Novak Djokovic and propaganda - a lesson from history

What’s a role model? According to the definition, it is: someone others look to as a good example. A role model is someone worthy of imitation — like your beloved teacher or a well-behaved celebrity. So, becoming a role model is about two things:

1. What you do that is worthy of imitation, and

2. What do people know about you. Millions of people are worthy of being role models, but almost nobody knows about their deeds.

So, let’s see what Novak Djokovic did outside the tennis court.

• He didn't get a vaccine against Covid 19, applied for Australian Open 2022 and stubbornly took things to court. Got deported for "thought crime" because he could "become an icon of free choice".

• Organized two tournaments in Serbia (ATP and WTA), and players there got vaccinated against Covid 19. They couldn’t get these vaccines in their countries at the time.

• He donated 1M EUR to Italy when Covid 19 broke out. Donated 1M EUR to Serbia for the fight against Covid 19. Donated money to Spain to fight against Covid 19. Donated money to Australia for the fight against fires.

• Donated money to Melbourne City Mission, a programme for poor children. Opened 49 schools in Serbia, financed programmes for parents. The list of his contributions to education is long.

• n 2016, launched the Djokovic Science and Innovation Fellowship at the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University.

• Rented a private plane to transport a sick child to the USA to treat a rare disease.

• Gave up 1M of his prize money from the Australian Open 2021 to be distributed to lower-ranked players who strugge financially.

• Started the PTPA — association to help the lower-ranked players. This is what his fellow player, Alexandar Zverev had to say:

Alexandar Zverev about Novak Djokovic (Credit: tennishead.net)

• One of his rivals (Novak hardly beat him, losing the first 2 sets in the French Open 2021) couldn’t reach Wimbledon on time. Djokovic offered to transport him via his private jet to London. Let that sink in: Djokovic offered to transport HIS RIVAL to the Wimbledon major, knowing that he would probably play against him. In some countries, people consider this to be stupid, and in some countries, this is considered an act of chivalry and behaviour that we want to model for our children.

The list goes on and on.

But which of these deeds is worth role-modelling? And who decides that?

So why is Djokovic not a role model?

To be a role model, people also need to know, be informed about what you do. The question is — how many people know about the list of Djokovic’s good deeds?

Very few. I don’t see a lot of media coverage about the charitable and honorable things he did. Novak’s generosity remains hidden by media.

How can Djokovic be a role model if people don’t know about what he did?

The media loves sensationalism and scandals because it drives their sales, and the media often has an agenda to follow.

What attracts attention? Most people love to see celebrities on the ground, humiliated. It’s what makes some people feel better about themselves. On the other hand, if people see a celebrity doing something good, some people feel bad about themselves because they can’t or don’t want to follow.

Media is responsible for making the role models

This is why most top sportsmen and sportswomen hire a PR agency to take care of their public image (and consequently branding and profit they make). Novak Djokovic seems to care much less about that. And that is something to be respected.

Making the role models

Do you know who was a role model 90 years ago? Adolf Hitler. The media in Germany 1930s made him a role model. They interpreted his doings as something worth following.

But, Nazi propaganda had one more dark side: satanization and spreading hatred towards people who didn’t fit the agenda. In the case of Novak Djokovic — there is widespread propaganda against him.

Just one example:

Credit: racquetmag.com

Credit: Der Sturmer (an example of hate-spreading propaganda)

There was a magazine in the 1930s in Germany focused on something very similar — demonizing and spreading hatred against people. The main editor was trialled and sentenced in the Nuremberg trials along with other architects of death.

Our world fought very hard against the effects of propaganda, but it seems we forgot the lessons in the meantime.

Why is this important today?

Novak is just a tennis player. The world will not fall apart if he is kicked out of the Australian Open 2022. But look at the results of a poll in Australia, on 13. January 2022.

Source: Twitter

I wonder what would be the results if the poll asked “Should Novak Djokovic be publicly hanged?” If you’d rather not run such a poll, you are right. I am also afraid to see the results. Having 85% of people supporting any political idea is a strong sign of propaganda doing its job. And people love blood, it sells.

Is Novak Djokovic an anti-vaxxer?

What’s an “anti-vaxxer”? Here is the definition from Wikipedia, but let me provide a screenshot before someone changes it after reading this article. It has happened before, so…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_hesitancy (10. Jan 2022)

“Total opposition to vaccination”. Read that again.

And than read Djokovic’s statement from 2020 in New York Times.

Credit NY Times

Djokovic also said that his children are vaccinated against various diseases. His entire team who follows him on all tournaments — all of them are vaccinated. How on Earth is he an “anti-vaxxer”?

Any proofs?

Words. Anyone can say anything. But what about the facts that support a claim? For example, a fact several people in the Serbia Open expressed gratitude to Novak Djokovic and Serbia for providing them opportunities to get vaccinated. They couldn’t get vaccines in their home countries. That vaccination happened during the tournament which Djokovic organized in Belgrade.

Why would an “anti-vaxxer” help others to get vaccinated? It doesn’t add up.

Besides, all people in Djokovic's team are vaccinated. How can an anti-vaxxer support that?

You will never find this information in sensationalistic media that draws attention (and their revenue) by creating scandals and triggering emotional responses from their audience. This is how propaganda works — it feeds public hate, and there is a wide-spread witch hunt against Djokovic.

How does that hate end?

Read this quote…

…and then play this video:

You all know how propaganda feeds hatred. You feel it every day. You learned that in school when your teacher showed you photos of war. What you didn’t remember is what happens when politicians are more powerful than the law, like it happened on 16. January 2022 in Australia. Like this:

“Rightly or wrongly he’s perceived to endorse an anti-vaccination view. And his presence here seems to contribute to that and could lead to more people becoming anti-vax.” — Explanation for Australian Federal Court why Djokovic should be deported

“Rightly or wrongly”? “Seems to contribute”? This is not an excerpt from a book by George Orwell, it’s a real statement by Australian Federal Court.

Australian court can pick any person and say (for example): “Rightly or wrongly person X is perceived as a murderer and it seems that others may become murderes around him, so let’s imprison person X”. That is EXACTLY what happened on 16. Jan 2022 in Australia.

Pray that you never find yourself in the mercy of a state that can convict you for “rightly or wrongly being percieved” and “seems to”. History teaches us that it happened before and our civilization fought hard against it, paying the price in millions of lives.

Very similar loss of law happened in Germany in 1933. We all know how it ended. So, this is not about Novak Djokovic, vaccines, covid nor Australian Open. This is about step back in civilization and a proof that law is there just as a masquerade. At least in Australia.

Australian lawyers, of course, know this and find it profoundly disturbing and dangerous.

“One of the most dangerous aspects of the Djokovic matter is the preparedness of the federal government to deem someone a risk to public order simply on the basis of what it perceives that person’s views might be. This is Orwellian and it is deeply troubling in a society supposedly committed to freedom of speech and freedom of thought”. — Australian Lawyer’s Associaton (Greg Barnes SC)

That’s why we stand with Novak.