Press pass

Sport’s big Saudi party and where that leaves the media

Saudi Arabia’s ever-growing influence on world sport is not new, nor is it really even considered news anymore. It is almost an accepted reality for some sections of the media.

But over the weekend a journalist’s treatment at the Anthony Joshua v Daniel Dubois heavyweight world title bout, hosted at Wembley Stadium, offered a reminder of just what is at stake.

The fight, billed as “Riyadh Season: Wembley Edition”, was bankrolled by Saudi Arabian royal Turki Alalshikh, who has been behind some of boxing’s biggest fights — and purses — in recent years.

Oliver Brown, who is chief sports writer at the Daily Telegraph and a former colleague of mine, arrived at Wembley as planned on Saturday evening, but says he was blocked from entering the stadium.

Writing in the Telegraph on Monday, he claimed this happened after a PR executive working for the fight took issue with a previous column published last Friday, in which Brown described the Wembley spectacle as a prime example of sportswashing for the Saudi state.

Wembley Stadium on fight night | Credit: Wembley Stadium

Reading his account of what happened on Monday morning felt like a reality check which the sporting world — and that includes some corners of the media — needed.

If one of the most senior sports correspondents in the UK, with the platform and backing of a national newspaper, could be barred from boxing’s biggest night at Wembley Stadium of all places, seemingly for offering criticism of the Saudi state’s involvement in the sport, what does that say about the freedom of the press?

Organisers have since suggested that his entry was blocked on account of the media seating being oversubscribed. It is worth pointing out too that there were other sports reporters who were also previously critical of Saudi involvement in boxing, but were admitted to the event.

It still got me thinking about how we report on sport and how access is a fundamental part of that - and cannot be taken away based only on a big difference of opinion. Reporting always needs to be fair and accurate, but that does not mean you need to pander to narratives as deemed appropriate by those you report on. The former is journalism 101, the latter is simply PR.

In my own bubble, these dilemmas have come into my thinking over the last few months. Boxing is not my patch, but in about six weeks’ time, the WTA Finals will be hosted in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It will be the first edition of a three-year hosting deal that extends through to 2026 for the women’s tennis tour.

As a freelancer, a lot of things come into play when you consider which events to travel to — top of that list usually being finances and the likelihood of being commissioned. But when planning which tournaments I was going to target this year, I never really thought the WTA Finals were a realistic option for me as, if I’m honest, I didn’t see a way I could feel completely comfortable reporting from Riyadh while also writing exactly what I thought.

I’m sure the WTA will do everything in their power to help every journalist feel at ease at the Finals. My understanding is also that every person accredited by the WTA will have access to the event, irrespective of their reporting.

Would that erase all my doubts? I don’t think so. I might feel differently if I was on staff for a newspaper but, as a freelancer, I cannot shake the feeling that if anything were to go awry due to, I don’t know, me writing something deemed unfavourable by the hosts, I would still feel vulnerable.

Going to a tennis tournament is not exactly brave reporting. There are plenty of journalists who are in actual grave danger on a daily basis in war zones and similar. This is not even in the same league as that.

But I’ve still taken pause about travelling to this event, and I cannot remember ever feeling similar (except maybe about travelling post-lockdown). There are many who have reported on boxing, football and even tennis from Saudi Arabia for years who might mock my take, but I don’t think my feelings are unfounded.

Lest we forget that, according to US officials, the Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman approved the operation that led to the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi six short years ago. I’m not suggesting that criticising the WTA tennis tour’s move to Saudi Arabia is about to get somebody killed, but I also think our collective memories are too short.

In the case of the WTA Finals, the move to Saudi Arabia is complicated further by the tour’s status as a leading force for women’s rights in sport, ever since it was formed by Billie Jean King and the Original Nine more than 50 years ago.

Women’s freedoms are still controlled by male guardianship laws in Saudi Arabia, and members of the LGBTQ+ community continue to live in fear according to Human Rights Watch. Just a few months ago a 29-year-old female fitness trainer, Manahel al-Otaibi, was handed an 11-year prison sentence in Saudi Arabia. According to Amnesty International, she was imprisoned on charges related to her clothing choices and expression of her views online - including opposing guardianship rules. (The official line from Saudi diplomats is that she committed "terrorism offences".)

Moving the WTA’s flagship event to a country with that kind of record seems a poor fit at best.

Some will suggest that the WTA had no better option if they want to catch up with the prize money available on the men’s tour. The WTA Finals have also been crying out for some stability, and this Saudi deal offers that.

For those who are not familiar, the WTA Finals happen at the end of each season, and feature the top eight singles players and doubles players from that calendar year. For the past three years though, it has been somewhat of a shambles.

Due to the Covid pandemic and the WTA briefly pausing tournaments in China over concerns for the safety of Peng Shuai in 2021, the tour’s 10-year deal to host the Finals in Shenzhen disintegrated. So the last three editions of the Finals, from 2021-23 were hosted in Guadalajara, Dallas-Fort Worth and Cancun. Dallas-Fort Worth featured embarrassingly sparse crowds, and last year Cancun made headlines for abysmal weather, complaints about uneven court surface and photos like this one:

Aryna Sabalenka battling the elements in Cancun | Credit: Getty

The players sent a letter to WTA CEO Steve Simon calling for better conditions. The deal with the Saudi Tennis Federation guarantees better conditions. Much better, in fact. The players are competing for $15.25million (£12m) in prize money - a record for a WTA event and equal to the ATP Finals purse.

These are things that should make me feel good, as a journalist who wants to see women’s sports elevated to a level playing field with men’s. But all it leaves is a bitter taste: the top eight women’s tennis players in the world will finally get the cut they deserve, but they do so in exchange for boosting the image of a country that restricts women’s rights on a daily basis.

There was a sense of inevitability to this happening in women’s tennis. The ATP and WTA rankings are already sponsored by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) - the same state-run entity which owns Newcastle Football Club. At various events this season, the PIF logo has been visible on the court advertising hoardings too. Last year, the Next Gen ATP Finals (for players under 21) were held in Jeddah, the first of a four-year deal.

So when the announcement came in April about the WTA Finals, it was no surprise - especially as reports first surfaced last year.

Very few current players have voiced any issue with going to Riyadh, except Russia’s Daria Kasatkina, who is openly gay. But she softened her viewpoint after Arij Almutabagani - the president of the Saudi Tennis Federation - assured players they would not have to act any differently to the way they do in Dubai or Qatar.

Among former players, the picture is more mixed. Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert penned a joint column in the Washington Post earlier this year, discouraging the WTA from holding the event in Saudi Arabia. I asked Navratilova about it at the Laureus Awards in May, and she called it one step away from being as bad as “going to North Korea”.

But other top names are on board. Former Wimbledon champion Garbiñe Muguruza is the tournament director, and even Billie Jean King is on record as supporting the move as she is hopeful it could make a long-term difference to women’s lives in the region.

I don’t doubt that some women may benefit from a top women’s sporting event being hosted in Riyadh. I also understand that players will have no restrictions on how they dress on court or in practice, and that there are many women on the ground working on the event, including Almutabagani - who became the first woman elected to run one of the country's sports federations in 2021.

I know from speaking with people involved that there are hopes tennis participation in the region will be boosted by the event and that this can enact progress when it comes to how women’s sport is viewed there. I do believe that sport has the power to make change.

But being able to report on every side to this story — yes, to highlight supposed social progress, but also to ask fair questions about sportswashing and human rights violations — is crucial.

The Wembley incident was evidence to me that press freedom remains a question mark when sport is being funded by Saudi Arabia. I’m not sure that’s a price anyone should be willing to pay.

Recommendations

The Women’s Super League returned at the weekend, led by a thrilling 2-2 draw between Arsenal and Manchester City. To mark the start of the season, Flo Lloyd-Hughes has launched The Cutback on Substack, and I’d recommend it for anyone looking for quality analysis of all the action.

In tennis, I enjoyed (and was very jealous) of this feature by Charlie Eccleshare, written at the Laver Cup last weekend. He got to sit alongside Andre Agassi — eight-time major champion and soon-to-be Team World captain — and watched a set of tennis with him. So much insight into Agassi’s tennis brain, and just a lot of fun.

Elsewhere Iga Swiatek celebrated 122 weeks at world No 1 on Monday. That tally moves her ahead of Ash Barty and seventh on the all-time list in women’s tennis. She is still only 23 years old. I’m not sure she gets the credit she deserves sometimes, so I just wanted to give Swiatek her flowers on here.

And another thing!

This past week I reached 1,000 (!!!!) subscribers on Substack and (without getting soppy) it really just blows my mind that there are that many people signed up to read my work each week.

I want to say thank you for the support, so I’m giving existing subscribers 50% off if you upgrade to a paid annual subscription this week. That’s £20 for the entire year.

There will always be free reads on here, but I’m going to start increasing the number of posts that go behind a paywall over the next few months, as I want to reward those who are financially backing this Substack.

I’d love for as many people to get to read all the posts as possible — click the button below to find out more.

Thanks again for reading - and let me know what you’d like to see more of in the comments!