Tiger Woods played by the rules in apologising,that is. He cut straight to the point,I am deeply sorry for my irresponsible and selfish behaviour, followed by a swift What I did is not acceptable and I am the only person to blame and then the path to rehabilitation: Its hard to admit that I need help,but I do.
His apology was as control freakish as his personal life has been. A handful of carefully selected friends,colleagues and endorsers watched the fallen hero deliver what farcically resembled a State of the Union address. A no question policy operated,but then again,what really remained to be asked? How many women were there? We already know. Why was his wife absent? Tiger already answered that. The one question that actually remains a mystery is whether Tiger Woods is indeed sorry.
a public issue.
Celebrities are seen as role models as examples of those who struggle with identity,with sexuality and the like and also integrated into the political sphere by politicians and their agencies. Thus the boundaries between news and entertainment between the performer and his or her role in public debate are blurred. The performer or the athlete can no longer be disengaged from public issues.
Simply look at the prominence of celebrity diplomacy. Celebrities use their power and status to bring about political change. Bono and Bob Geldof are classic examples just look at their role in Red and Band Aid campaigns to see how much public support they garner. Recently the Haiti earthquake saw singer Wyclef Jean and Angelina Jolie mobilise public support and awareness. In fact,Tiger himself is politically involved through his foundation.
So naturally,the reaction to his apology has been mixed. Can a public figure so prominent in our lives be so close and yet so distant? Also,why did he mention the G-word (golf) only twice? I do plan to return to golf one day,I just dont know when that day will be. I dont rule out that it will be this year. Here lies the catch: Tiger Woods needs golf,but golf needs Tiger more. Since the unravelling of his secret life,Tigers endorsements have taken a major blow. It is these endorsements the multinational corporations that used to back Tiger that are the lifeline of the PGA. Its the giant management consultant firms like Accenture (which has now dropped Tiger),investment corporations and the like that sponsor the tournaments.
Before Tiger the game belonged to the rich mans world. Tiger changed that and,without him,the sport is likely to suffer.
What now? As he said himself,I convinced myself that normal rules didnt apply. I thought I could get away with whatever I wanted to. I felt that I had worked hard my entire life and deserved to enjoy all the temptations around me. I felt I was entitled… I was wrong. I was foolish.
Now one wonders why this uncharacteristic public display? Who was Tiger apologising to? The honest answer may well lie in the thousands of us who buy into the squeaky clean Tiger Woods image. Take a walk around New Yorks Time Square and youll see a boyish Tiger promoting the luxury TagHeuer watches; or a drive in a London cab where the bold catch-phrase Go on,be a Tiger was promoted by Accenture,or walk into Nike in India where his range is stacked right on top. Tiger Woods did not become one of the wealthiest athletes in the world by being the best at his game he got there by selling his image,allowing himself to become a product. A global name one that he wants us to like.
The big takeaway from this entire sorry saga has been that
the wall of no-questions has been penetrated. Has there been
another athlete in memory that has been subjected to such scrutiny? Does this mean that athletes too will now be subject to the intense media gaze and accountability that politicians normally deal with?
alia.allana@expressindia.com
