In March 2020, US sports journalists were shocked when the coronavirus resulted in a ban on them walking into locker rooms or to training grounds to interview anyone they wanted. The journalists were worried that once the right of access was removed, it would not be reinstated.
But while the ban was a shock to the US writers, a lack of access to grounds and locker rooms is common in Australia and Europe.
Australian media managers are taught to restrict spontaneous interviews and to keep interviews with either pre-planned events or at the press conference. Even ‘spontaneous interviews’ on radio or tv are pre-planned between the team and networks.
In the book, Sport and the Media: Managing the nexus, Nicholson, Kerry and Sherwood write that it’s long been argued that such pre-planning isn’t designed to censor players, but rather to make it easier for the media to get their ‘sound grab’ if the player is aware of the line of questioning.
Likewise, Nicholson, Kerry and Sherwood note that sport stars are athletes, not wordsmiths like Oscar Wilde, and teeing up with the media and the media manager gives players the best opportunity to provide an answer that gives the media what they want, without the athlete coming across as ‘aloof, stupid, clumsy or incoherent’.
The AFL Players Association Well-being Survey found AFL players have higher rates of anxiety and mental stress than their similar-aged counterparts, and the survey indicated the media cycle plays a role in contributing to this.
AFL clubs are conscious of the eagerness of the fans to consume information about players and have developed media teams which rival news organisations to produce print and video content to help manage their message.
Josh Jenkins, from the Geelong Cats, has advocated for the US-style access to drive fan engagement.
“The key aspect that is missing from the AFL is access. Access to AFL players and clubs is sheltered at best. Before every player steps in front of a camera he is buttered up with specific lines to use and what to look out for from the awaiting interviewers,” Jenkins said.
However, Australian sportswriters aren’t necessarily eager to have more access.
I spoke to Daniel Cherny, an AFL and cricket correspondent from The Age, who isn’t desperate to be spending more time chatting to players.
“Access is good if anyone is going to say anything interesting … I always try to talk to the players in the rooms after the game, some of the time it’s good, maybe one in five you can get something useful, but a lot of time it’s pretty mind-numbing stuff.
“It’s not really relevant or newsworthy, it’s a glib quote and you don’t run the story,” Cherny said.
UK sports writer Jonathan Northcroft, argues US sports writing is different to other parts of the world because it is constantly being ‘fed’. It is more akin to the 24 political cycle than sportswriters in Australia or the UK.
“You’re not reporting on things every week. You’re trying to use your one bit of access in the six-month period, but you’re trying to use it to maximum effect,” argued Northcroft on the Ringer.
Due to the economic fallout from the pandemic, AFL clubs are looking to cut costs which will affect their ability to compete with major news outlets.
This could mean the US-style fan-driven access may be further away than initially planned.
This is not necessarily bad news for journalism as the clubs will not be able to control the message.
“Caro [Caroline Wilson, chief sports writer at The Age] said ‘the best stories are the ones people don’t want you to write’,” Cherny mused.
Daniel Cherny, sportswriter for The Age.
Featured photograph by the author.
