Under pressure from media organisations WADA softens restrictive conditions for journalists
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) demanded that journalists sign gag contracts restricting reporting. Now, under pressure, it is backpedalling – as the under-fire body continues to face pressure.
Next week, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is inviting all those involved in the fight against doping to its annual symposium. It promises to be an uncomfortable event for the organisation, which is supposed to ensure that sports fraud is stopped, but recently attracting attention more for the surprisingly lenient way it has dealt with some of the athletes testing positive for banned substances.
As if the problems triggered by this were not enough, WADA has launched an attempt to patronise journalists and prevent critical reporting from Lausanne in the coming week before its annual meeting. Accredited journalists were supposed to sign a two-and-a-half-page long “Terms and Conditions” contract as a condition for admission. Under pressure from journalists' associations, WADA backtracked on Saturday, amending the contract for the symposium in Lausanne and deleting all particularly controversial passages.
Violators could be expelled
Journalists should avoid making "inappropriate or defamatory comments about the event, speakers or other participants" on social media, according to the initially somewhat vague rules of conduct. In the event of a violation, the original version emphasised, expulsion would be threatened. In the case of violations, WADA also reserved the right to exclude participants from future events. These passages have now been completely dropped. The demand for "professional and respectful behaviour" was still included in the new version. Furthermore, the rule that television shoots may only take place in a narrow time frame and in strictly limited areas, unlike in previous years, remains in place.
International journalists‘ organisations had officially complained about the patronising approach. The list of conditions was "unacceptable", wrote the president of the World Association of Sports Journalists (AIPS), Gianni Merlo from Italy, in a protest note to WADA director general Olivier Niggli, which was submitted to the ARD doping editorial team. He felt "reminded of the dark days of censorship". Merlo warned: "I urge you to revise the accreditation requirements and respect our work, because the barrier you want to impose on us is contrary to the freedom of the press and can be misunderstood as an attempt to hide something."
"WADA is copying larger sports organisations"
Merlo told ARD doping editor: "We have to protest against this and defend ourselves against this kind of situation. It is completely unacceptable. The bad example set by other international federations or larger sports organisations has created the possibility for WADA to behave in this way. This is just the consequence of a world that is trying to prevent us from doing our work. WADA is copying the situation that exists in many international federations, which are always trying to restrict journalistic access to many events."
The German Sports Journalists' Association (VDS) has also written a letter of complaint to WADA. In it, its president, André Keil, wrote: "The attempt to influence reporting in advance is unacceptable. The conditions that you are dictating to the media representatives contradict the basic principles of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. We strongly condemn the threatened restrictions on reporting." The VDS has since also received written confirmation from WADA that the restrictions in question have been removed.
Reuters news agency last year removed articles perceived as being supportive of WADA after admitting that one of its journalists had arranged for the organisation’s head of media relations James Fitzgerald - the man responsible for sending out the latest “terms and conditions” - to attend the Masters golf tournament at Augusta as an accredited journalist.
Secret preferential treatment
These events are all particularly painful for WADA because they fit seamlessly into the image the agency has presented over the past year. Several crises have severely damaged the reputation of the anti-doping campaigners. Last year, research by the ARD doping editorial team revealed that 23 Chinese swimmers secretly received preferential treatment after positive doping tests: they were cleared in China of alleged contamination, not even provisionally suspended, as the rules stipulate. All with the blessing of WADA.
A few weeks ago, WADA once again shook global confidence in rules that apply equally to all athletes with its handling of a case in tennis: after two positive doping tests, WADA let the world number one, Jannik Sinner, off with a mini-suspension. The Italian will not miss any important tournaments. He is also said to have been contaminated.
Do fame and fortune protect?
There is outrage in the tennis scene because other, less well-known professionals have not got off so lightly. "The majority of players feel that there is favouritism," criticised the Serbian superstar Novak Djokovic, "it seems that you can influence the result if you are a top player and have access to the best lawyers. The inconsistency frustrates all players."
Experts from other sports, such as the long-standing head of the German Athletics Association, Clemens Prokop, also complain about the serious consequences of WADA's approach. "The problem is that WADA actually has a huge task, namely to fight for the credibility of sport, for the credibility of equal opportunities," Prokop told ARD, adding: "And if WADA partially robs itself of credibility by making spectacular decisions that seemingly do not align with this goal, then it is a problem for the entire sport."
Resistance is forming
Insiders in the anti-doping community expect the difficult situation to be discussed in Lausanne next week. Last year, 18 national anti-doping agencies joined forces to organise resistance, with the support of the German NADA, since the China case. "Basically, we have found that the way WADA has handled this case, how it has communicated it, has had difficult to poor consequences for anti-doping work," says Lars Mortsiefer, chief executive of the National Anti-Doping Agency, to ARD, adding: "there has been a loss of trust in the Olympic Games environment that continues to this day. We still can't explain the situation to our athletes in our respective countries."
Mortsiefer describes the immediate consequences of the WADA crises on his work: "With every case, with every event, we hear: 'But the Chinese, they were treated differently.' And accordingly, this is something that continues to resonate and accordingly also strengthens our resolve to continue demanding answers. Only clear, transparent answers can restore this trust."