Leave Tiger Woods Alone
Dec 2nd, 2009 | 11 responses
I have refrained from writing about Tiger Woods, his accident and his rumored extra-marital exploits because it triggered painful memories of why I got out of the newspaper business. In short, I believed the media was stepping out of bounds by invading people’s privacy.
This is one of the most fundamental challenges facing publishers, editors and reporters. At what point does one cross the line and let the facts either be damned in search of a good story or fall wherever they land?
A reluctant Woods finally succumbed to the pressures and issued a guarded statement today. (See Joe Windish’s post on themoderatevoice.com). Naturally, his statement only begged for further questions. Such as what were his “transgressions?”
Woods is a private person living in the public arena because he is arguably the best golfer the world has ever witnessed. Consequently, there is a natural thirst for every move he makes in or out of golfdom.
His greatness in his profession is transferred to him as a person and that is a colossal mistake. Shame on the public for thinking that way. Off the fairways, he is not a god, but, in his words, an imperfect person.
What other than evil thoughts do we have speculating that he abused his wife by lusting after other women? Give the guy a mulligan and leave it at that, I say.
Probably more than any other star athlete, Woods is protective of his image culled over the years on the golf courses and crafted in TV ads. He is a brand name. As with many celebrities, he lives in his own bubble reinforced by underlings who tell him only what they think he wants to hear. The world is his oyster and when he starts believing that, trouble follows.
In this auto-accident-fire-plug-tree mishap, Woods made an unfortunate decision by going into hiding six days before fessing up. It accomplished the fanning of gossip which could have been snuffed last Friday.
Yes, there are unanswered questions. What was he doing at 2:30 a.m. driving barefoot out of his driveway? Why did his wife break the rear window of their SUV when he apparently was trapped in the front driver’s seat? Why was he laying in front of the vehicle when police arrived?
By the way, his wife swings a mighty club. Have you ever tried to break a car windshield with a golf iron? It’s not a slam dunk.
I think a good PR man could have earned his money by getting Woods to at least address these questions early on. After that, the public be damned.
The strange thing is that Woods gave hints of his imperfect condition on the golf course. You need not be a lip reader when he curses after a bad swing or even bouncing his club into the gallery. But what he does behind closed doors is his business.
I started having doubts about the public’s right to know years ago. As a police reporter, I interviewed the father of a child killed during a gang-related driveby shooting. The day after the story appeared in the paper, the father was shot for speaking out.
So often, these right-to-know stories lead to unintended consequences. Ruining people’s lives by dwelling into the dark abyss rarely accomplishes anything. In other words, put yourself in the position of the guy you are about to trash. Guilt by innuendo in this case is worse than the crime itself.
Tiger Woods deserves more respect for what he has done professionally than what we can only imagine he has done in private.
The cartoon by Nate Beeler, The Washington Examiner, is copyrighted and licensed to appear on TMV. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited. All rights reserved.
11 Responses to “Leave Tiger Woods Alone”
Like Mel Brooks said in “The History of the World”, “It's good to be king.” This folks IS the life of the super rich. CEOs, moviestars, and world class athletes. Society has endowed them with gifts that would turn the head of all but the most pious. Power currupts. Folks always talk in articles like the one I just read about the supposed bad boy as if with their meager earnings and ounce of influence they are unlike the person in their cross hairs. The very fact that you condescend morally is an indication that you too would succumb to temptations and commit similar “trangressions” as well. If you call for a “mulligan” write the article consistent with that tone. Don't sneaking words like abusing his wife with lust or whatever. You do not know what goes on in the Woods home. It well maybe that the abuse was on Friday and maybe before then from the other source. I once heard Geraldo Rivera candidly admit that because he had means he felt he could do anything with anyone at anytime. His rational was that the rules did not apply to him. Because he had so much money, divorce was not as fearful a constraint on his behavior. He could “afford” to literally pay for his mistakes. Again I say, It's good to be the king. Funny thing is in America kings aren't born. WE MAKE THEM THAT WAY by our choices everyday.
Jerry, I could not agree with you more. I'm so glad you wrote this.
I am uncertain of my feelings about this, but I'll put them out there. I don't think it's right to talk about exposing something you heard as a journalist particularly if the journalist knows it could lead to a life threatening situation. Tiger's being exposed for not being the milk toast image created by his handlers and from which he garners millions of dollars in contracts may be life threatening, wallet threatening, shaming, but not quite on a par with the latter situation. And is it just ruthlessness or profit motive that would lead a journo to expose another. If we say no to sports heros, what about politicians? People in high places? I wonder to what degree the journos decision is affected by how much he likes the person he is exposing.
Also how would we know we were being sold a bill of goods by believing the public relations campaigns unless they were exposed from time to time?
I'm curious too, since we all have private lives, who gets exposed and who doesn't? My guess would be that would be based on degree– how much the outward created myth is at serious odds with the real person. I think A-view touches on that– how much arrogance does it take for you to think you are beyond the rules? That your wealth and influence can fix anything?
“I think a good PR man could have earned his money by getting Woods to at least address these questions early on.”
But he didn't. And he's a celebrity, which, like it or not, applies in all possible ways celebrity can.
As with most people, I'm not part of the celebrity-obscessed minority that is (once again) the incorrect stereotype carelessly or defensively(?) used. Most of us don't care about his personal life, unless it is in the news, anyway (which isn't our fault, but his). What so many of us noticed in passing (so again, don't bother with incorrect stereotyping) and could not fail to observe was not his “transgressions” (about which we still don't know many details, nor have we ever cared), but the cover-up. He looks worse now.
As a golfer (hacker?) I shouldn't be allowed a comment… BUT I think Jerry's hit one 300 yards and it's landed in the middle of the fairway. Good shot and thanks for the post.
like SteveK said
thanks Jer, I love your reflections esp with comments on what passes as modern weird form of personalized jingoism
dr.e
I may be disagreeing with the majority here, but I honestly think that Tiger sacrifices his right to privacy by virtue of his mega-celebrity. I get that he makes his living off his squeaky clean image, and I still respect Tiger the golfer for possessing more patience and skill than just about anyone on the planet.
But his own actions and corresponding desire to hush the matter up have created this mess. Journalists are not paid to whitewash a story– but to get at the truth. We now know at least that he's cheated on his wife with several women, and that in all probability he was leaving to escape a domestic dispute. By doing so he put his own image (not to mention his marriage) in jeopardy.
In all honesty, I don't care about the behavior– I just can't stand the pretension, and the feeling of entitlement that seems to go with celebrity status. Is anyone even shocked anymore at the weekly revelations that some politician or celebrity is cheating on his wife? Let him be judged like the rest of us.
Not a big golf fan so I've never given much thought to Tiger or his life. Really don't care personally. I also think that even sports figures deserve a private life. That being said since Tiger makes so much more of his money in endorsements and being a spokesperson that his plea for privacy leaves me unconcerned. The funny thing is those I've heard support Tigers pleas seem to lean to his supporters who just don't want to have to think about it. My feelings, who cares, and stop your damn whining
Reporting a story about a famous person is ok, and driving barefoot at 2:30 in the morning into a fire hydrant and a tree probably qualifies. It's the ensuing 24/7 obsessive speculation and tabloid dirt digging that puts me off. I still don't give a rip who the father of Anna Nicole's baby is or who Tiger has slept with. And, it really starts to move over the top when previously unpublished bikini photo shoots of Elin start popping up all over the media…she's not the one who “transgressed”. How does sexing up this now mother of two add to the story?
“I just can't stand the pretension, and the feeling of entitlement that seems to go with celebrity status”
Celebrity works in all ways. And the cover-up of what he did made it worse (and was the real news).
As for the defenses of Woods that are not merited, celebrity fans aren't called “fanatics” for nothing.
DLS-
The cover-up is not the issue for me– he was trying to protect the privacy of his family, and he DID take responsibility for his mistakes. The problem is that celebrities, politicians and athletes are portrayed one way media— due to a paid publicist's image, yet live a totally different way in real life, where they often feel that they are entitled to cheat with multiple partners by virtue of their status.
We worship at the altar of celebrity, never realizing that we are revering a false idol, yet claim to be so shocked when the celeb turns out to be even less moral than the average person.