Djokovic double faults on social media serves
The men’s final of the Australian Open, scheduled this Sunday, is notable for Novak Djokovic’s absence. Djokovic is a nine-time winner of the event — including the past three years — and he was designated the No. 1 seed for this year’s tournament.
Djokovic did not compete, of course, as he was effectively deported from Australia. Djokovic was denied entry upon arrival as his visa was revoked by Australia’s federal government.
Djokovic’s Australian ordeal was set off by his Instagram post announcing he was about to fly there. He indicated having an “exemption permission.” The post included a photo of Djokovic appearing on an airport runway with his tennis gear and luggage visible.
Given his dominance at the Australian Open — and vying to surpass Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal with a record 21 Grand Slam men’s singles titles — perhaps Djokovic anticipated being warmly embraced upon arrival.
Still, Djokovic apparently miscalculated the value — and timing — of such publicity. Djokovic’s social media post did not mention the word “vaccine” or specify why he had received an exemption. Consequently, questions were predictably raised.
Many Australians were outraged that Djokovic could travel, despite seemingly being unvaccinated for COVID-19. Australians have undergone stringent pandemic measures: the border was closed for a lengthy period to the country’s own citizens.
Djokovic’s pending long-haul flight provided sufficient time for Australia’s Border Force to prepare for his arrival.
Djokovic’s eventual visa cancellation was appealed in Australia’s courts. An initial court hearing reinstated Djokovic’s visa when sympathy — momentarily — seemed to generally shift in his direction. Such public sentiment was short-lived though.
Court filings revealed that Djokovic’s initial exemption was based on testing positive for COVID-19 in mid-December. Djokovic’s social media postings, however, detailed that he did not accordingly self-isolate. His continued indoor public outings in Serbia, while infectious, were morally objectionable but also actions that defied the law.
Djokovic posted a photograph where he is seen shaking hands at an event showcasing a Serbian stamp in his honour. He is also pictured in close contact with children — devoid of a mask — at a Belgrade Tennis Association function. He was interviewed for L’Equipe and did not disclose being infected to journalists.
Djokovic additionally documented being in Serbia and Spain within the final week of December although his Australian visa paperwork indicated not travelling then.
Some sports celebrities have more than 100 million followers on social media platforms where they expectedly have considerable control regarding what gets publicized about them. Still, Djokovic illustrates there can be ramifications for publicly documenting one’s movements.
Few people have the fame and reach that equal Djokovic. Nevertheless, there are lessons applicable to the rest of us concerning our digital footprint and showing caution about what gets willingly displayed on our social media profiles. TIMOTHY DEWHIRST IS A PROFESSOR AND SENIOR RESEARCH FELLOW IN MARKETING AND PUBLIC POLICY AT THE GORDON S. LANG SCHOOL OF BUSINESS