It’s difficult - like you said, consideration of the mental health of players should be of paramount importance, and some journalists are better than others in this regard. At the same time, Naomi’s stance feels a little less in service to the good of the sport, and more symptomatic of some personal struggles (which I hope she overcomes soon).
The sport thrives on getting to know the players, whether they’re going through good or bad times, and media duties are a big part of that. And yeah, the way Osaka worded a few things like you quoted doesn’t sit that well. An interview question as innocuous as “So, do you think you’ve got what it takes to win tomorrow?” could technically be an invocation of doubt for someone in a mentally fragile state, but I can’t help but feel it’s part-and-parcel of professional sport and it’s very out-of-touch to think you can remove yourself from it. Indeed, the journalists themselves may feel like the question’s a softball which allows the player to deliver a message, whether that’s to show confidence, provide an interesting perspective, etc. (that’s one of the things Swaitek mentioned in response to all this)
I like Osaka, and she’s obviously been emboldened by the other times she’s successfully driven some agendas to the forefront of the tennis/sporting conversation - so she should be, because it’s been considered, brave and thoughtful. Not so much this time, unfortunately, for my money.