Must-Read: Double Trouble
by Brian Reich | 23 Apr 2010, 12:51pm
I have a love/hate relationship with mainstream media. I love reading/listening to/watching mainstream media because it gives me access to stories and ideas that I wouldn’t otherwise encounter on my own. At the same time, I hate reading/listening to/watching mainstream media because all too often it presents the same stories and ideas over and over again.
For example:
The New York Times Magazine featured an article about Bob and Mike Bryan, the identical twin brothers who also happen to be the most successful doubles tennis pair in the world, in their August 24, 2009 issue. The headline was “Unseparated Since Birth.” It was a good article — I learned some new/interesting things about the Bryan’s life on, and off, the tennis court.
A week later, in their August 31, 2009 issue, The New Yorker published an article about the Bryan Brothers with the title “Perfect Match.” There was some overlap between this article and the one from the week before, as you would expect, but in class New Yorker fashion, this article also looked into what scientists know about the relationship that exists between twin siblings as a way of analyzing the brothers’ ability to dominate opponents (vs. their limited success when playing apart). Very smart stuff.
So, two good articles in one week about the Bryan brothers. How exciting!
In the year since… not so much.
On March 18, 2010, 60 Minutes aired a story about the brothers. There was no new information in the story. The April 26, 2010 issue of Sports Illustrated has a profile of the brothers (the title is ‘Togetherness‘). No new ground broken here either. And there are many more examples…
The Bryan Brothers are a great story. They deserve to be covered. And I want to hear more, go deeper, and look at their lives from different perspectives and angles. But that’s not how the mainstream media plays the game. Any one of the stories I posted, on its own, is worth reading. But every story about them is not - especially because they are, at this point, mostly the same.
Once that first big story has been written, or an in-depth piece (like the one in The New Yorker) offers some solid analysis of their success, the mainstream media has two choices: option 1 is to cover something else (and trust me, there are more than enough good stories out there if you are willing to look), option 2 is to add some value. That means writing about a different aspect of their lives. That means focusing on a different part of their game. That means interviewing different people in the world of tennis for their perspectives. You get the idea.
The mainstream media has settled for the first option in the case of the Bryan brothers. I’m looking forward to someone… anyone… taking a shot at option two.
TAGS
: 60 Minutes Bob Bryan Mike Bryan Must-Read New York Times Sports Illustrated tennis The New Yorker
2 comments
True Champions
by Brian Reich | 2 Feb 2009, 2:24pm
On Sunday morning, still before sunrise in the United States, a great sports rivalry logged its 22nd and most recent installment. Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer squared off for the Men’s Championships at the Australian Open with Nadal emerging in five sets with the title. And while the match was incredible, what happened on Sunday morning confirmed for me that these two athletes are the best, not only in their sport but perhaps in any sport — and it wasn’t something that happened during the match, but rather during the presentation of the trophies.
Roger Federer, when he accepted his runner-up plate, started to cry.
He didn’t cry because he had lost the match. He didn’t cry because he is still one major title short of being considered the greatest tennis player ever. He certainly didn’t cry because Rafael Nadal secured the world’s top ranking or brought home a bigger check.
Roger Federer cried because he didn’t play as well as he is capable. He cried because he knows he can do better. He cried because he only wants to compete at his best, to give his rival the best possible match - no matter the outcome. Roger Federer works so hard, focuses so much, and wants nothing more than to win — and when he can’t, when the pieces can’t fit together like they have so many times before that… the only thing he could do was cry.
And do you know what Rafael Nadal did? He didn’t ignore Federer or look the other way. He didn’t gloat or mock his rival. Nadal, all of 22-years old, walked over, put his arm around Federerl, and comforted him. He stepped up to the microphone when it was time to accept his trophy, and said that Roger Federer was the greatest tennis player of all time. Rafael Nadal knew exactly what Roger Federer was feeling.
You don’t have to be a tennis fan, or even understand the game really, to recognize that these two competitors represent all that is good about sports. Whenever they meet, and it seems of late that they are always meeting in the biggest matches in the the biggest tournaments the sport of tennis has to offer, Nadal and Federer go all out. Every point. Every set. Every great shot and near miss. When its over, they have left it all out on the court.
Federer and Nadal are true champions. They are at the top of their game, on a level that few, if any, can even imagine. They are great ambassadors for their sport. They are rivals, as well as friends.
No matter what your profession or your level of success in life, you can learn something from these two. I know I have.
TAGS
: Australian Open heart Rafael Nadal Roger Federer tennis
leave a comment
