The (not so) secret lives of men
Posted by: Sam Borden - Posted in Misc on Nov 30, 2009 
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
By this point, I think we all know about what happened to Tiger Woods over the holiday. It’s been debated, discussed, rumored and dissected. Everyone has an opinion on what happened. Personally, I think it might have been something like this. Either way, that isn’t what I want to talk about.
What I want to talk about is this: Privacy.
Whenever an athlete is involved in a not-so-positive story that is initially murky and requires some reporting to be fully fleshed out, I get some (many?) emails from readers complaining about the nosy and intrusive media. It happened during the A-Rod divorce story and it even happened during the whole Carl Pavano-crashed-his-car-with-a-girl-in-it story.
Now, it’s Woods. Some people believe we should simply accept the accident for whatever Woods says it is – which, if we’re being honest, sure doesn’t make all that much sense – and move on. Not dig a little. Not make sure his fans around the world get the full story. That’s a perfectly valid opinion to have. I just don’t happen to agree with it.
I could write a very (very) long-winded explanation of why I think it’s OK to pursue stories like this one but the general essence of my reasoning is this: You don’t only get to be famous on the good days.
Athletes, particularly the biggest stars, are afforded many wonderful things because of their fame. The press they receive, and in turn, their popularity and notoriety, is what allows them to have the impact that they do on fans like you. They are, in so many ways, not like the average person and often that’s a positive thing: It gets them free stuff, lots of money and the devotion of many. If a friend of mine decides he wants to raise money to try and encourage kids to stay away from drugs and alcohol, he can have a fundraiser and work REALLY hard to get a few people there and raise a few thousand bucks. If Derek Jeter wants to do the same thing – which he does very, very well and is one of the reasons he won this award today – he can raise millions. That’s what fame can do. Without that fame – that attention – Jeter is just like my fundraising friend.
Thing is, nothing in life is perfect. And one of the imperfect parts of fame is that you can’t control what people want to pay attention to within your existence. If you’re on stage, the audience gets to see all of you – not only the good parts. The reality is that pro athletes like Woods (and A-Rod and Miguel Cabrera, for that matter) are on stage, for better and worse.
Privacy, of course, is a changing concept in the internet age and that’s a discussion for another day, but for now the question is this: Do athletes deserve the same privacy that “regular” people (hopefully) get?
I know this is an issue that has people on both sides and, as we wait for the Hot Stove to heat up a little, I thought it might be good to hone in on the debate. Feel free to drop me a line with your thoughts and/or post here in the comments.
The NY Post drops a big one on Tiger
http://www.newseum.org/media/d.....NY_NYP.jpg
Who do you think is better looking, Tiger’s wife or Tiger’s mistress?
I think the mistress is too skanky looking.
Every time something like this happens, it just makes you realize how much we can take Jeter for granted. Somehow he has never even come close to being involved in any off field drama, despite playing for the largest market sports team in the whole world.
Yeah, but Jeter is single.
More than half of ARod’s drama has centered around his philandering (Toronto weight-lifting stripper/Leaving his wife for Madonna, etc.).
Its nothing against you bdog375 but there are many, many athletes who never get caught up in this kind of off-field drama. And it does a disservice to athletes and fans who always complain about bad behaving athletes to only focus on the same couple of people as if no one else knows how to keep their noses clean.
As far as living a public life, people should remember there is a difference between wanting to know and having a right to know about celebrities’ personal business.
Excellent post Sam. Love the “fighting trees” explanation. lol
There is clearly more to this story than what is being said. I can understand Tiger wanting to keep it private but all of the speculation isn’t going to stop until a better explanation of what happened is forthcoming.
Tiger makes hundreds of millions of dollars in endorsement because corporations believe that being associated with his brand enhances the value of their own.
Part of Tiger’s image, fairly or unfairly, is based on a public perception of integrity. An incident like the one that transpired last week casts doubt on the veracity of that image, not because he has an obligation to reveal details about his private life, but because his story strains credulity and as a result, his brand could be damaged absent a more candid presentation of the facts.
I just don’t see where the line is drawn between gossip and newsworthy story.
Tiger didn’t do himself any favors by being closed off about what happened and why, which has lead to a feeding frenzy about this incident.
It really makes you wonder if we are better off knowing such intimate details about these stars or not though. Imagine how Babe Ruth or JFK would be treated in the press today as compared with during their eras.
Sadly many of the people who lived years ago are not safe with having their private lives torn and shredded either. (Look at the Thomas Jefferson stories of just a few years ago.)
More recently we have heard defense over Clinton’s excapades, where some only feel it was a private matter, others that it should have drummed him out of office.
Of course, the political figures that are in power can have those secrets held over them, so it can impact us more, but I tend to question what did Alex’s affairs, divorce and so on, have to do with his play on the field?
If affairs, accidents and so on do not impact their play, is it really news? I don’t think so. It is gossip.
Sam
I love ya, but I’m going to disagree here.
Whatever happened with Tiger and his wife (most of us married men probably can guess the general outline) has nothing to do with his ability to hit a golf ball.
Tiger is the best golfer ever, period. Guess what? He’d be the best golfer whether 1 billion people were watching him, or one.
He’s the best for himself (and maybe for the memory of his dad), not for us. We are just going along for the ride, watching him. I really think he could care less about the press coverage and the adulation.
Sounds selfish on his part? Tough. We should all consider ourselves lucky that we can be there during his run to see him. We deserve nothing more.
Some athletes are in it for the fame and fortune. As the press, you have as much power over them as you wish, and can snoop around and get the public as much of the story as you wish. These athletes are fair game.
The rare guys like Tiger? You’re just along for the ride, like the rest of us. Be lucky that you’re of a generation to see it.
I wish more of the truly rare and special talents understood this. Bobby Jones got it. I think ARod finally gets it.
I also wish that the media understood the difference.
I’d love to see some person of fame, whether in sports or the arts, fame hire investigators to poke around in the private lives of reporters and when they did up enough dirt (and, I’m sure there is plenty) and make every sordid detail public.
Of more baseball related importance :
* Dec. 1 — Last day for teams to offer salary arbitration
* Dec. 7-10 — Baseball winter meetings, Indianapolis
You know what GB7, people may not agree with Deadspin’s treatment of ESPN’s frat boy environment but I think it was great. They have been very much into the tabloid style of reporting in sports as anyone else.
Sometimes you are burned by the very fire you help create. Reporters are public figures too. And if Deadspin or anyone else wants to out their misdeeds its all fair since they do it to athletes.
And the whole “well, they are public figures and it goes with the territory, its just the way it is” is nothing more than justification for snooping into people’s lives.
“You don’t only get to be famous on the good days.”
Great way of putting it
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....?eref=sihp
Sportsman of the Year
PYF: Fair points. The one thing we disagree on though is that while Tiger might well be the best golfer in the world even if no one watched him, he wouldn’t realistically be the “best golfer in the world” because he wouldn’t be making any money at it. Part of his professional life (and professional success) is tied into being famous — without it, there are no endorsements and no money in PGA tournaments and no golf courses for him to build and get paid to put his name on. Fame is what gives him the opportunity to make a livelihood out of golf. So, my point is, fame is a two-way street. Most days it’s great – some days, like this one, it stinks.
GreenBeret: Nobody’s perfect. I’m certainly not and I’m sure that neither are you (or Tiger). This isn’t about judging someone or even “digging” up details. This is about whether famous people who benefit from constant attention and focus should be able to decide that they don’t want that attention and focus on days when it might not serve their best interest. If you think they should, that’s a totally reasonable opinion (and one that many people have). It’s just not one that I happen to have.
Sam, I absolutely appreciate the search for the truth. I agree with you that those who are in the public eye and receive tremendous benefit because of it have to reckon with the fact that they are in more of a fishbowl than the rest of us who are leading the more ordinary lives. On the other hand, I have to tell you that if the same thing happened to me, while the story wouldn’t receive the same degree of publicity, it certainly would receive the same amount of suspicion, and the believability of what happened would certainly be brought into question. Therefore, the people who know me would certainly be reading about what happened and any questions that followed. So my “readership” would be made aware of what happened – just on a much smaller scale. But it would affect my life in perhaps a larger way than it affects that of a celebrity, since they are given a much wider berth to act like fools and losers and be forgiven for it since they ARE celebrities – the old double standard in society. In my town, women who have babies out of wedlock are still considered to be a notch down on the decency wrung. In Hollywood they get their own reality shows and are thrown huge baby showers.
My only objection is when slimebags like Selena Roberts go delving into the lives of celebrities and try to dig up salacious material (and probably make up a lot of their material) not in an attempt to inform the public about any present and relevant truth but to make a quick buck. But to find out about some event that just happened and what really happened – absolutely. Again, if I crashed my car at 2:15 in the morning and had all of the attendant things that Woods did, it would make the local news and people at in the town and in my state would be talking about it and reporters delving a little deeper into exactly what happened. And it would lead to all kinds of speculation. If I’m fair game, so is Tiger Woods. No pity there.
An offshoot of all of that is that public figures (and that includes celebrities) have to prove an additional element if they sue for slander, and that is actual malice (aka a reckless disregard for the truth).
While none of us is perfect, my dad always counseled us that if you are living a clean life (his words) you have nothing to be worried about. I always thought that was pretty good advice. To this point, I have never made headlines in any negative sense – well maybe on lohud, but not in the projo!!!
“I’d love to see some person of fame, whether in sports or the arts, fame hire investigators to poke around in the private lives of reporters and when they did up enough dirt (and, I’m sure there is plenty) and make every sordid detail public”
Don’t think anyone would care. Probably countless episodes around the country this weekend that are similar to what Woods and his wife went though. Only one anyonw wants to hear about is Woods. Fame and fortune is the draw moreso than the incident itself.
Tala08
November 30th, 2009 at 9:28 am
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c…..?eref=sihp
Sportsman of the Year
*************************
Congrats to Jeter!!
Congrats to our Captain!!!!
Yay Jeter, what a year he has had
Pro athletes are subject to more public scrutiny, as are members of certain professions, such as teachers and police. I believe the public has a right to know the basic info, but not all the gory details. Everyone has a right to some privacy. That being said, Tiger would be better off providing more info to stop all the crazy rumors.
You don’t think that people around NY wouldn’t love to read about slugs like Lupica, Sherman, Raissman and that ilk getting caught with their pants down, being unkind to farm animals, getting caught DUI or strung out on crack and coke? Perhaps after that, they’d actually report on sports or news…if they could even get a job.
Now don’t go tapdancing all over my head for this question because it is really just a question and not an accusation. I am just wondering if there is a gender split on this issue, with men feeling that this stuff should remain personal and women feeling it is fair game. IF there is, it wouldn’t surprise me since there has always been a double stadard in society in terms of married men and women stepping out on each other: men who do it are studs; women who do it are whores. While that may be an exaggeration in terms of terms used, I know you understand that split I am talking about.
NB: I know it isn’t ALL men and ALL women if this does break down in terms of gender. I’m just wondering if it would be the majority of the gender seeing it a certain way.
Congrats to Derek ! He has done an excellent job handling himself in the spotlight in NY and no doubt his parents are very proud.
In my opinion, the personal lives of athletes should remain private unless it is relevant to performance. Cabrera getting drunk and having police involvement the night before an important game is relevant. Tiger Woods getting into a fight with his wife in November is not.
It really must be a slow sports news day!
Well Trisha I’m a woman and I’m 100% in the “mind your business” camp if you’re doing a poll.
I don’t get the argument that because someone benefits from fame (and the exposure that comes with it) they should also suffer from it, when they do something bad. One does not justify the other. Both happen for the same reason: people want to see/read about/hear about celebrities — all the time. People are interested in the good stuff, and they’re interested in the bad stuff — for the same reason. We live in a pretty celebrity-obsessed culture. Should athletes, actors and singers get as much attention as they do? No. I simply don’t understand why people care so much. These are all just people, no better or worse (except perhaps at a particular skill) than anyone else, and certainly not worthy of being idolized.
So, no, Tiger shouldn’t expect the spotlight to be aimed elsewhere when something bad happens. He’s justified in thinking people should have better things to do; but, unfortunately, that’s just not the culture we live in.
Guys: I updated the post to reflect Jeter winning the award and we’ll have a post dedicated to him a little later on.
Trisha: VERY interesting theory about the gender split. I’m curious to see what others think.
Austinmac: That’s a very popular opinion but one that’s very difficult to quantify. How do we know that what happened to Woods won’t affect his performance? Do you mean only physical injuries and such? Because at this point we don’t REALLY know whether Woods suffered any lingering injuries that might affect his ability to play in the future.
More importantly, mental toughness is something we all talk about when it comes to athletes, so how can we know for sure what impact anything involving a star’s family might have his or her game?
I’m no pro golf fan, but if Woods is in contention at a major on a Sunday, I’ll usually find a watch the last 9 holes or so.
That said, I haven’t read or watched a single story about this incident. It holds zero interest for me.
Never read a single A-Rod story that wasn’t about baseball either.
Sam, I think to some degree you’re missing A point (I won’t say ‘the’ as I don’t have final say on what’s relevant here). And that’s not whether a figure like Tiger Woods has the RIGHT to privacy, but that fact that is doesn’t reflect well on us as a society that there is intense interest in this.
Why do we care? What about us makes us curious about the “real-life” goings on of people we see on TV, on the screen and on playing fields?
We except it as fact of life and I suppose it is for no other reason that it won’t change anytime soon, so we debate whether famous people should or shouldn’t enjoy privacy, but what even makes this a debate at all is the real issue here.
Everyone who’s followed the coverage, heard the explanation, and either excepted it or scruntinized it should be asking themselves why? Why do you care to even do that?
Curiousity is not a virtue by default.
Don’t think it would have much in the way of legs, GB. It’s a blub on Deadspin and Page 6 for a day and it’s done. Guys like that aren’t 1/1000th as famous as a Tiger, Arod or Jeter.
I went to high school with a young lady in Northern VA back in the 80′s. Brilliant kid. Graduated UVA, Masters from Northwestern. Went on to have a prolific marketing career with Pepsi and more recently ESPN. Sadly for her, at about the time a far more visible Steve Phillips was exposed for cheating on his wife with a bridge troll, this woman was engaged in an affair with ESPN’s SVP of Programming, a man once named the 73rd most influential man in sports. She was fired and the Programming guy, who was married with children while this was going on, was stripped of all authority. Somewhat, similar scenarios, right? Well the ESPN execs got a little Page 6 blurb and a hit on Deadspin that was “here today, gone tomorrow” while Phillips matter was fodder for a few weeks. Again, fame is what gives these stories the legs.
To follow-up on my point…
“By this point, I think we all know about what happened to Tiger Woods over the holiday.”
While this may have just been literally conceit Sam, in fact, we all don’t know, and some of legitimately don’t care to.
Car accident, lack of explanation, explanation has holes is what I’ve gathered some headlines on sports sites and the discussion here, but that’s it.
“Well Trisha I’m a woman and I’m 100% in the “mind your business” camp if you’re doing a poll.”
Which is why I pointed out that I was wondering about the MAJORITY split. I wouldn’t think there would be 100 percent. (I’ve yet to see any poll that has received 100 percent approval/disapproval!)
Well said Stuckey. I agree.
Trisha
I am also in the “mind your own business” camp.
BTW: I remember you saying your red sox lovin sister got you a Yankees WS something (hoodie?). I recently had a birthday and neither of my red sox lovin sisters got me anything Yankee related, even tho that would have been the obvious gift choice. Luckily my sister in FL came thru
“(I’ve yet to see any poll that has received 100 percent approval/disapproval!)”
Ha trisha, you’ve oviously never seen my four team fantasy football poll. Every time there’s a poll for “Who will win this game?” I’m the only one who ever bothers to vote. So it’s always 100% ME.
See, having a poll go 100% either way CAN happen!
http://www.usmagazine.com/cele.....s-20093011
Sportsman of the year!
I wish someone would hunt yellow journalist,photographers, gossip mongers down,and violate their privacy,their friends,their families,et al close to them.
They should stalk them,and give them a NASTY taste of their on medicine.
Justify it by saying they are public figures,and the public deserves to know all the dirt on the ones dishing it!
Derek on Dan Patrick show talking about MOY and other things.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....erview.mp3
Trisha I read all your post, even the part where you pointed out “MAJORITY split.” I was just responding to your question. I wasn’t trying to imply that you thought it would go 100% one way or the other.
pat
November 30th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Derek on Dan Patrick show talking about MOY and other things.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c…..erview.mp3
******************
pat, for those of us at work would you mind summarizing?
I’m happy to say I havent read one story about this Woods thing. The only reason i know about it is because ESPN had a constant scroll on their networks on saturday and I was watching the Uconn/Duke game.
I disagree with Sam; I dont think its any of our business as long as the person involved isnt breaking the law. A one car accident at the end of his driveway seems like a pretty silly story (and that includes anything about a mistress).
Squidward, sure being a celebrity is what gives stories legs but I’m sure the media people who were outed are no less embarrassed because they aren’t famous.
Their family, friends, neighbors and peers’ knowledge of their misdeeds is embarrassment enough. And a good enough taste of what they’ve made money off of in the recent years.
Erin there is a synopsis on Dan Patrick’s page.
Not that it’s happening in this case, at least the auto accident part of the story, but my main beef with reporters nowadays is that they quite often really teeter on the edge of manufacturing news, rather than reporting it. As a former Journalism major, it is disgusting to me.
Watch what happens in the next few days to the coach at Cincinnati, Brian Kelly. He will be hounded non-stop with questions about whether he’s leaving for Notre Dame, even though the question itself is purely speculative. They’ll put this poor guy through hell in trying to get a “gotcha” moment, while he’s trying to prepare his team to focus on the next opponent.
This is the kind of thing that is turning people off to the press.
Tala08
November 30th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Erin there is a synopsis on Dan Patrick’s page.
******************
Oh thank you. I didn’t see that.
Pat, never mind!!
In one fell swoop Sam,you’ve debased this Yankees sports blog,by leading off with a gossip-mongering thread.Shame on you also for suggesting scandal sheet journalism is justified!
upstate kate, seriously I thought that was the most loving gesture she could have made and it brought tears to my eyes (if you remember I do tear up easily). I really hate to admit that I don’t think I could have brought myself to do the same thing – but I don’t think I could have done it. To walk into an official Sux (see what I mean?) retail store, in beantown, the day after they had their stupid parade (theirs was ridiculous – driving around in those duckboats, or whatever they are!) to buy something that indicated that they had won the world series? NOT IN THIS LIFETIME!
Which is a good thing since they aren’t going to be winning again in this lifetime!
For some reason, my siblings don’t “hate” the Yankees the way I “hate” the Sux. Hmmm.
“I wish someone would hunt yellow journalist,photographers, gossip mongers down,and violate their privacy,their friends,their families,et al close to them.”
That’s sort of missing the point gio. We live in a market-based society. So long as there is demand for something, SOMEONE will step up and fill it, legally or otherwise.
It doesn’t make trading in such things virtuous, but just like the solution to stopping illegal narcotics use isn’t the ridiculous premise that if we throw every drug dealer in jail or scare people away from the trade, drug use will stop, so long as there is a market for such information, someone IS going to gather, distribute, and profit from it.
The real shame is that there a market at all, and that’s the FAULT of everyday people that aren’t so easy to villainize.
I think journalists “should” be allowed to look into the private lives of athletes, but I would not do so if I was a journalist. I have no interest in these types of prurient interest stories and feel that the world was a better place when our news was not cluttered with them. The focus of the press has enabled the changing of the public into a mob of Kelly Kapoors, more interested in the pregnancies of celebrities and their affairs and drug usage than the wars we are currently fighting. I understand the need to have some lighter news, but does it always have to focus on this sort of negativity and scandal?
Now that we’ve been informed of Tiger’s dirty side, maybe he can start to be self deprecating a bit. He was always too smug & serious, and constantly throws the F word around when he misses a putt, acts like its the end of the world. He should laugh things off, smoke a few cigars, drink and be merry like Angel Cabrera – the opposite of Tiger – Cabrera won the masters while being quite out of shape and a belly that looked like he never worked out a day in his life.
None of us has any privacy. Most of us are of no interest to the media most of the time, but the day they want to hunt you down, believe me you will have LESS privacy than Woods — unless you have the means to protect yourself, which very few have — and you will have LESS opportunity to spread your own version of the truth.
I don’t know or care whether there is more to the Woods story, and certainly don’t know or care whether, if there is, it is of the salacious nature that Sam apparenty assumes. But I’m sure there are plenty of Sams out there dying to put it in print or on screen. That’s how Sam and his cohorts put dinner on the table.
For what it’s worth, the sociopolitical value of a free press does outweight its squalid side in my scale of values. I’m willing to put up with some of them dishing trash in order to have those who are providing us with the information that a democracy has to have if it is to function.
Now I’m wondering if this comment will be censored out, like yesterday’s was.
Anthony-you get a gold star for The Office reference.
Unless the fire hydrant or tree press charges – I think it’s a little (okay a lot) overblown.
SI thing on Jeter:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....?eref=sihp
Quite frankly Sam,a lead off thread of Jeter and his accomplishment,Sportsman of the yea, would have been in better taste.Yankees fans love reading about anything good about the Captain,or any Yankee.
A word of warning to you.I hope you never find it appropriate to do a hit job on Jeter.This blog wouldn’t be kind!
damon enjoy 27…think 28
November 30th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Quite frankly Sam,a lead off thread of Jeter and his accomplishment,Sportsman of the yea, would have been in better taste.Yankees fans love reading about anything good about the Captain,or any Yankee.
**************
damon, Sam said they’ll have a thread on Jeter later on.
Congratulations to our Captain! What a pleasure it has been to watch him play. He is the embodiment of a sportsman.
Anthony
Change the name then. Don’t call it private if journalist should be aloud to look in it.
Damon: This post went up before Jeter’s announcement. And, as I mentioned earlier, we’ll have a thread on Jeter shortly.
CR1: I agree with you that privacy, as a concept, has changed considerably. The problem is that many of us enjoy much of what the internet/instant-access age has provided us while still wishing for previous era privacy. Unfortunately, it seems like it’s impossible to have both.
Serious question – some sports figure – I think it was golf? – went on record saying that Yankees were charging too much for people to get into the Stadium and then maybe had some event that was free to the public. I think I’m getting at least some of the details correct. Does anyone remember who that was?
Hope everyone had a good Thanksgiving.
I really liked that last post – the one about the 2009 trades – there were a couple in there that I had forgotten about (like Jose Veras or Jason Hirsch)
There are always a couple of small moves that happen that never get mentioned but turn out to be positives for a club over the course of a season. Who knows, maybe this year if the Yankees need another arm Jason Hirsch steps in and shows what he once had as a prospect.
On another note – in what is probably his first step along the road to managing – Sal Fasano retired from playing and was named the manager of Toronto’s Single A club. Fasano’s going to be an outstanding manager – he was one of the smartest guys in the game and in the last few years was pretty much a manager in training working as a minor league catcher.
Not a great career – heck not even a very good career – but I wish him the best of luck.
As for the Tiger Woods stuff and what level of privacy a player should expect – my feeling is this – who the heck cares? We have, as a society, become so voyeristic that the very notion of a private life for a public figure is out the window. If there’s evidence of spousal abuse then absolutely the FSP should follow up, but if this is just some curiosity, some notion that because it’s Tiger we need to know more than what we need to know if your or I had crashed into a fire hydrant, then move on. Charles Barkley said it best “don’t look at athletes as role models, look at us as athletes. Teachers, doctors, your parents, police – those are role models.”
if gender is going to be brought into it, what about race and class ?
what if elin weren’t white and they weren’t in a gated community and she was standing over her bloodied husband with a golf club outside their house when the police arrived?
personally , i’m glad tiger likely can control of this situation .
this hits on a lot of levels because tiger crosses over in terms of wealth, class, color, and celebrity.
i suspect he’ll take his medicine , knock the ball back in the fairway, get a bogey , and continue on with his life.
tiger didn’t get to where he is by not being able to handle adversity.
The Sports Illustrated link above didn’t work for me, but Jeter is the lead story on their front page:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/
Fantastic. It’s been a remarkable year for the Captain.
Sam, you wouldn’t be a very good journalist if you thought otherwise
“Do athletes deserve the same privacy that “regular” people (hopefully) get? ”
This question is phrased a bit oddly I think. It’s not like the right of privacy is stolen from athletes. In this day and age, nobody has a right to privacy or so it seems. If “regular” people weren’t regular they wouldn’t have privacy.
Like you describe Sam, you can’t have fame and fortune without constant media attention. And you can’t have constant media attention while also maintaining complete privacy.
Frankly I’m not a fan of Tiger Woods as a person, I’m a fan of him as an athlete. He could be a horrible person and to me it wouldn’t matter. As long as Woods the athlete is fine, I don’t care.
trisha,
Pretty sure that was Tiger Woods
red sux interested in hanley ramirez per espn rumors . cashman has to keep the pedal to the metal, keep on improving the team. thinking about halladay trade; what about this: ian kennedy, zach macallister, ivan nova, montero for Halladay? obviously we keep phil and joba as is my wish.
I take no issue with reporters, reporting a story. Columnists opining and moralizing is a different issue to me.
Many people seem to judge an athlete by what they do off the field of play as well as on it. An athlete, to me, is about what they do only on the field of play. You can look at stats, talk about historical reference and tangibly see the gifts they have.
IMO, their humanity, foibles and intangibles, for good and bad, is irrelevant when talking about the athlete. That’s looking at the person they are or you think they are because most of us really have no clue what kind of person they are or aren’t.
Events that happen in their lives are news but need to be more compartmentalized in their reporting.
Tiger drives a golf ball 300 yards- Sports section
Tiger drives his car into a tree- News section
Tiger drives himself to distraction- Gossip section
Seeing TMZ quoted by a sports writer makes me take pause as much as seeing a story in the sports section written by a gossip columnist.
Now that having been said, Tiger claims to want his privacy yet he has released photos from his wedding and family portraits after the births of his children. In doing so, he opened up his personal life to the public. Controlled access but access all the same. Celebrating happy life events with fans is wonderful but asking for the cone of silence when things aren’t as happy is unrealistic. Probably as unrealistic as expecting ESPN, The Golf Channel and every sports page around the country to leave the reporting of this week of his life to only the Page 6′s and TMZ’s of the world and going away just because he asked.
Lots of times we talk about what trades the Yankees should make. I’m curious what you think about undoing some trades. What would the Yankees look like if we undid some of the trades that have been made over the years.
For example, if the Javy Vazquez, Randy Johnson and Ed Yarnell trades had never happened – then guys like Tex and Alex may not be Yankees – the team might look something more like this:
LF – Soriano
SS – Derek
1b – Nick Johnson
3b – Mike Lowell
C – Jorge Posada
RF – Juan Rivera
DH – Nick Swisher
2b – Robbie Cano
CF – Melky Cabrera
Interesting because I don’t think anyone would say that any of the three deals I erased worked out, but in the end, even bad trades yeild positive results. Because the Yankees mistakingly gave up Mike Lowell they needed a 3b a few years later and went out and got Alex. That sorta thing.
I will not rush to judgement until I read what the super talented Selena has to say….
once she finds out Tiger lives in a gated community she’ll be all over this.
T-Woo: The Many Lives of Tiger Woods
Big WOW for Jeter. What a year for him.
Count me among the “Who cares?” crowd regarding Tiger Woods.
Sometimes men behave badly.
Sometimes women get angry.
As a member of the human race, I am familiar with these things.
Patrick the prospect hugger, thanks for the info. I wasn’t sure if it was Woods, but I did remember some pro athlete moralizing about what the Yankees charged.
Clark Spencer,writer on the Miami Herald says no go on Hanley trade.
Confirmed by Juan C Rodriguez,writer on the,South floridia Sun Sentinel paper.
ESPN is in contrast to their local papers on Hanley,!!
I’d sooner trade Joba than Montero.
The biggest reason I disagree with you is that these are ATHLETES. You should be reporting what he did that relates to his job – playing the sport or participating in something team-sanctioned. Anything anyone did with some girl last night is none of my business. And it’s not your business (sports reporting). Leave that to the gossip papers.
In addition to Hanley Ramirez and Roy Halladay, it looks like the Sox are also going to give Matt Holliday the privilege of playing for them.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/10357594
Here’s my conspiracy theory about the massive amount of leaks surrounding the Red Sox. The most obvious reason for these leaks is to further edify their genius management & hype their unproven youngsters. However, I can’t help but think a secondary motive is to pressure the Yankees into making a rash move for a high-priced & overvalued player. While the Yankees are loaded with talent, it is older high-priced talent. As a result, if they lock up one or two more players into their mid- to upper-thirties, the Yankees will have very little flexibility over the next several years. I think that is the only way the Yankees won’t be a perennial WS contender–if they lock themselves into expensive contracts with declining players (essentially repeat the mistakes from earlier this decade). The Red Sox will probably be in somewhat of a rebuilding mode over the next year or two as they shed players like Ortiz, Lowell & Varitek. So it would be advantageous to them if the Yanks sacrifice future resources to go all-in for the next couple of years.
Sam
From your previous post,
IMO, if a reporter wants to report the news, and further his career by breaking salivating news stories, then that is your right. There is a problem though, and I think you might agree (please let me know if you do), when people like Selena Roberts make it their mission to destroy a person’s life. In a lesser sense, for Pete Abe to mock, belittle, insult, put negative spin on every story concerning ARod, so as to color people’s opinions of the man.
Also, I have a question regarding your comment about “they dont only get to be famous on the good days.”
If I am misinterpreting that, please let me know. Using Tiger’s name as an example, I interpret that as “Tiger gets to be famous, the benefits of being famous, so as a reporter, if Tiger makes a mistake in his personal life, I have the right to out him and impair his life of benefits and hurt his reputation.”
In all honesty some of us just don’t have the stomach to do some of the reporting that’s done today. I would feel disgusting if I was Tom Rinaldi standing outside Tiger’s neighborhood for a live update. Its just not in me.
I wonder if at some point he thought, “I went to Penn and Columbia for this?”
Couldn’t disagree more. The only reason to dig the dirt around anyone famous is to make money, period.
It is nonsense to claim that the famous (athletes, etc.) have no right to privacy just because the money-grubbing media says so.
“Clark Spencer,writer on the Miami Herald says no go on Hanley trade.
Confirmed by Juan C Rodriguez,writer on the,South floridia Sun Sentinel paper.”
It didn’t take long for that rumor to get shot down did it? How many times are the Red Sox going to be in talks to acquire Ramirez anyways? Surely the Marlins are getting tired of seeing rumors about them trading away their best player. It’s almost as if the Sox want to create this perception that they can get Hanley back whenever they decide to pull the trigger…I guess there’s just no room for him with all of their depth at shortstop.
Sam I loath this thread.Of the three you were my favorite.I really like reading your threads,threads,they were so informative and and garnered your sense of humor.Today you’ve left me speechless,and I’ve lost respect for your debased reasoning on the right to know,all of a persons right to privacy.
I SINCERELY HOPE THIS ISN’T A FORESHADOW WHAT THIS BLOG WILL BECOME,A CESSPOOL.It’s a NY Yankees sports blog please don’t turn this into a model of the Euro trash papers!
Sam
You just had to get in on the gossip of Tiger didn’t you?
Who’s next?
Saqm, I trhink an auto accident for Tiger is news since, as you say, it could affect his performance. Fighting with his wife for whatever reasons two months before another golf tournament has an extremely tenuous connection with his golf performance. Wouldn’t you agree?
Awh Sam not you too.You caught the gossip bug going aroundt,sk tsk,tsk!
Sam, Tiger Woods is a golfer. A famous one, granted, but that’s all he is. When he’s not on the golf course, he doesn’t matter. When he’s not hitting a golf ball, he is not relevant to anything. Just because one is famous, that doesn’t mean one loses all sense of privacy with his personal life. If you weren’t a reporter paid to pry into the lives of others, you’d have a much better understanding of this very simple concept.
This is a fair explanation, but the bottom line is the media writes about these stories because people read them. In other words, this kind of material earns money. As long as reporters don’t argue that they are performing an important journalistic endeavor, I have no problem with them trying to make some money off of someone else’s fame.
Tiger Woods is a public person, however, he is entitled to his privacy. I wonder how you or any other reporter would feel if something similar happened to you and others were prying into every aspect of your personal life….the real problem here is that while 4 police officers were murdered execution style in the state of Washington, Tiger Woods’s personal business was the headline on the news…kind of describes what the priorities are in the news these days….
Sam, you’re a well known person too. People look up to you. People listen to what you have to say. Everyone who reads this blog and most that read your paper know who you are. You put your work and what you think about out to the public for all the world to see. People read you from other continents so your are definitely more famous than the normal “person.”
People [with no lives] would like to know your every move, thought, fight with your significant other and by your line of thinking, have a right to that knowledge.
If a public figure has the lost the right to privacy, at what point to they lose that right? How “famous” does one have to be to be fair game to the paparazzi?
William:
“November 30th, 2009 at 11:57 am
This is a fair explanation, but the bottom line is the media writes about these stories because people read them. ”
And often the people have no choice because the media reports some stuff ad nauseum….
*”You don’t only get to be famous on the good days.”*
Sam, it’s one thing to look into something like this, which could be a criminal matter and certainly involves police investigation. It’s entirely another thing to delve into divorce proceedings especially when children are involved. Famous or not, there’s no lines anymore.
My primary contention with your post is that most of these athlete’s families or not famous. I will presume that their marriages are based on love and respect for another and not an opportunity to cash in. With that in mind, A-Rod’s wife and kids did not sign up to be publicly humiliated. Tiger’s wife did not sign up to be publicly embarrassed and the subject of polls like the one in the new york post. If you want to explore the stories involving the athletes themselves that is one thing but when you bring in their families who are in the shadows the majority of the time I think you have crossed the line. What goes on in Tiger’s home or A-Rod’s home is their business and shouldn’t be the interest of reporters or the public. These athletes families’ aren’t famous on the good days, only the bad ones.
Sorry I used the apostrophe on the wrong word. Grammar mistakes annoy me.
If Tiger was a better lair……I was on my way to the Mobil Mart to get some pepto bismol for my kid who was up until 2 am with a tummy ache. My wife wore me up, and I headed out half asleep. I trid to change the channel on the radio, (I hate what Elin listens to) and
I crossed the road and hit the hydrant.
The trouble is his lack of lying skills. If he had 1/100 the pratice of Rodger Clemens for example, this would be over. ;-0
Doesn’t surprise me that a blood sucker likes blood.
THIS HAS TO BE THE WORST MEAN SPIRITED THREAD I’VE EVER READ ON THE YANKEES LOHUD BLOG.PETE WOULDN’T LIKE THIS SMUT EITHER!!