Apparently, Christine Brennan at USA Today Sports did not get the memo when we had the privilege of chatting with Michaela Onyenwere at the Chicago Sky’s exit press conference.
We asked Onyenwere about how unnecessarily toxic the discourse has been around the WNBA this season. We also asked Brianna Turner if the end of the Sky’s season was more bittersweet than disappointing because of it. Turner’s answer was more centered on her going overseas to play in Australia.
It was obvious that Brennan did not get wind of either Onyenwere’s answer nor Turner’s. Because if she did, she would not have pulled what she did recently.
At one point of Game 1 of the Connecticut Sun’s first-round postseason series with the Indiana Fever, Caitlin Clark was the receiving end of an inadvertent eye poke from DiJonai Carrington. Carrington, one of the best young defenders in the W, has been one of those that this season has been the target of hate and vitriol from many so-called Clark supporters.
Even though we have been very hard on those Clark supporters, those Clark supporters have seen kerosene poured on the flames because of bad actors in the media like Brennan.
Brennan had the nerve to ask this to Carrington…
The restraint for Carrington to not simply walk away from Brennan when it is clear as day that Brennan is hoping for a money quote is Olympic level. She also asked Carrington about a “3 to the Dome” celebration that, as has been pointed out by many including Cindy Brunson, happened later in the game.
Wait a second? Is that Clark once again understanding that it is basketball? Is that Clark once again acknowledging that playoff basketball is going to be more physical and more intense than in the regular season?
Oh, really? Did Brennan tweet that she is actually working on a book about Clark? That explains everything. Brennan in part was trying to mine Carrington for a money quote about that Game 1 play because she is using Clark as her meal ticket and she wants as much juicy content as she can possibly get for her upcoming read.
The sad part is that the 66-year old Brennan has stooped to such lows. Brennan is a trailblazer for women in sports journalism and many women have wanted to pave their way into the industry because of the path blazed by her. She is a former president of the Association for Women in Sports Media. She has worked at major outlets including the Miami Herald and Washington Post. She has been a leader in the conversation on where women stand in the male-dominant sports industry.
Unfortunately, the mainstream sports media’s sick fetish of putting Black women like Carrington in the crosshairs in defense of Clark (which Clark herself, again, is not asking for) has led even a journalistic titan like Brennan to the sunken place. That awkward exchange between Brennan and Carrington is not a problem that is only limited to Brennan.
As much of a problem as certain “fans” have been with this Clark discourse, the mainstream sports media has to look at itself in the mirror. Instead of dedicating actual resources to covering the WNBA as if it were one of its male peer leagues, it has attempted to manufacture a false storyline of other players being “jealous” of Clark because of the increased attention she has brought to the W.
First – let us address that part of the situation. When shock jock sports radio hosts and keyboard-tough-guy columnists push this false “jealousy” storyline, are they really talking about the public at large? Or are they really projecting their own feelings about the WNBA to the masses?
Many of these bad actors were the same individuals who were calling the W out of its name prior to this year. So, when they say there was no attention on the WNBA prior to Clark’s arrival, that is a flat-out lie. Maybe the WNBA was not front and center in the individual households of these shock jocks and ink slingers who only know football (and by football we mean cheerleaders), but the W was in a growth period even before No. 22 burst onto the scene.
Because that is the whole basis of the false “jealousy” narrative. What reason does A’ja Wilson have to be jealous of Clark? She is a two-time champion, a now three-time MVP recipient, a two-time Olympic gold medal winner, is swimming in endorsements, released a New York Times bestselling book, and now has a signature shoe (thank you Nike) on top of her candle business.
Oh – and let’s not forget she was immortalized in her native Columbia, South Carolina with a statue outside of Colonial Life Arena.
What reason does Breanna Stewart have to be jealous of Clark? She is a two-time champion, a two-time MVP and a three-time Olympic gold medal winner and is also making money away from the court via endorsements and a sneaker deal via Puma.
Stew’Ja will be first-ballot Hall of Famers (Women’s and Naismith) when their careers end. And in the case of Wilson, she introduced an entire new legion of fans to the WNBA – the South Carolina Gamecock FAMs.
The ones pushing the dreck that the Stewies and Wilsons of the world are not needle movers in their own rights (as is Clark) have a clear and obvious agenda. These individuals do not want to do the work that real W journalists like Ari Chambers, Myles Ehrlich, Khristina Williams and Meghan Hall (who also works at USA Today and probably should be replacing Brennan at these playoff games) have.
Chambers, Ehrlich, Williams, Hall and others actually have taken the time to know the entire WNBA – not simply one player.
Those who think the W revolves around only one player want to manufacture a “juicy” story (even if untrue) because all that is on their minds are clicks and views in the hopes of charging higher advertising rates. Brennan is better than this – and she knows it deep down inside.
This is the part where we partially give Brennan a bit of a pass. See, the reason why Brennan and others want to mine other WNBA players for Clark-related quotes is because sports editors and editors-in-chief could be telling the Brennans of the world to ask cheap questions about Clark because they believe anything Clark-related equals automatic clickbait.
And that is especially the case when the media is attempting to manufacture a hero-villain story (that does not exist) about Clark being the hero and Black players of the W like Carrington, Chennedy Carter and especially Angel Reese being villains. These sports editors and EICs want to be movie directors but are simply not talented enough or they would be working in Hollywood by now. Is the sports journalism business model this broken?
But the WNBA itself also deserves a bit of tough love in all of this. After all, the W bestowed playoff credentials to Outkick – the Fox News of sports media. What’s next? Barstool being announced as a WNBA Changemaker? The W would have been better off letting a writer from Playboy cover playoff games. At least there is more of a connection between Playboy and the W than Outkick – Liz Cambage did a Playboy photo shoot some years ago.
Speaking of credentialed press that gets the privilege to cover WNBA events, this is exactly what we at Beyond The W warned about in our piece about the W being gentrified – and other independent media have done the same. We have been privileged enough to cover major events like the Draft and All-Star not to mention conduct interviews with some of the biggest names in sports – even outside of the realm of women’s basketball – throughout our 10-year history. It is a privilege we do not take for granted because we (as many other independent outlets do) understand that there is more to being a journalist or content creator than simply being stuck in the numbers.
The idea of legacy media outlets with bigger budgets and whiter newsrooms being granted more access than independent outlets that have more of an actual connection to the players because…you know…Black, Brown, Asian and LGBTQIA+. The result of that will be more awkward encounters like the one we saw between Brennan and Carrington.
Those who pay reporters like Brennan live in so enclosed a data bubble that they fail to understand that making everything about page views and clicks has real world consequences. Ask the numerous Black players that have received death threats from racist fans solely for playing Clark hard.
Sadly, Brennan also comes across as a useful idiot because Gannett – the outfit that owns and operates USA Today – will have no problem replacing Bennett with an AI bot if it means they can save a buck or two (at least in the short term).
Also, a big topic within WNBA media circles is journalists who simply use the W as a stepping stone to land more cushy reporting jobs covering male sports. That is another type of energy that comes from so-called journalists who only want to mine Black players for Clark quotes. Ari Chambers at ESPN has called out this type of mindset on numerous occasions on her various social accounts.
Brennan attempting to press Carrington for a money quote about Clark that will be all over ESPN is exactly what happens when the media wants to be bigger stars than the players. For all the talk that comes from shock jock radio hosts about other WNBA players wanting to ride Clark’s coattails, it appears that is exactly what a lot of legacy media (like Brennan) is doing. Again – projection.
Whether it is sports or news, 2024 has taught us a hard fact about plenty of our media brethren – those like Brennan appear to be more in the sales business than the journalism business. Brennan is directly in the sales business – she wants to hawk an upcoming Clark book. But the lengths that some are going to for that cause is simply despicable.
In a perfect world, many of our media brethren would be doing plenty of soul searching about how we got to this point – and how the plot of honest journalism and content creation can be regained. Many of these legacy journalists have complained about how social media influencers are not “real journalists” but many influencers appear to be doing a better job at it than those who may have attended J-school.
The “Black players are out to get Clark” narrative is fake. It always has been and always will be. Manufacturing a fake narrative because it is sexier than actually talking about the sport is real. Perhaps putting microphones and cameras in the faces of said bad actors at the arenas and in the newsroom offices (ala what Brennan did with Carrington) is what is really needed to precipitate the period of soul searching that is truly needed.
We hope though that the clicks, the views, the increased ad revenue and the increased book sales were worth it. For all the talk about what is and is not a violation of journalistic ethics (thank you Olivia Nuzzi), look no further than those in these newsrooms on the sales side who salivate on sensationalism over substance.
