The Seattle Kraken are facing criticism after an unusual post-game media setup in which only a team employee was allowed to ask questions, effectively shutting out independent reporters.
Following Seattle’s 5–3 loss to the Colorado Avalanche on December 16, Kraken head coach Lane Lambert appeared for his post-game availability — but the only person permitted to ask questions was Bob Condor, editor-in-chief of the Kraken’s official website. The entire session lasted roughly one minute, prompting immediate backlash online and within the hockey media community.
According to the Kraken, Condor was relaying questions submitted in advance by other reporters. However, critics argued that filtering questions through a team employee undermined transparency and accountability. “This was a mistake,” the Kraken’s communications staff later acknowledged in a statement to Sound of Hockey. “This won’t happen again. It wasn’t because we didn’t want to give others a chance to ask questions.”
The explanation did little to quiet criticism, particularly given the timing. Seattle had lost nine of its previous ten games, and many observers felt the move was designed to shield Lambert during a difficult stretch.
Awful Announcing described the situation bluntly, noting that the setup was “a terrible look” and one that raised obvious concerns about media independence and league norms. The Kraken later reached out directly to reporters to apologize and clarify the decision. Still, the incident has sparked a broader discussion about team-controlled media access and where the NHL should draw the line between organizational messaging and open press availability. As one outlet put it, the Kraken’s attempt to quiet the room only ensured the story would travel far beyond it.
What made the situation resonate beyond a single awkward media moment was the timing. When teams start filtering questions instead of answering them directly, it inevitably raises eyebrows. Media access rarely tightens when things are going well, and the optics here suggested an organization more focused on managing their futility than addressing the team’s performance. When the answers are routed through the team’s own microphone, it’s hard not to wonder whether the real issue wasn’t the questions — but the endless losing that prompted them.
