Hill: NFL locker room debate not actually about nudity

It’s probably not a good idea to start a column with the acknowledgment of how few people will care about the subject at hand.

Even less will agree with the side of the issue being presented.

But there are some wild internet takes about the NFL Players Association’s latest efforts to get media out of the locker rooms that are so off base that it becomes necessary to at least lay out some of the details so the discussion can be properly framed.

The players association this week has started a push for its members to request that interviews during the practice week be conducted outside the locker room. The locker rooms will remain open for media to request the interviews, for now, but the union is asking players to then step outside the locker room to conduct them. It’s completely within their rights and has been a clear part of the NFL’s media policy for a long time.

The players just haven’t often exercised this option, because it’s quite inconvenient for them to get up and exit the locker room each time they are requested. Most players would prefer to just sit at their lockers and do the interviews, if they have to do them at all.

It quickly became clear this was simply a gambit to gain some traction in a longer-term agenda to banish media completely.

Immediate reaction poured into social media when the NFLPA put out a statement, and probably 90 percent was in support of the players.

Most of the comments, however, referred to postgame locker room interviews. That’s not really what this is about, at least not at this point. The current discussion centers on the 45 minutes per day players are obligated to be available after practice.

On the surface, that public support is to be expected. Especially the way the argument is being presented and the immediate ire that is already drawn just by the mere mention of the evil word “media.”

Already a policy

It’s incredibly easy to choose sides if the discourse is, “Should the media be hanging around and interviewing naked players?” That’s precisely why the NFLPA is presenting this as a privacy issue.

But that’s not the actual debate. Players are well-aware of when the media will be present. There are several options to ensure privacy, including robes and changing under towels or even in the shower area. This is even addressed in the media policy.

“If the locker room is open to the media immediately following practice, the club must screen the shower area from view and distribute appropriate clothing, e.g. wrap-around towels or robes, for player privacy,” the policy reads. “Clubs must submit to the league office as part of the 2024 Media Access Plan their plan to ensure player privacy during the practice week open locker room sessions.”

It’s better for everyone, and players absolutely have a right to feel comfortable, as do media members doing their job. As someone who has covered many locker rooms in several sports, I’m not sure anyone has ever actually wanted to be present when players are openly changing.

It’s just not a real thing. It’s a red herring to try to turn a complex argument into a simple one.

But it really is a complicated issue.

The locker room is open during that time not just for direct interviews, but also as a way for media members to build rapport with the subjects they cover every day — to better tell people who they are, generate future story ideas and get a gauge on what is really going on with a team to relay that to fans.

Sports are about far more than just the games. It’s about the people who play them.

It’s the ultimate reality show, and the ability to dig deeper is part of what has made the NFL such big business. It’s why the league has been so resistant to cut access.

Could a compromise be reached by players to instead sit in a separate room at individual spots for 45 minutes after practice each day to exclusively do media? Sure. Let’s do that. But players will never go for it. Again, it’s not actually about privacy.

Now some changes can probably be made. Cellphone cameras weren’t really a thing when these policies were written. They have also been the main culprit in some of the rare instances of nudity reaching the internet.

The number of people credentialed has also increased exponentially, meaning many people without actual training or understanding of the locker room dynamic are present.

These things can be addressed, and probably should.

But restricting direct access to players isn’t a good thing for media or fans. Or players, many of whom are not in support of such a drastic move.

Better for everyone

The media was out of the locker room during the COVID seasons, and the results were noticeable. Press conferences don’t yield anywhere near the same level of depth. Not even comparable.

There was far less storytelling, and the reporting was far less personable. Fans actually do tend to show less interest and empathy for players they don’t get the ability to know by learning their stories.

That’s not my opinion. It was one shared by multiple players and league personnel who shared their thoughts on this issue in recent days. In the locker room.

They also pointed out there was no accountability for media members who could just say or write whatever they wanted without having to face the players each day.

Nobody is changing their mind on this, and that’s fine. It’s understandable if you don’t believe media having access to players is an important part of your viewing experience.

But please frame the argument the right way.

Contact Adam Hill at ahill@reviewjournal.com. Follow @AdamHillLVRJ on X.