For years, one of the loudest complaints from WNBA players and fans was that nobody took the league seriously.
The coverage wasn’t robust enough. The TV deals weren’t big enough. The salaries weren’t high enough. The facilities weren’t good enough. The media didn’t pay enough attention.
Well congratulations, WNBA. You’ve made it.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK SPORTS COVERAGE
The league is booming, attendance is soaring and ratings are up. Players are making significantly more money under a new CBA tied to a media rights package reportedly worth more than $3 billion. Teams are building state-of-the-art practice facilities that rival — and in some cases surpass — what NBA players have access to.
The WNBA is no longer fighting for relevance. But with that relevance comes scrutiny.
Jemele Hill addressed this issue this week on her “Flagrant and Funny” podcast after she faced backlash for criticizing the WNBA’s restrictive locker-room media access policies. Hill argued that for years, many fans viewed journalists covering women’s basketball as part of the movement rather than as independent observers.
“There’s more people covering the league now, it’s under more scrutiny, and (the fans) have had the expectation that the journalists are supposed to be extensions of teams. And the journalists are not supposed to be that,” Hill said.
“They expect our jobs to be to support the women. And while the support is, to me, in the fact that we have built an entire podcast around discussing women’s sports and all the culture and the issues and all the things that come with it, they expect the journalists to be cheerleaders.”
She’s spot on.
For a very long time, coverage of the WNBA often resembled advocacy more than journalism. That’s not necessarily malicious. The league was smaller. Women’s sports historically received less investment and less respect. Many reporters covering the W genuinely cared about helping grow the game.
Frankly, I understand that instinct. As a woman in sports myself, I know the struggle is real sometimes. I get it. Hell, I interned in the Indiana Fever PR department in 2009 when they couldn’t even give away tickets. So I’ve had a front row seat to watch the growth of the sport.
But somewhere along the way, a portion of the WNBA ecosystem — fans, players and even some media members — started treating criticism as betrayal.
That’s a problem. Because tough questions are not “disrespect,” and pointing out poor play is not “misogyny.” And journalists are not supposed to function as an extension of league PR departments.
That tension has become increasingly obvious as the WNBA grows into a legitimate mainstream sports property attracting broader coverage from outlets outside the league’s longtime inner circle.
You can see it in the outrage over reporters asking uncomfortable questions. You can see it in the league’s restrictive media access policies. You can see it whenever players or fans accuse journalists of “not supporting women” simply because coverage wasn’t glowing enough.
Last year, veteran reporter Christine Brennan faced backlash — including a formal statement from the WNBPA — after asking DiJonai Carrington whether contact with Caitlin Clark during a controversial play was intentional. Critics argued Brennan was “pushing a narrative.”
More recently, reporters criticizing the WNBA’s limited locker-room access policies (including Jemele Hill) were treated with vitriol as if locker-room interviews are pervy and invasive. Even though they are the norm in every single major professional men’s sport.
Last month, Dallas Wings PR abruptly shut down a reporter’s question to rookie Azzi Fudd about navigating the spotlight alongside teammate and rumored girlfriend Paige Bueckers. Dawn Staley slammed a CBS reporter as “biased” because he dared to refer to a couple of Golden State Valkyries players by name.
And then there’s the growing hostility toward media access altogether. Angel Reese recently said she’d rather pay a fine than speak to aggressive reporters, a stance applauded by Megan Rapinoe as empowering.
We’ve reached a point where saying a player had a terrible game can trigger accusations of sexism or “agenda-driven” coverage. Meanwhile, male athletes get ripped to shreds 24/7 on television, radio, podcasts and social media without anyone questioning whether the existence of criticism itself is harmful to the sport.
That double standard does women’s sports no favors. In fact, I’d argue it’s insulting.
Equality in sports doesn’t mean female athletes only deserve positive coverage. It means they deserve to be treated like professionals whose performances, decisions and controversies are worthy of honest analysis — the good and the bad.
THE WNBA’S WINGS CAN’T SHIELD AZZI FUDD, PAIGE BUECKERS FROM RELATIONSHIP QUESTIONS FOREVER
And to be clear, there absolutely are bad-faith actors out there. There are internet trolls who don’t watch the WNBA, don’t care about women’s basketball and only engage with the sport to stir up culture war nonsense or demean female athletes.
But credentialed journalists doing fair, objective reporting are not the enemy.
I say that as someone whose platform hasn’t always had a harmonious relationship with the WNBA. There was a time when getting credentialed to cover games felt like pulling teeth for outlets perceived as unfriendly to the league. Even now, there’s still an undeniable sense that parts of WNBA media culture operate like an exclusive club.
If the WNBA truly wants to be treated like the major professional sports league it has worked so hard to become, then it has to accept everything that comes with that territory.
Million-dollar salaries. Chartered flights. State-of-the-art facilities. Met Gala invitations.
But also scrutiny, uncomfortable questions and accountability.
