WNBA reporter Christine Brennan doubles down on ‘racist’ question to Dijonai Carrington about poking Caitlin Clark’s eye

USA Today columnist and Caitlin Clark biographer Christine Brennan has no regrets asking Connecticut Sun guard DiJonai Carrington to poke the Indiana Fever rookie in the eye — a question deemed “racist” by the WNBA players’ union is featured.

Speaking to CNN’s Jake Tapper amid the ongoing controversy, Brennan emphasized that she would not hesitate to ask the question again. In particular, Brennan explained, she wanted to give Carrington a chance to hit back at critics who accused her of deliberately gouging Clark’s eye during last week’s playoff opener.

“The best thing I can do as a journalist is try to give the athlete the opportunity, which I have done tens of thousands of times, to answer the question and tell us what she thinks happened,” Brennan told Tapper. ‘That’s literally it.

“And as you know, first of all, I would ask that question 100 times out of 100, I would ask it today. The athlete has every opportunity to then take that question and do with it as she wishes,” Brennan continued. . “And she clearly did. So that, I think, is the opportunity that any journalist gives an athlete when you tell a story, to give them a chance to show their side of it.”

Carrington said she did not intentionally poke Clark in the eye and although cameras caught her giggling with teammates shortly after the incident, the Sun guard insists the laughing had nothing to do with Clark. Furthermore, Clark also dismissed the eye poke as unintentional.

Christine Brennan speaking on the ‘SiriusXM Business Radio Broadcasts’ in 2016

But while Carrington answered Brennan’s questions without complaint, the WNBA players’ union responded with a scathing statement aimed at the famed columnist.

“To unprofessional members of the media like Christine Brennan: You are not fooling anyone,” the WNBPA statement said.

“That so-called interview in the name of journalism was a blatant attempt to entice a professional athlete to participate in a story that is false and designed to fuel racist, homophobic and misogynistic vitriol on social media. You can’t hide behind your tenure.

“You have abused your privileges and do not deserve the credentials provided to you.”

Despite the criticism, Brennan did not attack the players’ union or any individuals.

Instead, she focused on the league’s ability to deal with the current controversy over allegations of racism and bigotry against players over issues of race and sexual orientation.

“Is the league ready to tackle some of this research?” Brennan asked. “That’s a question I would ask and say, ‘Yes, they are,’ because these are amazing women who have been in this spotlight for a long time.”

Brennan acknowledges that the controversy has “struck a nerve” but insists she would ask the same question of male athletes like “Tiger Woods and Michael Phelps.”

What worries her is that the expectation that journalists will ask tough questions is being replaced by a safe space for athletes, who want to remain unchallenged.

No foul was called, despite the contact leaving the 22-year-old in pain on the ground

“Are they saying we can’t ask tough questions or, in this case, not even a tough question, just an honest question from a female athlete?” Brennan said.

Brennan, a 66-year-old sportswriting pioneer, has been defended by dozens of journalists since the controversy began, including some from both sides of the political divide. For example, liberal Keith Olbermann and conservative Jason Whitlock both condemned the WNBPA for their statement.

That continued Wednesday with Tapper, who quickly explained Brennan’s exalted place within women’s sports.

“Whoever wrote this statement for the WNBA players’ union should probably read a little more about Christine Brennan before accusing her of buying anything to do with homophobia, racism, or sexism, because those are terrible scourges on our culture against which you fought. for decades,” Tapper said.

In addition, USA Today released a statement saying that the newspaper “rejects the idea that the interview perpetuated any narrative other than to get the players’ perspective directly.”