Err…Tiger, I Have A Question For You
February 22, 2010Tiger Woods held a press conference on Friday to apologise for his transgressions. I say a press conference, but there were only a handful of reporters present and no questions were allowed. Now I’d written about his affairs when it was hot news last year and now as then, I believe his wife and family are the only people to whom he should make the apology. I’m not a fan of Golf, I don’t like it, he hasn’t hurt me so it’s not for me to care. Still, let’s play fantasy journalist for a moment, “I have one question, sir: do you believe that taking 13 minutes and 58 seconds to say sorry indicates a need for time management?”
Pie and Biscuits 
Tiger… Who? Yeah Yeah I *do* know who he is but really I have no CLUE why this is such “big news” or why they thought it necessary to make “pre announcements” on major news senders all day that it was even going to take place. He has some serious stuff to work out with his family and for the rest gosh haven’t the media figured out that …. Yawn.. we might just not want to hear about him? He’s famous for playing Golf and being rich, So what? I’d rather be famous for doing something rather less self serving. Media hype, put him up and took him down. I wish they would report NEWS and not on these kinds of idiots. (Dreams are still free, aren’t they?)Sigh, rant over. I agree, 13 minutes and 58 seconds was 13 minutes and 58 seconds too long on the any News station as far as I am concerned.
I didn’t see the flagellation on TV and I only heard snippets of it on radio. I think that was more than adequate for my needs, of which there were none in this case.
Shush! Just ignore him. Maybe he’ll go away.
I think he’d like to go away, but the press and sponsors won’t let him.
I agree with both you and KiwiDutch. This apology should have been geared entirely towards his wife and children… In private. This is not the media’s or his fan’s business, he did nothing to them, he did this to his family. He is just a golf player, not a major public figure.
That’s right. It’s not like he’s the president, or the royal family. I remember one of your presidents in the not too distant past had the lions share of publicity for committing similar acts, though it was with only one person, as far as we could tell.
I didn’t realize he spoke that long. How many different languages did he translate I’m sorry into. He should have been able to get pretty far down the list…perhaps has far as Tagalog or Urdu, but probably not all the way to Yiddish.
Mmm. Having to translate ‘sorry’ for approximately 192 countries and territories takes time.
I, like you had issues with Tiger and his apology. If you’re so inclined, it’s posted here
http://shesboxingclever.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/roll-the-dice-spin-the-wheel/
I didn’t realize it was quite that long, but I did watch the whole thing….sort of like a road-side freak show, ya know? Couldn’t pull my eyes away.
My understanding from the reports I read was that it was around 14 minutes long. As I’ve said ad nauseam, it’s not for me to accept his apology. Leave it to the family. I’ll have a look at your take on it and get back to you. Thanks for the link.
Okay, if it’s nobody’s business, why are you all talking about it? 🙂
Well played, Gigi. Well done 😉
uh…was that sarcastic? (mine was)…meant well, though 🙂
Yeah, I knew it was. Actually, I thought it was a great comment. Sarcastic or not, it was a nice counterbalance and I responded in admiration.
I’m a student in PR and prior to that I have been studying in journalism.
As a blogger focusing on current news, I felt it was my duty to cover the news conference.
As a PR student, I added some suggestions made by professionals in our field in order for him to burnish his “brand” (yes he is a brand).
As a human, I find the whole story disguting; and I’m not talking about his private life (which I don’t care about). I am referring to all the people who keep insisting to get more juice when the family is already breaking down. Can we leave them live their lives and pretend that we do the same with ours?
Hi, Hibiscusjaune. Thanks for your comments. As long as there’s juice to be squeezed out of this story, as I’m sure you know in your capacity as a student in PR and Journalism, this will keep on running. I’ve read other bloggers views on this and I’d say that most of them feel that in relation to what’s happening in their own lives, they don’t really care and wonder why the general media insist on pushing this in their face. For the moment the ‘news’ will continue in this vein, but if the comments here are anything to go by, there may be a (very) small sign of change.
I was part of “the media” when I used to report the news and I can tell you in all honesty that “the media” never shoves the news down anybody’s throat. It may seem that way but only if you’re one of the readers or the viewers, and then you’d have to ask yourself why you aren’t reading/watching other forms of media, which have nothing to do with Tiger Woods. Supply equals demand. “The media” does nothing in a vacuum.
Thanks Gigi. You’ve given me a better appreciation of the media as someone who used to work in it. You’d forgive me for thinking this and other stories like it are shoved down my throat. Despite my not buying tabloid newspapers, gossip mags or cruising gossip sites, it was absolutely everywhere. We have two stories currently running here in the UK about footballers. The first one was caught cheating on his pop star wife who’s now left him. The second footballer had an affair with the ex girlfriend of another footballer who used to be his best friend, then tried to use his money and influence through the courts to gag the press. I’ve deliberately not written about either of them here (this description being the exception), but that doesn’t matter because the story continues to run and run. Today there’s a football match and these men play for opposing teams. You’d usually hear about the football, but do you know what they’re talking about? Whether the men involved will shake hands before the match starts because it’s the first time they’ve played on the same pitch since this story kicked off and bets have been taken on it, FFS. We really do get the media we deserve, don’t we?
I appreciate your response because you’re allowing for an honest debate. Most people get upset when you don’t agree with them. I like you, just for acting like a grown up. 🙂
I hear you but if you’re seeing those cheating football stories “everywhere,” then you’re looking in the same old places. There are other media outlets. The ones that sell that stuff know you have a love/hate relationship with it (they do, too). I promise you, there are other outlets -you just have to look.
In Tiger’s case, he held a press conference. How does anyone get a press conference? His publicist had to call the press. Or, the press may have contacted his publicist but the publicist is hired by Tiger.
The person responsible for his international apology? Tiger Woods.
The person responsible for bringing his apology into their home? Whoever turned on the TV.
The Nielson ratings show how many people turn on their TV sets at any given point in time. At that point, think of a large wave, building in an ocean. A large wave builds and then breaks at the shore. After it breaks, other waves, not quite as large but larger than normal, follow it and break at the shore. Then smaller and smaller ones build and break, until the sea reaches a calm. When does the story reach a calm? When people stop watching and reading. How does “the media” know they’ve stopped? When the advertisers are no longer able to spend dollars on those outlets and still return a profit.
We have a saying here (well we did when I was a young ‘un, but I hardly hear it now), today’s news is tomorrow’s chip paper. In the realm of advertising, I suppose you could say today’s cash cow is tomorrow’s hamburger.
Exactly. Except for with vegetarians (I’m one of them), we have to have a different analogy. Not sure what that would be, though. But you know, it’s sad for me because there is a lot of journalism that has nothing to do with this kind of thing and it gets overlooked.
I took my kitty to the vet yesterday -the most romantic kitty in the world, he is- and they told me he had to stay there overnight with an IV. I’m really scared and I’m hoping it’s nothing and I’m home, waiting for the vet to call so I can pick him up. Okay, I’ll shut up. I had to get that off my chest.
ps: I was in your city in 1985 and I saw Princess Diana, Prince Charles, and the queen. It was some sort of holiday in the summer and I have photographs of it. First, they were at a church, and on the next day or soon after, there was a parade and they were on horses/carriage.
I didn’t know you were a royal stalker 🙂
I’m sure your cat will be OK, though I can understand your fear, especially as he had to stay overnight.
Can I just say this has been a thoroughly enjoyable exchange, Gigi. Come back whenever you feel the urge and have another look.
That is a very nice debate here. I agree with you gigi, news organ are just trying to make money so they will only feed the public with what they seem to need. However, concerning the choice of media, let me tell you that I like to read my news on yahoo! and I was shocked when they wrote about his affairs and posted it in their “sports” section. Yahoo is not a tabloid as far as I’m concerned.
I like this exchange, too. 😉
I’m on my way out but I’ll post this first.
“I agree with you gigi, news organ are just trying to make money so they will only feed the public with what they seem to need.”
No, that’s not what I said. You have to take baby steps when you talk about stuff that’s complex. That’s like going from A to T. But I can understand why you would derive that and I’m sorry if I wasn’t more clear.
First, “news orgs” -you can’t lump them all in one sum. There are thousands of news organizations. There are nonprofit watchdog news organizations and all kinds of other news organizations (even the Bible can be considered a form of journalism).
Second, though it’s true they profit off advertising (newspapers don’t make their money off subscriptions and TV stations don’t make their money off TV’s), the people writing the news are journalists. Journalists are a dime a dozen. Unless you’re working in DC, you aren’t getting paid a lot and even those journalists don’t make six-digit figures. I can’t speak for broadcast journalism but print journalists (reporters, editors) -why are they in that field? Not to make money. They want to tell stories, they want the adrenaline, they want to make a difference, they want to expose the truth.
The people that own the companies might be in it for the money but in the end, the editors get to decide what goes on the A-1 page. They meet every day to discuss that. And they don’t sit in those meetings saying, “What do you think will sell?”
One of the best films that did justice to the journalism field was “All the President’s Men” with Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman. Journalists love that film because that newsroom was portrayed accurately. Watch it and watch how Jason Robards acts in that film as the editor. He’s got two writers on his staff uncovering a huge, really messy story with no one that wants to go on record, and he’s constantly screaming at them because he has to weigh out the ethics.
When Dustin Hoffman is up all night and makes that call to wake up a politician, he gets chewed out and then he talks to Jason Robards. Listen to the questions Jason Robards asks him. He wants to make sure he got the story straight. He has to make sure his reporters have triple-checked their stories. Watch all the tricks Woodward and Bernstein do JUST to get the truth. They weren’t in it for the money. Woodward was brand new. No one works that hard and sweats that hard for that kind of pay. They wanted to expose the truth. They played tricks to get the truth but they never hid the truth from their readers. The only thing they hid from their readers was the identity of Deep Throat.
“News” = anything that’s “new.”
In the US, journalism is at the very top of our constitution. The First Amendment:
“ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
You can say that advertising pays for salaries but you cannot say the news is there because of the advertising. Even with Tiger Woods.
WOW, that was a novel.