New York, NY——The process of obtaining media credentials in 2025 raises a troubling question: has access in sports journalism regressed to an era reminiscent of Wendell Smith?
For those unfamiliar, Wendell Smith was a pioneering African-American sportswriter who covered Jackie Robinson during his groundbreaking entry into Major League Baseball in the 1940s. Despite his respected voice and tireless work for the Pittsburgh Courier, Smith was denied entry into press boxes simply because of his race. He was forced to cover games from the stands—treated more like a fan than a journalist.
More than 75 years later, one would expect progress to have rendered such exclusion a relic of the past. And yet, many independent outlets—particularly Black-owned media—still find themselves sidelined.
At 4.0 Sports Media, we’ve spent the past 10 years building a reputable brand and consistently earning credentials to cover high-level events: the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, MLS, the Heisman Trophy, the Maxwell Awards, the Walter Camp Awards, WNBA games, major tennis opens, NFL Drafts, and national entertainment functions. We have earned access because we do the work and reach a national audience that values our insight and coverage.
However, our experiences with credentialing remain inconsistent, arbitrary, and, at times, discriminatory.
Here are just a few of the reasons we’ve been given for denial:
- “There is limited space available for this event.” Yet, we later discovered that other outlets were granted access—some with less reach or presence than our own.
- “We don’t credential independent websites.” Still, select independent blogs, college newspapers, and student journalists were allowed in.
- “Our media pool is already full.” But then we observed family members, former players, and friends of staff granted media credentials.
In many of these instances, it wasn’t about space or policy. It was about familiarity. If a media coordinator doesn’t recognize your outlet—or worse, if they make assumptions about who you are and what you represent—you’re dismissed without a fair evaluation of your work.
This isn’t just an oversight. It reflects a larger problem in sports media: gatekeeping based not on merit, but on connections, legacy affiliations, and in some cases, race. It leads us to ask: is credentialing based on the quality of journalism—or the color of the journalist?
We’ve been fortunate to have industry colleagues who recognize these disparities and help expose the truth: there was space. There were credentials available. And yet, our requests were denied—often with boilerplate responses like:
“After careful consideration, we regret to inform you that we will not be issuing media credentials. This decision was made based on a variety of internal factors, including space limitations and coverage priorities for the year ahead.”
Or the ever-popular fallback:
“We do not credential independent publications.”
—As if legitimacy is only defined by mainstream affiliation.
Meanwhile, in a press box meant to facilitate fair, informed coverage, we’ve seen outlets occupy three or more seats while independent reporters are turned away. Circulation size should never be a barrier to inclusion, nor should it excuse gatekeeping practices that favor legacy media over emerging voices.
The broader conversation on media access is happening alongside a national reckoning with systemic racism. Following the murder of George Floyd, icons like Michael Jordan, Bernice King, LeBron James, and even corporate America have called out the inequalities embedded in our institutions—including the media.
Jordan released a powerful statement expressing his pain and frustration with America’s repeated failures to protect Black lives. Bernice King echoed that sentiment, tweeting:
“America must begin the strategic, focused work of supplanting racism and white supremacy with truth, equity, justice, and love.”
Even global brands like Nike, Netflix, HBO, Bank of America, and Apple have joined the push to address systemic inequality. And yet, in the sports world, many Black-owned media outlets are still denied seats at the table.
We are not asking for special treatment. We are demanding fair treatment. The media plays a critical role in shaping public perception. When diverse voices are excluded, so are the stories and perspectives of the communities we represent.
It’s time for credentialing decisions to be based on professionalism, journalistic integrity, and audience impact—not personal bias, outdated traditions, being independent, or racial assumptions.
We need to address the elephant in the room: there is a serious lack of Black media representation at major sporting events and red-carpet gatherings. Too often, media executives turn a blind eye to this issue, pretending it doesn’t exist. Rather than work toward real solutions, they choose to silence those who speak out—sometimes even blackballing the very outlets that dare to call out these inequities.
Until school athletic directors and VPs of communications take a firm and intentional stand to support Black and independent publications, these disparities will continue to persist.
The media world cannot afford to mirror the same closed-door systems we claim to challenge. If this industry truly values equity, then access must be part of that equation.
