Thank you for being here! I am a full-time freelance sportswriter and your support allows me to continue doing work like this. If you appreciate my work, I would be really grateful if you considered upgrading to a paid subscription.

A paid subscription also supports the community that we are building here, which includes events like the Out of Your League Book Club and our (very active) paid subscriber Discord server. You can upgrade here:

I have a new column at Xtra magazine that looks at the media’s problem(s) covering women’s sports, and the WNBA, in particular. From the piece:

In that column, I cite a new study that examined ESPN’s WNBA coverage in 2024 and found that ESPN publicly condemned racism while simultaneously amplifying it as entertainment. That study, titled “Co-framing the 2024 WNBA Playoffs: ESPN’s Deferential Approach to Selling Misogynoir,” is by Zoe Tzanis, a PhD Student and Researcher at the University of Pittsburgh.

Zoe is a Capricorn (hello, research- and detail-oriented!) and a New York Liberty fan and I wanted to ask them a little bit more about their findings.

OOYL: Can you give me the elevator pitch of your study? What did you look at and what did it find?

Zoe Tzanis: My study looked at how ESPN covered the 2024 WNBA playoffs, specifically in relation to issues surrounding racism and racial harassment of league players. What I found was twofold: first, though ESPN readily covered the racial harassment of players, analysts deferred responsibility for said reporting to digital audiences and trolls. That is, they deliberately made racial harassment a central topic, often earning more airtime than the game itself, but blamed external actors for its centrality. Second, ESPN and, more specifically the network's male analysts, infantilized the WNBA and its players, describing racial harassment as something male players can handle but women by nature cannot. This coverage forwarded long-standing sexist tropes that men are strong, capable, natural athletes and women are weak and in need of their protection. 

OOYL: Was there anything your study found that you were surprised by? Or anything you expected to find but didn't pan out?

ZT: The most surprising find of this research was that, while Black women athletes are historically treated as violent and aggressive—think of routine coverage of Serena Williams as angry and uncouth—the reverse can be just as damaging. When analysts, instead, treated DiJonai Carrington and Alyssa Thomas as bereaved victims, incapable of manning up in the face of racism and in need of external protection, these athletes were similarly reduced of their agency. Both extremes tell us that Black women athletes can not control themselves or properly face the worlds around them. Both extremes forward damaging stereotypes about Black women. 

OOYL: You spent a significant amount of time discussing the way "trolls" were framed by ESPN. This is something we saw Cathy Englebert do, as well. I feel like the idea of "trolls" is used to both minimize the real harmful nature of the content, as well as deflect responsibility by pinning it on nameless figures. Can you talk more about how the idea of "trolls" being responsible for the racist harassment and abuse functions?

ZT: Exactly. As this study demonstrates, trolls are a coverup and a catchall for not only discussing but sensationalizing racism without taking responsibility for what discussing and sensationalizing racism does in it of itself. When Englebert, Steven A. Smith, or Chiney Ogwumike blame "trolls" for making them discuss racism, they are not being truly forthcoming. They have the power to choose which topics they cover and which things they say or do not say. That is not to say that they should not handle racism when it comes up—they can and often should—but rather that attaching trolls to the discussion is an easy out to not taking ownership for what they say and do. 

The troll is a deceptive figure. Who are they? What are they? Are they even real or human? Blaming the trolls for the cultural and social ills propagated by intuitions, like leagues and media, like the WNBA and ESPN, tells us that the enemy is outside and that the inside is to be trusted. That is rarely the case. The inside is to blame for creating a culture in which racism, sexism, and homophobia are made sensible and systematized. The trolls are merely a symptom. 

OOYL: I'm thinking about your work, which shows the way misogynoir was reinforced by media narratives, alongside Risa Isard and Dr. Nicole Melton's 2021 work about discriminatory coverage. And what we see is that, despite the WNBA itself being a league that is predominantly made up of Black women, the prejudices of the outside world are projected onto that league and cause significant harm. What do you think the media can learn from your work?

ZT: The largest takeaway and ask for media actors are: 1) to be transparent about the role of institutional media in creating the conditions for understanding, not only racism, sexism, and misogynoir; 2) amplify and empower players to speak about their experiences; 3) treat the WNBA and women's leagues as their own ecosystems not only an arena to be understood in their comparison to men's leagues. 

OOYL: Anything important you want to mention?

ZT: Think critically about how the media throw around and employ trolls in their coverage. Think about where the money is and who may profit from the eyeballs and hype that surround sensational coverage.