A friend asked in her blog if the media interest in Infidelities was justified. I had a comment to make on her blog. Go check her blog out. She is an insightful writer and the blog is very good.
Below is what I wrote as a comment on her blog.
.....................................................................................
I do not see why the media should NOT write stories about Tiger Woods and his shenanigans. Tiger Woods sells and how! As bad boy and good (endorsements). He is a whole economy by himself. PGA will suffer, golf and all its support industries will suffer, why even shaving cream companies will suffer millions and billions if the Tiger Woods brand is devalued by his actions.
As such his story is deserving of media coverage and as the ultimate consumers we have the right to be both amused and entertained by stories of his peccadilios; just as much as we have the right to be informed of how the devaluing of his brandname will affect our own purchasing power. Any phenonmenon that affects my saving/purchasing capabilities must be investigated, giggled at, raged at or ultimately shelved for future reconsideration.
In the US context, it follows that the brandname devaluing of politicians or other powerful people who behave badly, will affect my life in many ways.
Indian or European sexual mores or definition of badboy behavior and brand devaluing is different. The corruptability of the press and also the profitability of the press in other countries is also a factor in what stories are newsworthy in economic terms. I am not going to compare what is acceptable and where. It is apples or oranges to guavas.
Money decides everything ultimately in any country, in any era, even how many beds a man or woman can warm.
Money also decides if it is acceptable for the aggrieved spouse to rage at the unfaithful one, golf club in hand or to accept the "transgression" in sati savitri fashion.
Ultimately money defines a culture and its mores.
Men and women have behaved badly everywhere, and in every era. Today, it affects me monetarily. Damn right, I am interested in the gory details.
In Twos
12 hours ago
6 comments:
:) ...You always have another angle to a multi-angled story :)
for me I am feeling sorry for the guy , it must be humilating to be called as an "under-performer in bed "..
Kiran, you are right, and I think that why just for the sake of the brand aspect, I think there is no use pretending that people are not interested.The media would not write about it otherwise and it is human nature to be interested, not just in famous people, but also our neighbor! This ofcourse does not mean that we twist or malign anyone, but it is human to be at least a little interested in these things. I think the only people who wouldn't care less about Tiger Woods personal lives are those who don't know who he is.
Brand knows only one thing " Numbers", and tiger woods , stand out in that.
When it cms to devaluation of brand " Tiger". I think brand "Tiger" completely associates with its possitioning , in Tiger's case its his prowess, be it in the course or in bed.
He rocks in both ;)
reading you after a long time...
guess you are right in your comment... but then people should have some privacy also
People read about Tiger's affairs for the same reason they read about his golf prowess. These are things we wish we could do but cannot.
On a sidenote, his taste in women is distinctly Clintonesque... I wish someone would analyze *that*.
I would tend to disagree with your point here. Tiger's endorsements stemmed out of him being a good golfer and nothing more. If companies like Accenture decided to put an "above all follies" spin to it, it was their marketing decision and they should've factored in the risks.
His infidelity though, was never an aspect for which he reached our TV sets and magazine back-covers. And while the media is free to report such infidelities, the importance accorded to him and showing him in an inhuman light was IMO going a bit too far.
I also don't buy the comparison between the need to report Tiger's shenanigans and those of public figures like Clinton, or closer home in recent times, ND Tiwari. While Tiger is just a sportsperson, the others held constitutional positions, and hence, were far more accountable to the general public, especially in their official office/residence.
Post a Comment