From Practice to Piecemeal: Sports Journalism in the COVID-19 Era

If there’s anything to be learned from 2020, it’s this: almost nothing is safe. Very few processes, operations, organizational structures, and professionals are protected from disruption in the immensely volatile world in which we all live.

At this point, stating that an industry or corporation has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic seems gratuitous and even cliche. The same, of course, can be said for sports.

Outside of the obvious distraction that sports provide, the debate that is spawned after a game’s conclusion is perhaps what was missed most during the initial months of the pandemic. Like a poignant album or an enthralling movie, post-mortem reports and debates spur further engagement and enjoyment. Most of that ancillary discussion is provided by sportswriters, the likes of whom are in a precarious position nowadays. 

Though traditional journalistic diligence, professionalism, and spontaneity are still at the forefront of sportswriting, several adjustments have been made—both willingly and unwillingly—to the ways in which journalists operate during the global pandemic.

At the Explanatory Journalism Impact and Uptake project, we’re chiefly concerned with the ways in which certain issues and developments are framed by the media, both mainstream and alternative. Unsurprisingly, the COVID-19 pandemic has provided ample opportunities to analyze constantly shifting rhetorical frames, with sports media being perhaps one of the more unexpected sources for material on this topic.

With that in mind, here are the key ways that sports media has changed in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

From injuries to epidemiology

In a typical sports news cycle, it’s common for beat reporters and columnists to step outside of their comfort zones and report on an athlete’s injury in terms they may not be familiar with. Several writers even lightheartedly joke (external link)  about the lack of knowledge (external link)  they have when reporting the details of an injury.

During a global pandemic, most have shifted their focus from micro health-related stories (for example, a basketball player recovering from a knee injury) to macro issues of public and global health, the latter of which may be equally unfamiliar to them. 

This isn’t exclusively a bad thing. For many average consumers of news, sports reporters may be the only journalists they regularly follow or interact with; having them amplifying the voices (external link)  of those who do know what they’re talking about (external link)  can expose a layman audience to accurate public health advice.

On the other hand, sportswriters have rightly been criticized (external link)  for erroneously evaluating (external link)  or extrapolating elements of the pandemic that are far beyond their scope of knowledge. Simply put, it’s not the job of a sports reporter to be providing the public with ill-informed opinions on the state of a public health crisis. In these cases, journalists should exercise caution when injecting their own personal opinions or evaluations in the realm of public health and epidemiology.

This isn’t even mentioning the unethical disclosure of names (external link)  by some writers who, in publishing the names of athletes who have tested positive for COVID-19, have damaged their reputations and created subsequently uncomfortable conversations (external link) .  

Of course, misinformation and questionable reporting aren’t unheard of in journalism, both within and outside the sports landscape. But, errantly reporting the terms of a player’s salary or the extent of their elbow injury is different from publicizing the fact that they’ve contracted a potential deadly virus. In other words, this isn’t new, but the stakes are much higher when a contagious virus is in question. 

As the pandemic moves forward (and, by extension, the fatigue surrounding COVID-related news grows), sportswriters would be best advised to keep their public health evaluations to themselves. Presumably, sports outlets will see their style guides and ethics guidelines expand to cover pandemic-related topics, especially given how interwoven public health and sports have suddenly become.

Until then, self-policing and careful quoting will be vital to both consistent communication and the truthful dissemination of information. 

Interviews from a safe distance

As of August 2020, Major League Baseball (MLB), National Basketball Association (NBA), and National Hockey League (NHL) games are all being played within meticulously controlled and isolated environments. In almost every sense, sports reporters are physically removed from the action that would otherwise unfold right before their eyes. 

While the players often act indifferent to these changes, members of the media have undoubtedly been impacted by the startling lack of routine that comes with reporting in a purely digital space. Gone are the days of constant gameday routines for members of the media. Reporters haven’t asked an athlete a question while in the same room as them in months, with athlete-journalist correspondence restricted to Zoom calls and slightly delayed live video feeds. 

Some writers have joked about their sudden physical disconnection to the fields of play (and even created content based around their new communication methods (external link) ) while others have been able to remain engaged due in part to teams and athletes willing to make light of the situation (external link) .  

There are two major ways in which virtual interviews and coverage can impact the relationship between a reporter and an athlete. 

First, exclusively virtual interviews have largely dissolved fear of embarrassment, toxicity, or even harassment for reporters on the job. Locker room culture (external link) , especially in North American team sports, is incredibly male-dominated and laden with backstage dialogue that is, in many cases, unpleasant and uncomfortable. 

In several instances, female reporters (external link)  have experienced immensely uncomfortable atmospheres (external link)  due to their presence. Professional sports remains incredibly male-dominated, after all. But, without an actual physical environment within which to exist, the exuberant masculinity should be less apparent, allowing for a more diverse group of reporters to feel comfortable doing their jobs.  

Second, Zoom-based interviews (especially of the post-game variety) can offer new opportunities for reporters to truly ask the right questions. More often than not, traditional post-game interviews are composed of the same batch of generic questions that are asked with predictability in mind; questions to the effect of, “how do you feel your team did out there?” or “how big is this win for your team?”. 

With an intimidating and sometimes angry athlete standing in a reporter’s midst, it can be difficult to truly ask poignant and profound questions out of fear of embarrassment or a hostile response. Over a Zoom call, however, reporters may be able to muster up the courage to ask a truly difficult question that they otherwise wouldn’t feel comfortable posing as a result of the mediated relationship that has developed.

It remains to be seen whether reporters will actually take advantage of the opportunity to ask more intriguing questions, as the bulk of the informal analysis of sports journalism (external link)  during the pandemic thus far has been focused squarely on the previous lack of sports to cover. In due time, opportunities will be seized and more honest interviewing will take place. 

Leniency for non-sports expression

Sports journalists are often bombarded with the same adage when reporting or speaking about anything not related to the athletes they cover: “stick to sports”. Female, trans, and non-binary journalists are especially targeted with this sentiment (external link) . 

But, as colossal issues of racism, gender equality, and politicization of science have collided with the pandemic, readers appear to be easing up on their favourite scribes, allowing them to use their platforms for more than just reporting the scores of last night’s game. Even more positively, the intersection of professional sports and the above issues has created a market for intersectional sports journalism. 

In Toronto alone, Sportsnet’s Donovan Bennett penned a powerful essay about being a Black sports journalist (external link) , with journalists from The Athletic (external link) , The Toronto Star (external link) , and The National Post (external link)  tackling issues of Indigenous appropriation, sexuality, and mental health, among others.

The impact of the pandemic on this shift in audience perception of non-sports-related discourse is still in question. Is this content being more accepted and embraced given the holistic global turmoil? Regardless of whether or not that’s actually the case, the diversity that is organically seeping into the sports media landscape makes for a richer, more equitable pipeline of information. If not tokenized, writers who are approaching these complex issues from an athletic lens can drastically improve the current homogeneity of professional sports.  

Unfortunately, sports media still remains a deeply inequitable and biased industry, despite steady nudging of audiences’ window of palatability. In the same time period as the above pieces, some writers have questioned progressive ideals in favour of traditional, “safer” stances, the likes of which have inevitably been negatively received.

And so, while sports journalism hasn’t exactly undergone a paradigm shift in the way its content producers operate, the elements of the cycle that are often taken for granted have been flipped on their heads, leading to a visible separation between lazy, unethical reporting and serious journalism. 

While the COVID-19 pandemic has definitely undermined the work of an endless number of professionals (especially in creative fields), journalists certainly have their work cut out for them, needing not only to navigate their fast-moving beats, but also making sure they remain factual and ethical.