Opinion I am my own PR
Tiger Woods public statement was well stage-managed but poorly staged. Woods mea culpa was plain bad television.
Tiger Woods public statement was well stage-managed but poorly staged. Woods mea culpa was plain bad television. There was a thick curtain hanging limply in the background as though weighed down by the burden of the golfers indiscretions; there was a select group of people seated in complete silence with the same expressionless features; there was the golfer,face puffy,saying what needed to be said (I am sorry!) but without any spontaneity (for being too well-rehearsed?). Half way through his monologue,the camera angle switched from a frontal view of his face to one behind his shoulders. Suddenly,we saw the back of him (literally) and it wasnt a sympathetic angle. It shut us out; he was no longer addressing us but his chosen audience. If the purpose of Tigers address was to win friends and influence people,he needed to look us in the eye while speaking. If the purpose was to hide his expressions,he might as well have been on radio.
The Tiger Woods Show has been criticised for being so freakishly controlled: it was scripted,was before a chosen few and no questions were entertained. Thats unfair: what could he have done? Spoken extempore,live on TV,and said something the tabloids would have headlined for another month? Fielded questions on his extra-marital affairs who,when,where,how,and how often? Yes,if he wanted to commit hara-kiri, there and then.
Shah Rukh Khan knows how to use television to his advantage. He invites the camera into his face,space and says,love me. Thus,even as Tiger was distancing himself from the media,SRK was being given the once over (Shah Rukh Khan Revealed,Discovery). A special one-hour programme interspersed the actors sound bytes with serious comments from professionals (Prasoon Joshi,Anupama Chopra),and academics (Shiv Visvanathan,M.K. Raghavendra). It was intelligent,not for what it said about the superstar (that has already been said) but for what it said about pop culture reflecting a country in transition: SRK epitomised foreign labels with Indian values; he represented the self pride of India,he was the metrosexual (soft,feminine),he made retro cool,he made crying manly… Above all,he understood the role mass media could play in celebrating his brand. As the man said,I am my own PR.
The show was a curtain raiser to Discoverys Living with a Superstar,beginning later this week. Frankly,weve been co-habiting with him for the last month (at least),ever since his IPL and Pakistani players remark created a Shiv Sainik furore in Mumbai,jeopardised the release of My Name Is Khan and saw him make more TV appearances than,perhaps,ever before on the news and entertainment shows. This Khan knows how to massage the media and spread his message. Tiger Woods could learn from him.
The tussle between Sony Max and TV news channels over coverage of IPL seems to be a lose-lose situation for both. Fact is,TV news virtually broadcasts entire matches and reruns footage all day unfair. But this can benefit the official broadcaster. If the news channels boycott the IPL,Max will not be able to exploit the event for all its worth. It will be out of the picture: For a game that is over almost before it warmed up,absence can spell disaster. The tournament will get less publicity and fewer viewers are likely to remember to switch to a particular match exactly what Sony Max does not want. There are 60 matches to be played over more than a month. Interest will wane unless it is artificially generated. Thats were TV news comes in.
Funnily enough,the winner might be the viewer who will not have to watch interminable replays of a six hit by a Yusuf Pathan,who will be able to choose whether to watch a match or not a luxury TV news does not allow. So maybe the impasse should remain?
shailaja.bajpai@expressindia.com
Share
