The whole exit interview apparent controversy doesn't even show up on my radar. I've been a huge hockey fan for over two decades and I didn't even remember they were a thing.
To me, hockey players (especially stars) are already so available to the public for the great majority of the year that something like this is far less about fans and mostly comes down to media/reporters. Maybe this is old fashioned, but I don't think the media has any kind of right to access a player. I also don't think it speaks better of a player for them to be more open with the media. I just...don't care, and it's honestly a little creepy to me that some people do.
I really wonder what he could have said that would have made anybody feel differently from how they already do. As far as I'm concerned, good on Tarasenko for deciding when he does and doesn't want to give interviews. We've even seen this plenty from him before when he didn't feel comfortable with his English. I think the situation he's in with having just lost a heartbreaking series, being a brand new (rather young) father, and being the focal point of criticism that should be aimed a lot more elsewhere, are easily just as good of a reason to avoid an interview. Call me a bleeding heart, but I respect someone for taking care of their own needs.
From Ben Frederickson's garbage article:
See, he even goes out of his way to defend that his criticism of Tarasenko is just ol' Mr. Reporter lookin' out for the faaaaaans. If you respect your audience, you'll let them make that judgment for themselves rather than going the extra step and framing how specifically they should believe this snub is about them.
The reality is that the media didn't even need to mention the fact that Tarasenko declined to comment. But because they didn't get the soundbite they wanted, they had to make a story out of something that isn't a story.