason the reporter thought. And after demonstrating a complete lack of professionalism the reporter doesn't even have any shame. You would think the reporter would yield to someone else after making it clear they never saw the match. But instead the reporter has the nerve to then lob three auto-pilot questions that have nothing to do with any match in particular. Questions they must keep ready for those instances they are assigned to the press conference but prefer to skip the match.

And this is apparently the entire transcript, verbatim. No one that saw the match asked any questions or the scribe has a sense of humor.

US Open 2017:


Naomi Osaka

New York, NY, USA

K. KANEPI/N. Osaka

6-3, 2-6, 7-5

THE MODERATOR: Questions, please.

Q. Stupid question: Why did you win today?
NAOMI OSAKA: I didn't win.

Q. Oh, you didn't? Sorry. What do you think made the difference today in the end?
NAOMI OSAKA: Well, I think I was a bit emotionally unstable. Like, I think she would be more positive than negative. Like, she didn't have any outbursts or anything, and I had a lot.

Q. Where do you think some of those emotions were coming from? Maybe thinking too far ahead or the way you were playing?
NAOMI OSAKA: Oh, this sucks. (tearing up.)

I kind of feel like I didn't play as good. Like, in my match against Kerber, I played really well, and I just didn't feel the same level my last two matches. Sorry.

Q. What will you learn from this experience, ultimately?
NAOMI OSAKA: Just -- I think I stressed myself a little bit after playing Kerber, and I just had more expectations with myself. So I think the next Grand Slams, if I happen to beat a really good player, I'm just going to take that one match at a time and just play within myself.

ASAP Sports Transcripts - Tennis - 2017 - U.S. OPEN - September 2 - Naomi Osaka

ASAPSports FastScripts, a system using state-of-the-art technology created to produce verbatim FastScripts of press conferences and player/team interviews at sporting events around the globe.

www.asapsports.com

If I'm winning millions of dollars I would answer all those questions, even the stupid ones, with a big smile...

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Irrespective of your position on Osaka and press conferences the unprofessionalism displayed by some of the tennis "reporters" -- at a Major no less -- is jarring. We've seen the below performance before. Yes, it's always funny. But not only does this reporter not bother to watch even the ending of the match the reporter had so little interest in the assignment and/or respect for their job that they couldn't be bothered to check the scoreline on the way to the interview room. (Or they forgot which doesn't meet the minimum standards for the job.)

Yeh, the first question was stupid but not for the reason the reporter thought. And after demonstrating a complete lack of professionalism the reporter doesn't even have any shame. You would think the reporter would yield to someone else after making it clear they never saw the match. But instead the reporter has the nerve to then lob three auto-pilot questions that have nothing to do with any match in particular. Questions they must keep ready for those instances they are assigned to the press conference but prefer to skip the match.

And this is apparently the entire transcript, verbatim. No one that saw the match asked any questions or the scribe has a sense of humor.

US Open 2017:


Naomi Osaka

New York, NY, USA

K. KANEPI/N. Osaka

6-3, 2-6, 7-5

THE MODERATOR: Questions, please.

Q. Stupid question: Why did you win today?
NAOMI OSAKA: I didn't win.

That, that is unforgivable. I said in the other thread that there should be monitoring of the questions and a three strikes rule for basic idiocy like this. Not talking about controversial questions. But if a reporter cannot bother to find out the result of the match for which he is attending the press conference, he shouldn't be a reporter.

 

[Tshooter]

reporters arent needed anymore they need to go
if any players has anything they want to say they can use a number of social media

I disagree. I think the public should be able to hear directly from the players when they are fresh from the match. It can occasionally make for some interesting insights and dramatic viewing. I understand we are dealing with a wide range of players sometimes kids, often very young adults and all the way to seasoned pros and there may be issues that need to be addressed accordingly.

 

[Jason Swerve]

Why did you win today
I didn’t win.

My god the incompetence.

Is this anti-press attitude for Osaka going to suddenly 180 your calling Hingis and Kournikova "b****y" towards the press?

 

[Tshooter]

Is this anti-press attitude for Osaka going to suddenly 180 your calling Hingis and Kournikova "b****y" towards the press?

I'm not sure what you are referring to but don't read me as anti-press which I am not, at all. I'm anti press that has no respect for the job. Which harms the rep of all members of the tennis press.

 

[Jason Swerve]

I'm not sure what you are referring to but don't read me as anti-press which I am not, at all. I'm anti press that has no respect for the job. Which harms the rep of all members of the tennis press.

You must have Darcy ignored. I quoted him.

 

[celito]

I wasn't suggesting it was OK to not watch a match if you are going to do the presser. Like I said, it's funny but it's completely unprofessional. Then they let them go with follow up questions. If the reporter doesn't know who won you don't get anymore questions. In fact, the player should have the option of immediately ending the press conference and maybe the reporters would then discipline their own.

On the other hand, this is still one of the funniest I've seen and I'm glad we have it. Nadal just rolls with it.

"Yeah I know, but it's a win anyway " That's legendary ...

I would have so much fun with that question if it was me.

 

[Tshooter]

"Yeah I know, but it's a win anyway " That's legendary ...

I would have so much fun with that question if it was me.

I understand the reporter is to be inducted into the tennis HOF for her body of work and, in particular, being the first reporter to recognize and highlight during a press conference the concept of a (Rafa) “moral victory.”

 

[Swingmaster]

As long as theyre allowed to say "next question" then no sympathy from me. Next question.

 

[beltsman]

Irrespective of your position on Osaka and press conferences the unprofessionalism displayed by some of the tennis "reporters" -- at a Major no less -- is jarring. We've seen the below performance before. Yes, it's always funny. But not only does this reporter not bother to watch even the ending of the match the reporter had so little interest in the assignment and/or respect for their job that they couldn't be bothered to check the scoreline on the way to the interview room. (Or they forgot which doesn't meet the minimum standards for the job.)

Yeh, the first question was stupid but not for the reason the reporter thought. And after demonstrating a complete lack of professionalism the reporter doesn't even have any shame. You would think the reporter would yield to someone else after making it clear they never saw the match. But instead the reporter has the nerve to then lob three auto-pilot questions that have nothing to do with any match in particular. Questions they must keep ready for those instances they are assigned to the press conference but prefer to skip the match.

And this is apparently the entire transcript, verbatim. No one that saw the match asked any questions or the scribe has a sense of humor.

US Open 2017:


Naomi Osaka

New York, NY, USA

K. KANEPI/N. Osaka

6-3, 2-6, 7-5

THE MODERATOR: Questions, please.

Q. Stupid question: Why did you win today?
NAOMI OSAKA: I didn't win.

Q. Oh, you didn't? Sorry. What do you think made the difference today in the end?
NAOMI OSAKA: Well, I think I was a bit emotionally unstable. Like, I think she would be more positive than negative. Like, she didn't have any outbursts or anything, and I had a lot.

Q. Where do you think some of those emotions were coming from? Maybe thinking too far ahead or the way you were playing?
NAOMI OSAKA: Oh, this sucks. (tearing up.)

I kind of feel like I didn't play as good. Like, in my match against Kerber, I played really well, and I just didn't feel the same level my last two matches. Sorry.

Q. What will you learn from this experience, ultimately?
NAOMI OSAKA: Just -- I think I stressed myself a little bit after playing Kerber, and I just had more expectations with myself. So I think the next Grand Slams, if I happen to beat a really good player, I'm just going to take that one match at a time and just play within myself.

ASAP Sports Transcripts - Tennis - 2017 - U.S. OPEN - September 2 - Naomi Osaka

ASAPSports FastScripts, a system using state-of-the-art technology created to produce verbatim FastScripts of press conferences and player/team interviews at sporting events around the globe.

www.asapsports.com

Who is dumber, the idiot reporter or the player that gets triggered by the idiot reporter?

 

[mtommer]

Oh, I don't mind the questions actually (obviously not the first one). I read those questions more along the lines of: "This is a champion and I'm going to ask a champion why she isn't playing the way the public expects a champion to play."...or some derivation thereof.

 

[Bartelby]

No. You wouldn't. You're not winning millions of dollars. So you don't get it.

If I'm winning millions of dollars I would answer all those questions, even the stupid ones, with a big smile...

 

[Bartelby]

The idiot reporter, clearly.

Who is dumber, the idiot reporter or the player that gets triggered by the idiot reporter?

 

[Bartelby]

And then the next question is a re-phrased version of the last one. Next question.

As long as theyre allowed to say "next question" then no sympathy from me. Next question.

 

[Graf1stClass]

Is this anti-press attitude for Osaka going to suddenly 180 your calling Hingis and Kournikova "b****y" towards the press?

No, Anna did not deserve it. They were unnecessarily cruel to her in her interview with the BBC.

 

[Bartelby]

Newspapers are in terminal decline, and social media is a free for all, so who they send along and how competent these journalists are in tennis varies widely.

 

[USO]

No. You wouldn't. You're not winning millions of dollars. So you don't get it.

Osaka is not the only millionaire tennis player or sports athlete out there, there are tons. But she's the only one who can't just accept that it's part of the job, I'm sure others don't necessarily like to do press conferences but they still do them, especially if they are paid millions because they would feel actually lucky to even be in that position. And I'm sure they feel that there are tons of problems in life that are much bigger than answering a few questions after a match, even if some are stupid questions. I've seen her do talk shows, tons of extra public events, she even takes center stage in order to talk about certain causes, she seems comfortable enough being in the spotlight. But her sister already told us the real reason of the recent events...

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Osaka is not the only millionaire tennis player or sports athlete out there, there are tons. But she's the only one who can't just accept that it's part of the job, I'm sure others don't necessarily like to do press conferences but they still do them, especially if they are paid millions because they would feel actually lucky to even be in that position. And I'm sure they feel that there are tons of problems in life that are much bigger than answering a few questions after a match, even if some are stupid questions. I've seen her do talk shows, tons of extra public events, she even takes center stage in order to talk about certain causes, she seems comfortable enough being in the spotlight. But her sister already told us the real reason of the recent events...

Sure, but we don't know exactly what she is going through at this point that prompted her to want to avoid press conferences. I will give her benefit of doubt there. If she is telling the whole world she has depression, I will take that to be true. My only complaint was that she chose not to reach out beforehand privately and chose to write a whiny complaint on Twitter/Insta instead. But that is just a product of her being a child of the internet as Mary Carillo said. It looks bad but let's also not read too much into it.

It is up to the older players, ex-players, commentators (who are also ex-players in tennis) to coach her in this regard. Rather than making it the standard that anyone can simply write a nasty complaint on twitter and then expect to be treated as bonafide, take these rising stars into confidence and teach them how to address their issues. And if those issues are not being addressed by the appropriate channel, by all means take their case on social media.

While press conferences are important for the sport as such (which is why I could not agree with her first twitter post alleging that these conferences somehow gave mental problems to tennis players in general), they are not more important than dealing with depression. Which is why I didn't understand why she set out to 'revolutionize' the sport without taking her peers into confidence when really it was as simple as she wanted her personal, specific problem to be addressed.

 

[Bartelby]

Once again with this 'reach out' nonsense! They stated that regardless of the process question, on which the jury is out, they will not change the compulsory presser for her!

Sure, but we don't know exactly what she is going through at this point that prompted her to want to avoid press conferences. I will give her benefit of doubt there. If she is telling the whole world she has depression, I will take that to be true. My only complaint was that she chose not to reach out beforehand privately and chose to write a whiny complaint on Twitter/Insta instead. But that is just a product of her being a child of the internet as Mary Carillo said. It looks bad but let's also not read too much into it.

It is up to the older players, ex-players, commentators (who are also ex-players in tennis) to coach her in this regard. Rather than making it the standard that anyone can simply write a nasty complaint on twitter and then expect to be treated as bonafide, take these rising stars into confidence and teach them how to address their issues. And if those issues are not being addressed by the appropriate channel, by all means take their case on social media.

While press conferences are important for the sport as such (which is why I could not agree with her first twitter post alleging that these conferences somehow gave mental problems to tennis players in general), they are not more important than dealing with depression. Which is why I didn't understand why she set out to 'revolutionize' the sport without taking her peers into confidence when really it was as simple as she wanted her personal, specific problem to be addressed.

 

[Bartelby]

Some tennis players get TUEs, even millionaires, and yet no one says they get special treatment. She has a mental health issue, and exemptions should be allowed.

Osaka is not the only millionaire tennis player or sports athlete out there, there are tons. But she's the only one who can't just accept that it's part of the job, I'm sure others don't necessarily like to do press conferences but they still do them, especially if they are paid millions because they would feel actually lucky to even be in that position. And I'm sure they feel that there are tons of problems in life that are much bigger than answering a few questions after a match, even if some are stupid questions. I've seen her do talk shows, tons of extra public events, she even takes center stage in order to talk about certain causes, she seems comfortable enough being in the spotlight. But her sister already told us the real reason of the recent events...

 

[Raul_SJ]

unprofessionalism displayed by some of the tennis "reporters" -- at a Major no less -- is jarring

Journalist Jonathan Pinfield had his media pass revoked for being in a supermarket. We do not care about the supermarket incident.

But Pinfield is regarded as one of the top tennis journalists and he is allotted one question. And yet look at the lame question he comes up with to ask Zverev.

Reporter: "How will you be spending the next few days?".

Zverev: "I will be practicing".

Given that this reporter was running late in the supermarket, we have to wonder if this dunderhead even watched the match. What is the point of reporters who have not even watched the match participating in the post- match press conference.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Once again with this 'reach out' nonsense! They stated that regardless of the process question, on which the jury is out, they will not change the compulsory presser for her!

What 'nonsense'? Now that she has mentioned she has depression, they will look into the issue of press conference. Even if it is not made optional, they will tweak the process. But how are you even going to know unless you ask the question in the first place? Already Djokovic has spoken out in her favour. More players will. It takes a different dimension once you say it is a specific issue like depression and not a general dislike of press conferences (for the latter, the rules cannot indeed be relaxed).

 

[Bartelby]

I haven't seen the video, but the journalist also sees himself as a humorist.

As soon as I saw the player surrounded by bottles advertising sponsors, I immediately thought they'd turned the table into a supermarket set.

My guess is that the reporter was not in a supermarket by accident.

He was mocking the organisers so they suspended him.

This reporter had his media pass revoked for being in a supermarket. We do not care about the supermarket but Pinfield is regarded as one of the top tennis journalists in the world. And yet look at the lame question he comes
up with to ask Zverev.

Reporter: "How will you be spending the next few days?".

Zverev: "I will be practicing".

Wonder if this dunderhead reporter in the supermarket even watched the match.

 

[Bartelby]

They made no statement as to any concession whatsoever. The process issue is clouded with many unknowns.

The substantive issue is that they said no, and they made no commitment to an inquiry for change.

Instead they immediately threatened to disqualify or ban her, and yet you talk about her process!!!

What 'nonsense'? Now that she has mentioned she has depression, they will look into the issue of press conference. Even if it is not made optional, they will tweak the process. But how are you even going to know unless you ask the question in the first place? Already Djokovic has spoken out in her favour. More players will. It takes a different dimension once you say it is a specific issue like depression and not a general dislike of press conferences (for the latter, the rules cannot indeed be relaxed).

 

[Tennis_Hands]

What 'nonsense'? Now that she has mentioned she has depression, they will look into the issue of press conference. Even if it is not made optional, they will tweak the process. But how are you even going to know unless you ask the question in the first place? Already Djokovic has spoken out in her favour. More players will. It takes a different dimension once you say it is a specific issue like depression and not a general dislike of press conferences (for the latter, the rules cannot indeed be relaxed).

Djokovic is forming to be quite the populist. How very modern!

 

[daphne]

The majority of reporters are idiots. Very rarely do you watch a press conference and think wow what a great question. I rarely hear reporters ask about specific strategies players used or why they didn’t utilize alternative tactics etc. It would be far more interesting if they got some hardcore tennis fans who actually play the game to question them about the matches.

Absolutely. It's simply because reporters are there to fill the quota across many sports and rarely do they know anything about any sport in particular. I am sure if you ask them what kind of strokes exist in tennis they would not be able to tell you that/ Fans are enthusiasts who follow the sport closely and know about it because it's either their hobby or passion. I'd ban all reporters. Many journalists have no idea about the subject they write about. Read any online paper and pay attention to the quality. Rarely there is one. Usually they write for click baits. This is why I do not watch TV or read papers for more than 20 years now.

 

[Raul_SJ]

haven't seen the video, but the journalist also sees himself as a humorist.

These press conferences are only 10 minutes long and there are a million serious reporters keen on getting their one question in.

The press conference organizers presumably try to choose serious reputable reporters.

The guy asked Zverev a meaningless question, "What will you be doing the next few days?". He gets to ask one question and that is the best question he can come up with? A child could do better.

And nobody, except Zverev, could see this reporter standing in a supermarket, so there is no point in the joke. The viewing audience cannot see him.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

They made no statement as to any concession whatsoever. The process issue is clouded with many unknowns.

The substantive issue is that they said no, and they made no commitment to an inquiry for change.

Instead they immediately threatened to disqualify or ban her, and yet you talk about her process!!!

No, you are intentionally obfuscating the timing. The threat of DQ came after her first statement which said nothing about her suffering depression and made a general comment that press conferences are bad for players' mental health and cited that as the pretext to not attend press conferences. Naturally they reacted strongly because even if she didn't intend it as such, her language made it come across as a threat to the way the slams do things and less as a call for help. You cannot say what the response would have been had she just been honest with them and focused on her case instead of trying to make it about all players in general.

 

[Third Serve]

Who is dumber, the idiot reporter or the player that gets triggered by the idiot reporter?

Who is worse, the person who yells a racial slur or the person who gets offended by that slur?

 

[Dolgopolov85]

These press conferences are only 10 minutes long and there are a million serious reporters keen on getting their one question in.

The press conference organizers presumably try to choose serious reputable reporters.

The guy asked Zverev a meaningless question, "What will you be doing the next few days?". He gets to ask one question and that is the best question he can come up with? A child could do better.

And nobody, except Zverev, could see this reporter standing in a supermarket, so there is no point in the joke. The viewing audience cannot see him.

The problem is even serious reporters often ask terrible questions. At best, their questions are dead boring and unimaginative and at worst they infuriate the players.

This has become worse because conventional media is embattled and struggles to retain talent anyway.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Who is worse, the person who yells a racial slur or the person who gets offended by that slur?

As Obama said of a rather famous personality, these are the questions that keep TT up at night.

 

[Bartelby]

She did mention the reason beforehand and it was clear that the general nature of the comment was understandably due to not wanting publicise her personal condition.

She fleshed it out with more personal detail afterwards PRECISELY BECAUSE THE BIG FOUR SLAM BULLIES THREATENED HER WITH DISQUALIFICATIONS AND BANS.

She immediately withdrew from the tournament.

No, you are intentionally obfuscating the timing. The threat of DQ came after her first statement which said nothing about her suffering depression and made a general comment that press conferences are bad for players' mental health and cited that as the pretext to not attend press conferences. Naturally they reacted strongly because even if she didn't intend it as such, her language made it come across as a threat to the way the slams do things and less as a call for help. You cannot say what the response would have been had she just been honest with them and focused on her case instead of trying to make it about all players in general.

 

[Bartelby]

The props surrounding the players are so over-done that even people who are not professional comedians could see the potential for humour, and I'm sure the organisers got the joke and disliked it.

These press conferences are only 10 minutes long and there are a million serious reporters keen on getting their one question in.

The press conference organizers presumably try to choose serious reputable reporters.

The guy asked Zverev a meaningless question, "What will you be doing the next few days?". He gets to ask one question and that is the best question he can come up with? A child could do better.

And nobody, except Zverev, could see this reporter standing in a supermarket, so there is no point in the joke. The viewing audience cannot see him.

 

[Raul_SJ]

The props surrounding the players are so over-done that even people who are not professional comedians could see the potential for humour, and I'm sure the organisers got the joke and disliked it.

Doubtful that it was a joke as these innocuous product placements have been there for years. Nobody thinks twice about them. Everybody loves capitalism.
And the organizers quickly reinstated his media pass.

IF the reporter was mocking the press conference product placements, he would be out of line. He should not be mocking people that he essentially works for.

 

[Wurm]

If she is telling the whole world she has depression, I will take that to be true. My only complaint was that she chose not to reach out beforehand privately and chose to write a whiny complaint on Twitter/Insta instead. But that is just a product of her being a child of the internet as Mary Carillo said. It looks bad but let's also not read too much into it.

Depression doesn't express itself in one, and only one, way but also depression is not just "feeling a bit down".

I actually think she's telling the world she has PTSD but either doesn't know about it, doesn't realise that's probably what she has or doesn't want to trivialise PTSD - that braying crowd siding with Serena (because the crowd was dumb) whilst she had a tantrum will have been a pretty nasty atmosphere to be in and I would imagine having to then go into a press conference after winning that match will have been pretty horrible. I'll have to go see if I can find a video/transcript of it.

But yes, the big problem in all this is that Osaka's idea of handling it was to put out a social media post ahead of time. Either she needs a better management team to put a buffer around her or she needs to start employing one.

 

[Bartelby]

The product placement is a tad over-done in my opinion. One bottle to the right side of the player with glass would be more subtle. And that's what I'm used to seeing.

It's like over-loading a Bond film with product placement. The film, and the product, lose credibility.

Doubtful that it was a joke as these innocuous product placements have been there for years. Nobody thinks twice about them. Everybody loves capitalism.
And the organizers quickly reinstated his media pass.

IF the reporter was mocking the press conference product placements, he would be out of line. He should not be mocking people that he essentially works for.

 

[Raul_SJ]

The product placement is a tad over-done in my opinion. One bottle to the right side of the player with glass would be more subtle. And that's what I'm used to seeing.

Which brand of bottled water do you drink? Perrier?
And what is that "V" bottle? Vodka?

 

[Raul_SJ]

that braying crowd siding with Serena (because the crowd was dumb) whilst she has a tantrum will have been a pretty nasty atmosphere to be in

The media by enlarge worships and adores her, so it is ridiculous for her to make the media the scapegoat.

She did sit there for minutes with her face covered. Very very bizarre. How ironic that the cause of her alleged issues was Serena's shameless pompous grandstanding and cheating.

Serena to umpire: "How dare you! I never get signals. Would never cheat. I have a daughter!!".

Serena's Coach: "Yes, Serena and I have a sign signal system. Against the rules. But hey, everybody cheats."

 

[tennis4me]

Which brand of bottled water do you drink? Perrier?
And what is that "V" bottle? Vodka?

I believe that's the French mineral water Vittel.

 

[Tshooter]

…She did sit there for minutes with her face covered. Very very bizarre.…

Dr., speaking of bizarre, you changed your avatar from the universally beloved Mr. Majestyk to the Canadian Rafael Cruz who recently vacationed in Mexico while his constituents were back in Texas freezing to death.

 

[mwym]

"Thanks for the opportunity to answer your question but I am not interrested in using it."

or shorter version

""Thanks, not interested."

What exacly prevents a player, female or male, from sitting at press conference for a 'mandatory' period of time and replying to any or every question with this answer?

Another option is a mere IDK. Any or every.

 

[Bartelby]

They are doing the flat v sparkling water thing. I mostly prefer flat.

Which brand of bottled water do you drink? Perrier?
And what is that "V" bottle? Vodka?

 

[Bartelby]

What prevents it is mental health issues, or perhaps a moral sense that treating matters as a joke is disrespectful.

"Thanks for the opportunity to answer your question but I am not interrested in using it."

or shorter version

""Thanks, not interested."

What exacly prevents a player, female or male, from sitting at press conference for a 'mandatory' period of time and replying to any or every question with this answer?

Another option is a mere IDK. Any or every.