Rafael Nadal

Djokovic propaganda cliches

by

Last night, tennis player Novak Djokovic won the US Open, one of the four major tournaments of the year.

It’s Djokovic’s third win at a major this year and the 24th in his career. This ties him with Margaret Court for most majors won (men or women), and moves him two ahead of his rival Rafael Nadal (22 majors) and four ahead of former rival Roger Federer (20 majors).

I didn’t watch Djokovic win last night. But I read a New York Times article about it this morning. The article said this:

“The nearly 24,000 spectators welcomed him with a massive roar, then showered him with the biggest one when Medvedev dumped a shot into the net to give Djokovic the title…”

That’s new. The last time I wrote about Djokovic was January 2022, when he was detained and then deported from Australia, among general controversy and much hate and contempt world-wide.

I had an entire email back then on why Djokovic was hated so much over the years. He was called a malingerer early in his career… a new-age kook in the mid 2010s… and a dangerous anti-vaxxer over the past few years.

And yet, like the New York Times says, now he’s loved. He’s routinely called a “mental giant” and “undisputed GOAT.”

But I come here not to praise Djoko, nor to bury him.

I simply thought the reaction of the US Open crowd was a great illustration of something interesting that I read in a 100-year old book last night, about the psychology of masses, as opposed to the psychology of individuals:

===

The group mind does not think in the strict sense of the word. In place of thoughts it has impulses, habits, and emotions. [When the group mind does have to think for itself,] it does so by means of cliches, pat words or images, which stand for a whole group of ideas or experiences.

===

That 100-year-old book is Propaganda, by Edward Bernays.

You might have heard of Bernays as the father of public relations.

The entire point of his book, as far as I can see, is that PR is important… that you can’t leave it to chance… and that there are strategies and tactics that allow you to take PR (or propaganda, if you choose) into your own hands.

One such tactic is tacking on a cliche, a simplified and simplistic tag, onto yourself, or even better, onto the alternatives your audience might have to you.

But on to business.

If you haven’t yet checked out my Copy Riddles course, consider doing so.

Copy Riddles is nothing like the many “water off a duck’s back” copywriting courses out there, which tell you stuff that goes in one ear and out the other.

Instead, Copy Riddles gets you writing actual copy, practicing, getting feedback, getting better, day after day, through a gamified process that’s actually fun and enjoyable.

For more info on how this process works:

https://bejakovic.com/cr/

The real Djokovic problem

by

If you’re a tennis fan or an Australian or a non-Australian, you’ve undoubtedly heard the smouldering news:

World tennis #1 Novak Djokovic is being deported from the Land Down Under.

Djokovic arrived yesterday to play in the Australian Open, which he has won 9 times already. But…

Djokovic is not vaccinated against corona and was not willing to get vaccinated to participate at the Australian Open.

So the organizers had to finagle (“rigorous review process”) a special medical exemption for Djokovic to be allowed into the country, which has strict vaccine mandates.

And then the folks at the Australian Open had themselves a “good news, bad news” situation:

“Good news! We have the world no. 1 coming to play at the tournament!”

“Bad news! The people of Australia seem genuinely pissed about the medical exemption… since they’ve been forced to live under lockdown for the better part of two years!”

And so, while Djokovic’s plane was in the air, and the smoke from the wildfire on the ground was rising thick and heavy, the Australian PM went on TV to take a tough stand. On arrival, Djokovic would have to prove his medical exemption is legit — or “be on the next plane home.”

The tension was immense. But thankfully, it seems to be getting solved in a nice and clean way.

It turned out somebody on Djokovic’s staff had fumbled the visa application, and had ticked the wrong box somewhere. So Djokovic’s visa is invalid. The Australian government refused to make an exception — “rules are rules” — and so here we are.

At this point, I could switch and talk about direct marketing, and the kinds of prospects you want to sell to, and more importantly, the ones you want to avoid.

But instead, I’d rather talk tennis. All right, not really tennis tennis, but what this Djokovic situation can teach us about personal branding, in tennis and more broadly.

Because I feel this entire situation could not have happened — not with this level of scrutiny, outrage, and interest — without the animosity that has built up against Djokovic over the years.

Let me make it clear:

I personally like the guy. I’ve been a tennis fan for a long time, and I root for Djokovic whenever I see him play. Plus, I find his public appearances charming and funny.

But the tennis media will tell you the world hates the man. His corona stance is just the latest reason why. Before that, it was that he is a cult-minded kook… before that, that he is arrogant… and before that, that he is a whiner and malingerer who takes medical time-outs as a game strategy.

To me, all these seem like surface justifications for something deeper. So I kept asking myself, why do many tennis fans hate Djokovic, and why does the media keep making him into a villain?

I’ve had my own theory about this for a long time. And today, I read a very interesting article, which put my theory into a bigger context. The gist of it is this:

There is a difference between having an enemy and a nemesis.

An enemy is just somebody in your way to getting what you want.

But a nemesis is much like the “Shadow Man” in the Prince of Persia video game — an eerie, bizarro version of yourself, who can match all your skills, who keeps foiling you at key moments, and who ultimately forces you to learn, develop, and grow in order to win.

A true nemesis makes for peak levels of drama, a story we instinctively respond and cling to.

And that’s what made Djokovic so offensive.

My theory for all the Djokovic hate is that he ruined the greatest rivalry tennis has ever known, the one between Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.

Federer and Nadal had a true nemesis storyline, which fans and media loved.

Djokovic ended that. And in his dominance over the past 10+ years, he has had no true nemesis of his own. People never forgave him for what he took away and failed to replace.

That’s been at the core of why he’s been made into a villain. And now it’s coming back to bite him, at the tournament which was his best chance to break the biggest record in tennis — the number of Grand Slam titles — for which he is currently tied with Federer and Nadal.

So here’s my takeaway for you:

If you want a personal storyline that people eat up, get emotionally involved with, and fight to defend, then find yourself a worthy nemesis. Somebody who matches your skills and who can genuinely defeat you.

Because if you don’t, the consequences are clear. Over time, you’ll face growing resentment at your success… hostility at your attempts to be friendly and open… and eventually, a long and lonely flight, “on the next plane home.”

By the way:

The article on the nemesis I mentioned above, by a guy named Ted Gioia, was both interesting and well-written. So in case you’re curious about nemesizing your life or your business, here’s where you can read more:

https://tedgioia.substack.com/p/you-dont-need-a-mentorfind-a-nemesis

Entrepreneurship: A loser’s game

by

A couple nights ago, I stayed up two hours past my bedtime to watch TV and witness a miracle.

Well, a sports miracle:

Novak Djokovic beating Rafael Nadal at the French Open.

In case those names mean nothing to you, I’m talking tennis. And what Djokovic did is the hardest thing in that sport.

After all, Rafael Nadal has won the French Open 13 out of the past 15 years.

The only times he lost, it was in the early rounds, because he was crippled, hobbled, or hamstrung. Whenever he made it to the end stages, like this year, he was unbeatable. Until this past Friday.

It took an incredible effort. In fact, both Djokovic and Nadal played at the highest levels.

They made tennis look like ping pong, because of how they moved each other around, with crazy angled shots, delivered from far off the court and from seemingly impossible positions.

Other pros and commentators gushed afterwards that it was one of the greatest matches in history, and probably the greatest clay court match ever. Nadal and Djokovic are from another world, they said.

Well. Contrast that to my real-life experiences with tennis.

I started playing when I was a kid. If you saw me play, you might think I have skills. But I don’t.

In fact, I have such an extreme lack of skills that two years ago I vowed never to play again. It was just too painful.

I’d play a match against somebody who I should be able to easily beat. And I’d still end up losing.

Double faults… routine balls dumped into the net… attempts at winners that sailed a foot wide.
​
Each mistake-filled loss would set off a binge of self-hate that lasted for days, until it was time to play (and usually lose) the next match. So I decided to give it up.

And that’s my point for you for today.

It turns out that the sport played on tennis courts is actually two entirely different games.

That’s according to a Dr. Simon Ramo, who analyzed the data. Ramo’s research can be summed up simply:

Professional tennis players win points. The rest of us lose points.

In the pro game, outcomes are determined by the actions of the winner, like in the Djokovic-Nadal match.

In the non-pro game, the amateur rarely beats his opponent. But he beats himself all the time.

It’s two opposite games. And Ramo’s data bear it out. Pros win 80% of points. Amateurs lose 80% of points.

Of course, tennis is not the only loser’s game.

So is campaigning for political office… warfare… and modern dating.

In all these fields, outcomes are determined more by our own mistakes and self-sabotage, rather than anything the other side did.

And from what I’ve seen, entrepreneurship fits into this mold too.

We look to the highest performers, like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk. We see how they run laps around the competition and create daring offers that wow customers.

But that’s not the game the rest of us play.

For the rest of us, competition is largely irrelevant and potential customers usually never even see our offers.

Instead, the outcomes we get (typically not good) are really the result of our own mistakes and self-sabotage.

If that’s the case, then what’s the fix?

I don’t have a good answer for you. But I can leave you with the advice that Simon Ramo gave to tennis players:

Lose less. Avoid trying too hard. And keep the ball in play.

But let me take my own advice:

I have an email newsletter. I write an email about persuasion, marketing, copywriting, and occasionally business, every day. Keep the ball in play. In case you want to sign up, click here and fill out the form.