Communicator - The Online Destination for Electronic Journalists


Chairman's Blog: A Memo to Tiger Woods
Print Story

Nov 30 2009

By Stacey Woelfel, RTDNA Chairman

To: Tiger Woods, Professional Golf Superstar
From: The Media, Professional Golf Superstar Makers

Mr. Woods:

It has come to our attention that it is your desire to keep the details surrounding your recent car accident to yourself.  You have issued a statement on your web site saying, “This is a private matter and I want to keep it that way.”  That may be well and good for the other 300 million people in the country who are NOT Tiger Woods, but this approach—both the written web statement and the request for privacy—just won’t do.  You are who you are thanks as much to media interest as to your own golf ability, and we, the media, won’t settle for this approach you’re taking.

Let’s start with the notion that anything that occurs outside (and many of the things that occur inside) your home can be private.   Mr. Woods, this is just not the case.  You have chosen to live your life publicly by cultivating your superstar sports status.  Had you chosen a private life without the attention on your golf—not to mention the multimillion-dollar endorsement deals—that would be different.

There are talented people everywhere who do not use those talents to make money on the public stage.  They have private lives and no one cares when they crash their cars into trees without hurting anyone else.  You, Mr. Woods, are in a different situation.  What you consider your “private” life is part of the package that is Tiger Woods, Inc.  It deserves attention every bit as much as your work on the links.  And if America is going to consider you a role model and leader among young men, then it deserves to know as much as possible about the person who has allowed himself to be put into the position that you are in now.

Now let’s turn to the idea of releasing a written statement through your web site.  Come on, Mr. Woods.  Had you taken such a timid approach on the golf course in your years of play you would have never won a tournament.  In fact, some of our ilk would call it cowardly.  Quietly releasing a few paragraphs online does a disservice to your fans and to your reputation. 
Our professional advice is to step forward and tell the story of what happened last week.  Sure, there are probably some details you’d like to keep to yourself.  But a general outline of the events of that early morning, followed by a chance for reporters to ask questions, would go a long way toward clearing away a growing gray cloud on your reputation.  People, you see, take a written statement as a sheet of paper behind which you are hiding.  Trust us, we know.  We’ve seen this many times before. 

You see, we’ll keep working on this story whether you want it to be private or not.  Truth be told, some of us will report rumors or speculation without any evidence that it’s true. Others will report more correctly, doing our homework to find out what we can before we air it.  But we will find out.  And the longer the facts are hidden behind a false assumption of privacy, the longer and harder we’ll work to pull back that veil and show what it is you appear to be hiding. 

So, Mr. Woods, here’s what we’re advising you to do.  First, do what you should have done in the first place and come out and talk to us.  Hold a news conference and give us at least an overview of what happened that night.  List the events leading up to your departure from the house.  What happened inside?  Why did you leave at that hour?  Regarding the accident and the moments following it, give us some details.  How did you come to hit the hydrant and the tree?  What is the extent of your injuries?  Why do they seem inconsistent with the damage to your car?  And what was your wife’s role at the scene of the accident?

None of these questions invade the amount of privacy a celebrity in your position can still hold as his own.

This advice is free—it’s not costing you a thing.  We cannot say the same about your actions so far.  The makers of the products you so readily endorse have much more invested in how this comes out than we reporters do.  They have been watching since the moment this story broke to see how you would handle things.  So far, despite some public statements of support, you can trust us when we tell you they are not pleased.  They see their chief pitchman hiding from the media and stonewalling the police and their investigation.  Are those the actions of a role model?  We suspect that most people would say “no.”

We’ll keep our memo brief and say that the next move is yours, Mr. Woods.  Take the discipline that has made you the legend you are on the fairways and put it to work on your image.  Follow the advice you’ve stood behind since your first endorsement deal and “Just Do It.”
 

Comments
Eye Of The Tiger

Tiger Woods is blinded by his own fame. He doesn't see the world the way a journalist does. Instead, he feels that he's a normal guy until it's time to sign his paycheck. So, please believe that he's enjoying this surge in popularity that he's having. I almost feel as if his publicist is suggesting that he stays elusive to heighten public interest in this story.

As a "civilian", I just want to move on, but as a journalist, I do want to know more. It is our job to be storytellers, so why not wait until the REAL STORY is told.

Great job!

By Zack Isaacs on Dec 01 2009
Public Service?

I always understood journalism to be a public service -- keeping the public informed so they can make the best decision on an issue they are voting on or something that will affect their lives or community. Exactly what service is being performed by demanding a full explanation from Tiger Woods about an incident that only affected him?

None.

It's spurious demands like this from 'journalists' looking only to satisfy their own curiosity brings the entire profession down.

By Danielle on Dec 01 2009
If I were Tiger ....

I'd respond by simply saying, "Fine, you don't like it, stop covering me and making me wealthy."

Truth is, Tiger gets rich off the media exposure, but media make a ton of money off Tiger too. He sells papers, gets ratings, draws advertisers, etc.

While I love a good holier-than-thou argument as much as the next guy, ignoring the fact that the media has a commercial interest in covering everything Tiger does (good or bad) makes this just a laughable smokescreen justification for covering this barely-a-story to death.

By Jeremy Littau on Dec 01 2009
Tiger Woods

On the wall in my family room I have posted the top 100,000 world issues in order of importance. Among the top 10 are Afghanistan, nukes in Iran, etc. I was going to post Tiger Woods. He would have been issue No. 100,001. Fortunately I ran out of wall space.

By Harry Kovsky on Dec 04 2009
RTDNA Chairman's Tiger attack

The Chairman of RTNDA is sounding like a Managing Editor of a tabloid... not a responsible journalist. The chair might want to revisit journalism's roots and the reasons why news is supposed to 'serve the public' true interests. You know... news that can actually help the public to live a better life for themselves and their families. Might the chair leave tabloid fodder for the checkout line at the supermarkets?

By Chip on Dec 04 2009
Tiger Woods

Memo to: Danielle, Jeremy, Harry and Chip:

I must say I am surprised at your apparent lack of understanding of the public interest element of this story. As journalists - which I'm assuming you are - I would expect you to have noted the extraordinary amount of global coverage this "fallen idol" story has generated.

The reasons the public needs to hear about Tiger's transgressions are many and varied. Some will see it as proof that even a sports super hero has the same human frailties as the rest of us; others will be seeking the truth about the man they trusted enough to purchase the products he endorsed.

Here in Victoria, Australia, our regional government paid Mr Woods three-million taxpayer dollars to come out and play golf. He didn't even have to win! Of course, win he did - and took home the $250,000 prize money in addition to the public donation.

That $3,000,000 could have been used to help fix our failing public hospitals, our dodgy transport system or provide shelter for our growing legion of homeless kids. Instead, we are hearing that it may have been used to fly out a mistress and put her up in a $35,000-a-night hotel room across the corridor from Mr Woods.

So you see Danielle, Jeremy, Harry and Chip, the public interest in this story is as real as it is justifiable. As journalists it is as much our job to understand the public interest as it is to uncover the truth.

By Rob McLennan on Dec 05 2009
in retrosepct

It is nearly thirty days since this missive was written. I have just read it. Since it was written, the greatest breach of homeland security has happened and Al Quaida nearly took out another plane. If you all in the media would look at issues like airline security, wall street corruption, instead of whom Tiger has been banging for how long, we would all be better off. I had to read the China Daily to learn China's stance toward revaluation of the yuan- we should have been reading that in all out local papers since china owns them now.

By Don From Galveston on Dec 29 2009


Is it OK for journalists to publicly share (on Facebook or Twitter, for example) their views on Obama's support for gay marriage?

  POST YOUR THOUGHTS
recent posts most viewed recent tags