Is being ‘human’ a good enough excuse?
Golf’s greatest star rams his car into a fire hydrant, is “freed” by his club-wielding wife, declines to talk to the cops and, to a backdrop of rumors about an affair, declares, “I’m human. I’m not perfect.”
Wow, Tiger! You’re human? We did not know this.
And is it really worth paying a high-priced publicist to come up with the same tired, pat phrase employed by every celebrity caught with his pants–or pantyhose–down? We heard it from David Letterman, and from enough politicians to fill an alien spacecraft.
But what exactly does this evasive mea culpa mean? We’re all human. (Well, maybe not Dick Cheney.) We’re all imperfect. (That goes quadruple for Cheney.) But does the mere fact of being human mean we should be excused from moral lapses and misconduct? Does being human mean, when questions arise, the world should turn away?
Because that of course is Part Two: I am human. I need time with my family. Please give me privacy.
Maybe too much privacy is what led to the problem in the first place. Probably, there were some enablers afoot. And now, like the disgraced pol at the center of the CBS series, “The Good Wife,” Woods may feel the need to hire a “reputation manager.”
That’s a publicist on steroids.
You can argue, of course, that Tiger Woods did not ask to be a role model. But I doubt the companies paying him millions to endorse their products would agree. And if I were Woods, I’d spend a chunk of those earnings to find a publicist–or “reputation manager”–who can come up with a more original way out of this mess.
How about honesty? It worked for Letterman (if not his wife).
..
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
If PR people came up with this strategy, Woods is certainly not getting his money’s worth. This silence sounds more like the work of lawyers, who tend to care less about a client’s reputation than his freedom. One does not see in the facts as we know them where Woods would be guilty of criminal activity. The real possibility is that the person being protected is Mrs. Woods.
If he keeps postponing press conferences and canceling public appearances — where we could acually see his face — this also raises suspicions about what condition he is in right now physically, and why.
The whole thing, in its secrecy and stonewalling, is weird and bizarre. I wonder what his late father, Earl, who was ex-military and a huge influence on Tiger, would have to say about it all.
I doubt he was going to out buy a quart of milk at 2:20 a.m. at top speed.
I would agree that the way Mr. Woods is handling the whole affair is mystifying but it may well be a very ugly situation where there is just not a lot of room for finesse. The greatest poker player in the world can only play a pair of deuces so many ways, and rarely are those plays pretty.
Having said that, I don’t think Mr. Woods “owes” anyone (other than the police) any explanation of whatever it is that happened outside his house. He is not an elected official or anyone responsible for any public trust. No one seems to have been hurt outside of Mr. Woods himself. He is just a guy plays a game really well and makes lots of money doing it.
I believe that Mr. Woods’ predicament is that over last twenty years or so he (and his father) have played a very dangerous PR game. “Not only do I play golf really well, I am an interesting person off of the links as well. Have a look at my life and you can buy something from the gift shop on your way out”. It is the equivalent of inviting the general public to tour your living room. It is of course a very lucrative PR game, I do not doubt that Mr. Woods would have earned significantly less money had he taken to opposite approach of keeping the general public off of his lawn. He could have said “What I do on the links is in the public domain but my personal life is off limits”.
The problem with the high risk / high yield PR game is that after letting the public into his living room when it was convenient (and profitable), when things get ugly, getting the public out of your living room when it is inconvenient can be difficult.
Mr. Woods only needs to offer an explanation to the general public if he wants to continue to profit from them sharing his personal life.
Darn, I put the wrong name! Sorry Susan!!!