Ken Borland

Four-time Grand Slam champion Naomi Osaka this week announced she will be boycotting media conferences at the French Open next week, behaviour I think is most unbecoming. For the benefit of the many people who have harangued me for this view on social media, here’s why: She has a duty to help publicise the game that has made her the richest sportswoman in the world. I know TV coverage of her matches does that to a large extent, but the media conferences afterwards are like resales – they reach different markets and provide the opportunity for a more in-depth look at her performance, they provide the flesh on the bones.

The vast majority of sportspeople I have interviewed acknowledge that they have a responsibility to give back to the game that has given them so much, and that’s even the megastars. For any sport, the importance of marketing their product cannot be overstated and Osaka should perhaps consider the hefty prizemoney now on offer in women’s tennis and the media’s role in providing the exposure that attracts the investment of sponsors and broadcasters, as well as the eyes and ears of fans.

Sure, many press conferences are tedious affairs involving recycled questions; a bit like a 6-1 6-0 result in tennis. But the responsibility to fulfil media obligations is written in the WTA rulebook. And the WTA is actually the players’ organisation that runs tennis, so it is the players themselves who have agreed to these rules.

Except for Osaka, who feels the ground rules don’t apply to her. Perhaps she has become so famous and wealthy, ironically partly thanks to the exposure given to her performances and increasingly outspoken views on politics by the media she is now snubbing, that she believes she is special enough to operate under a different set of rules. The 23-year-old Osaka won’t be the first nor the last rich kid to lose touch with reality when incredible wealth is at their disposal.

Osaka’s reason for boycotting press conferences, according to her statement, was to protect her mental health. For a tremendous champion who has won all four of the Grand Slam finals she has appeared in, the suggestion that she has a fragile temperament floors me.

Sure, some questions asked at tennis press conferences range from the idiotic to the extraordinary to the downright disgusting, but they are easily handled by a “no comment” or by the facilitator exercising better control of proceedings.

Osaka said press conferences were like “kicking a person while they are down”. Sure, having to be interviewed straight after a defeat could lead to a lot of emotions – whether it be anger, frustration, heartbreak or dismay – being made public and perhaps competitors should be allowed a bit more time to compose themselves before having to face the media.

But it is a fact of elite sport that you have to take the losses along with the wins, the plaudits with the brickbats. Every high performance sportsperson deals with this, it is part of the game. And by all accounts, Osaka has always been an engaging, interesting interviewee.

It makes me angry that Osaka would hide behind an issue as important as mental health. And for those who say she is somehow taking action on behalf of many other tennis players who feel the same way, her statement contains 13 references to ‘I’ and ‘Me’ and just one mention of ‘we’re’.

Sorry, but Osaka’s decision smacks of sheer entitlement. She is refusing to follow a regulation that applies to all her fellow competitors, simply because paying a fine of $20 000 a day is hardly a dent in her purse. It is just selfish.

Perhaps the fact that she has never advanced past the third round at Roland Garros has more to do it with than any mental health concerns.