The Roar
The Roar

AFL
Advertisement

AFL clubs should open their doors to the media

Expert
11th April, 2011
13
1317 Reads

AFL St Kilda Nick Dal-Santo Stephen MilneCraig Hutchison had a brilliant piece in the Sunday Herald Sun over the weekend in which he called for AFL clubs to “open the doors” and make players more accessible to the media. He described the current access levels as “draconian at best” and urged the game as a whole to reinvent its media culture.

‘Hutchy’ hit the nail on the head. The AFL is well behind major sports leagues in the United States, and it’s to the game’s detriment.

“On a good day, a club makes one player available to the media,” Hutchison explains. “Forget whether the player is relevant, newsworthy or has anything to contribute. It’s the club’s choice. Most requests for individual player interviews are met with a ‘No’ from Monday to Friday, and many clubs stroll through weeks without making anyone available to the media.”

Now, compare this to the U.S. and you’ll notice a stark contrast.

Hutchison, who has spent his off-season in the States the last six years, continues: “ In the NFL, teams are forced to make the entire list available on every training day. For 45 minutes, the locker room door flies open four times a week. Interview who you like. There aren’t streams of media officials vetting any request. Indeed, you don’t need to even speak to them. And the league fines players who don’t co-operate.”

“… In the NBA, access is even more remarkable. There is an open media call after every training session, and game day is included. Coaches are open to the media, too. On game night, the locker room opens at 6pm, 90 minutes before tipoff … and there are 82 regular-season matches.”

Having this kind of open door policy makes sense on a number of levels.

First and foremost, the fans get more information about their favourite team under the American set-up.

Advertisement

The more information available to fans, the more opportunities for them to engage with the team. The more fan engagement, the more memberships, the more attendees, the more merchandise sales, the more the brand benefits … it’s a win-win situation.

Then there’s the obvious benefits that come having a positive relationship with the media.

Surely it goes without saying that making life difficult for journalists – the people that put together the stories consumed by the public – isn’t the wisest of moves. Conversely, surely it’s also true that making life as easy as possible for journalists increases the chance of a more favourable report.

Another clear advantage that comes with having players front the media is that it can, in a lot of cases, kill a story.

Jack Riewoldt’s apology for flipping the bird yesterday is a good example – sure, it got mentioned on the footy panel shows last night, but chances are we’ll all have moved on by today. It’s a non-story now. Same goes for Brent Moloney at Melbourne – that story had the potential to draw out all week, but by fronting the media, and denying the most serious allegation, it’s now far less likely to.

Finally, it’s hard to ignore Hutchison’s point about the positive impact St Kilda’s in-house documentary The Challenge, which aired a few weeks ago, had.

“It took only 30 minutes for us all to realise Nick Riewoldt and Sam Gilbert were mates and to quell any speculation otherwise. And to forgive Zac Dawson when we saw his remorse over the New Zealand incident. And for others to see what insiders had long known – that Ross Lyon has a sharp personality and strong wit. In essence, it took only 30 minutes to help repair a brand that had been battered for five months,” he wrote.

Advertisement

Leaving aside the fact the doco had PR stunt written all over it, it’s obvious that opening the doors, clearly, has its advantages. So the question remains: why do clubs seem so intent on keeping them closed?

close