What Does Tiger Owe Us?

Stephen A. Smith writes that Tiger Woods has been cowardly in his approach to facing the media. According to Smith, Tiger owes us the answer to a number of questions while conceding that Woods' private life is none of our business. Come again? What are these burning questions that inquiring minds want answered that don't concern the golfer's personal life? Where does Tiger stand on steel tariffs, or funding the United Nations? McDonald's or Burger King? Paper or plastic? Smith and his brethren, in playing the public's "right to know" card, are putting the arrogance and self importance of the media front and center.

Tiger Woods parlayed his wealth and fame into a life of personal excess. Maybe there are complicated Freudian explanations for his descent. Maybe the devil made him do it. Who cares? But he was hardly breaking new ground. Many athletes, past and present, have gone down the same path, as have nonathletes, perhaps even some sportswriters. Numerous politicians have made a second career of it.

Woods is one of the most recognizable celebrities in the world so everything he does is, not surprisingly, put under a microscope. But why his transgressions should merit lead story status on the evening news, as opposed to just "Entertainment Tonight", is puzzling. The irony of the mainstream media piggybacking on the reporting of "The National Inquirer" is more newsworthy than the story itself.

We may be disappointed with Tiger's behavior, we may choose to root against him. Those who have elected to make Tiger a hero may feel angry or betrayed. Corporate sponsors who feel Woods' tarnished image redounds to their products or services have every right to pull the plug on promotional contracts. And Tiger's family clearly is due a big fat mea culpa, and a whole lot more. But he certainly doesn't owe the general public an apology, nor do I want one. And, aside from a few comments on his golf game, he doesn't owe the media anything.