US Open Tennis Champion Emma Raducanu — Towards a Higher Road Beyond the Branding Bubble.
Could she successfully promote stellar causes instead of hawking trinkets?
18-year old Emma Raducanu, a daughter of multi-racial immigrants, after an 18-month hiatus from tennis in order to finish high school, gracefully manifested on the world stage on the 20th anniversary of 9/11
to reveal a dazzling streak of excellence — becoming the first “qualifier” to win the US Tennis Open — the pinnacle of global tennis — without losing a set.
Guardian columnist Adrian Chiles wrote an excellent piece on his high hopes that Emma will not be turned into a brand.
Her sterling presence appears to support that possibility — to transcend the branding bubble of consumerism and become a quite unique voice in sports an beyond.
After her stunning win, she was comped a ticket to New York Met Gala and seemed distinctly genuine, not caught up in branding ploys and posturing of more image-concerned attendees.
At this annual event, fashion, celebrity and financial elites fuse, donating $35,000 to attend. Some are decked out seeking the allusive high heavens promised by enhanced branding and pretension.
World-class models and celebrities strutted the walkways with, at times, grimacing looks, apparently posing to project exclusivity, self-focus, separateness, and superiority onto their dreary personal brand.
In contrast, Emma stunningly smiled — radiating humility, joy and magnificent — a happiness seemingly found from excellence, dedication to process, rather than from fixations on self, shallow branding, consumerism, adoration, and brand image.
Emma’s US Open win earned her $2.5 million. Presumably she is on track for making $5-10 million a year in tennis tournament earnings. Branding pundits think she could make many times that in endorsements, echoing such other tennis greats (and a prior personal role model) as Roger Federer. Rodger earned over $90 million during the last year — yet less than 1% came from tournament prize money.
Roger is a suave, sophisticated, polished guy, worthy of emulation — or so I used to think — the emulation part being questioned. I have seen a number of attorneys who also exhibit strong positive qualities in their personal and professional lives. Yet I have seen them ditch their personal values to argue persuasively for questionable policies and outcomes beneficial to their clients. Not that the old adage about lawyers is fully true — “You know that they are lying when their mouths’ are moving” — but it can be true some of the time. Its heartbreaking to see.
That’s how feel when I see Roger hawking goods of his clients. He is still suave and polished — but should I really believe him when he implies strongly that my life will be more fulfilled, that I will be happier, if I buy a $50,000 Rolex watch. My happiness is rather important to me — and Roger seems to trivialize it. I am reluctant to treat him as a friend — he does not have my best interests at heart.
In my view, he has devolved some from being a tennis great towards assuming a bit of a hustler persona — like vendors with 20 fake Rolex's on their arm, hawking them to naïve tourists on side streets and alleys. (Not that Roger is hawking fake Rolex's, but he is hawking fake happiness, surmised to be obtained by wearing the same watch as Roger.)
I hope Emma has higher aspirations. Does she want to put her great life-force behind promoting some phone brand over another? If in doing so, would she believe that the life of her fans could really be better? Or that the world would rise to higher levels? I hope not. From the glimpse of her that I have seen, Emma seems capable of doing better than that.
If she did not dilute and taint her credibility with hawking trinkets, I indeed would listen to her if she talked about greater issues — for example, the boost to community health that vaccines engender. Or that we are facing a run-away climate and biodiversity crises. Or simply, insights from her process that propels her to excellence — on an off the court.
Yet in doing so, Emma would take a short-term hit by forgoing endorsements. One step back, three steps forward, perhaps.
Regarding short-term hits: If Emma finds that in time $10 million a year is insufficient to buy a core level of human happiness and satisfaction, and that this dilemma is amplified by her having foregone the excessive wealth of branding’s purgatory, I will be more than happy to contribute to a “Go Fund Emma” campaign, buy her books, and listen to her podcasts — to help her over the hump of shaking consumption and status withdrawal jags. Joe Rogen has scored over $50 million, some estimate $100 million, in his podcast contract with Spotify. As Emma’s wisdom and insight flower over the years, I venture that I would choose Emma’s podcast over Joe’s. And Emma’s books over Rodger’s.
And if she took the higher road, a non-branding, “not hawking trinkets” stand, I venture, that would place her in an advantageous position later in her post tennis years for advisory or executive positions of substance — whereby her life earnings may equal or exceed a life of hawking trinkets, but also be far more satisfying from her genuine and heart-felt efforts of inching the world towards being a better place.
In my visions, she could become a globally dominant resource for the good of humankind. That may be too much pressure, a bridge too far, to place on the shoulders of an 18-year-old. Yet her manifestation of excellence, competence and focus hint that she may be capable of scaling such heights.
I would support her without reservation if she were to go full force, in her own way and exuberant style, towards building a global platform of non-branding: No paid endorsements.
Rather, she could focus on being a spokesperson for causes of good intent across the globe — without conflicts of interest or implicitly supporting mass, excess consumerism by taking on million dollar endorsement deals. And while that may be reward in itself for someone living well in the upper .1% , it may also payoff longer term financially. Doors to higher level ventures may open from her higher road approach that (far) exceed mundane glitter-filled commercial deals that will soon be tossed at her.
In my vision, she could be a beacon, from her non-commercial platform, to unmask the hidden dopamine-fueled addictions of mass consumerism that greases the skids for humanity’s plunge towards catastrophe via the climate and biodiversity extinction crises.
And in contrast to that, she could demonstrate that radiant happiness can be achieved through pursuit of excellent devoid of vast consumption and status accoutrements – and Rolodex watches.
What will unfold, undoubtedly will. Emma to me will remain excellent even if she gets detoured by branding fantasies and delusions. Like a flash bulb in her eyes, she may become blinded momentarily and stumble on the global “steps of the Met”. Even then, I sense that she will quickly regain balance and continue to radiate excellence. In her own and graceful way – not encumbered by well meaning, but limited, visions of admirers such as myself.
