news-record.com

OPINION

Kathleen Parker: Tiger Woods doesn't owe any explanation to America

Wednesday, December 2, 2009
(Updated 3:00 am)

The feeding frenzy over Tiger Woods' tiny run-in with a fire hydrant has taken voyeurism to new depths.

Where was he going at 2:25 in the morning? Why wasn't he wearing shoes? Why was his wife smashing his Cadillac Escalade's window with a nine-iron?

Prying minds apparently want to know all this and more. And the insatiable, ubiquitous media -- from the bloviating blogosphere to the cackling cable commentariat -- are all too happy to oblige.

Might we interrupt this terribly unimportant episode in the private life of a professional golfer to point out that it's nobody's business? This isn't breaking news. This is breaking gossip.

The news ended with the report that Woods had run into a fire hydrant outside his Windermere, Fla., home and has decided not to play in his own tournament because of minor injuries suffered. That should be a wrap.

Instead, enter the "experts," thousands of whom must reside in an underground bunker near the television studios -- either awaiting the next calamity or, perhaps, zipping out releases to newsrooms suggesting fresh story angles.

I get a dozen a day: "If you're thinking of writing about Such-and-Such, you might be interested in talking to So-and-So."

Thus, crisis management experts are filling airtime, yakking about what Woods should do to salvage his public image. The rumors, after all, could be true!

Pssst: He might have been having an affair. Pssst: His wife might have smashed the window in anger rather than trying to get him out of the car. Pssst: His (alleged) mistress ...

You see, Woods, the richest athlete on Planet Earth, has had an idyllic image and now it's been tarnished by -- what? Innuendo and whispers by that scurrilous wormtongue, Anonymous.

Among the many less-than-brilliant observations made the past few days is that Americans will forgive almost anything if people will just fess up. The implication is that Tiger will be forgiven his transgressions, whatever they are, if he'll just TELL US THE SALACIOUS DETAILS!

For God's sake, Tiger, tell us or we'll have to get back to our own pedestrian lives. Or, heaven forbid, focus on the prospect of 30,000 more American troops being sent to Afghanistan.

The notion that Woods owes America an explanation is based only on the fact that he is a celebrity. Meaning, some percentage of Americans worship him, or at least his amazing talent, and thus feel entitled to scrutinize his private life. His enormous success makes him a sort of public endowment from which gawkers expect dividends. They've tithed at the altar of Tiger Woods and they expect confessions in return.

Celebrity-obsession is cut from the same cloth as identity politics. Tiger is not one of us, clearly, but he is of us -- one of those unique characters in American history who make us feel good about ourselves. A human melting pot, he's the American Dream personified, who grew up in our living rooms, breaking records and hearts along the way.

We boosted him to Mount Olympus. How dare he descend and bleed?

Celebrity in America no longer means that one is admired for accomplishment. It means ownership by the masses. The stars may twinkle, but their reflection depends on the upturned gaze of those with dustier feet. As all gladiators know, the people are fickle. Like Caesar, they give a thumbs up or thumbs down in response to their own narcissistic injury. By denying the rumorists entry to his inner sanctum, Woods has invited a gathering of crows.

It gives solace to believe that most Americans don't really think someone's personal problems are any of their concern. Tiger isn't running for public office, after all. He isn't leading a congregation to the moral high ground. He's not trading trust for public funds, except to the extent that people willingly pay to watch him do what no other human can.

Might we think less of him should details emerge that confirm the rumors? To each his own. But someone, somewhere along this dark path to lost privacy needs to shout, "No more."

My own golfing motto can be summed up as follows: I don't care if the little ball goes in the little hole. But Tiger Woods will be my forever-hero if he locks the gate and shows voyeurs the road customarily paved with good intentions.

Kathleen Parker's e-mail address is kathleenparker@washpost.com

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Voice of Reason

December 2, 2009 - 7:08 am EST

I agree. But that isn't what ticked me off about this story. Refusing to make himself available the police is unacceptable. You wouldn't get away with that here. I've heard lawyers say he doesn't have to say anything to police, which is true, I suppose. Stupid, but true. However, I sure hope they got samples of his blood the night of the crash to prove he wasn't drinking, because if it were you or me they sure as heck would have done so. There are still unanswered questions in this case as to WHY he crashed, and if he was DUI due to alcohol or prescription meds, he deserves no more or less than everyone else.

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 7:35 am EST

Sorry, but I disagree with you with regards to not "getting away" with not speaking to the police. My sister-in-law found herself in a similar situation a number of years ago. She reached down to get something out of the floorboard, hit a tree, drove her car home. The police were provided with the necessary information and nothing more. She did not meet with police at all and wasn't required to, though they did come to the house and attempted to meet with her. She is (with no disrespect intended) a "nobody" - not an elected official, not related to an elected official, not a business owner, land owner (other than her home), etc.

Ms. Parker is correct in more than one respect.
1) The public may want more information but is not entitled to it.
2) There are so many other issues that we should be more concerned about.
3) Tiger Woods would do the world a favor if he would draw a line and continue to say "This is none of your
business. Go home Nosy!"

Voice of Reason

December 2, 2009 - 8:40 am EST

So..... she was involved in a hit and run accident then? Nice. In that case, she WAS required to meet with and report the accident. She should have been charged twice, just from what you have said. And were you there? How can you be sure she wasn't drunk too?

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 9:17 am EST

Clearly not, she didn't hit anyone else. And, as in Mr. Wood's case, no such charge was filed. I know she wasn't drunk because I was at the house when she returned. (Seven miles, ten minutes away - not enough time to sober up.)

Voice of Reason

December 2, 2009 - 9:29 am EST

If there was $1000 worth of total damage (to the car, the tree, if it was in somebody's yard, etc) then she was required to report it, whether she hit somebody else or not. Why do you think the Florida police were trying to get to Tiger in the first place? And DUI includes alcohol and drugs, legal or otherwise. If you were not trained to know how to recognize drug influence, you can't know if she was DUI or not.

Panacea

December 2, 2009 - 9:12 am EST

If I recall correctly, he was still on his private driveway. In that case DUI might not apply (depends on the state).

I'll bet that the hospital drew a blood alcohol level, since he had an altered level of consciousness. Also, if the police suspected DUI, they could have had a legal BAC draw in the ER. DUI probably isn't suspected in this case.

That so much time was able to pass before he provided driver's license, proof of registration, and insurance is interesting. I got pulled over in Delaware years ago and didn't have my insurance card on me. I got a ticket and a court summons. The cop told me, "bring it to court and I'll dismiss the charge (driving without insurance)." I couldn't bring it to the police station, and they sure weren't coming to me. I had to go to traffic court and sit for a couple of hours until my case came up. I showed my card, end of case.

Guess it doesn't work that way in Florida.

Voice of Reason

December 2, 2009 - 9:33 am EST

1. He was not on his driveway, not that it matters. DUI can be charged in a parking lot or driveway (in NC for sure)
2. It takes a while, months even, to get a BAC from blood. The hospital doesn't just get it like that. And remember, DUI means alcohol and/or drugs. But again, if the cops never had a chance to talk with the guy, how could it have been ruled out?

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 9:44 am EST

Let us take you by the hand and walk you through this. How do you suppose the police were going to determine if drugs and alcohol were involved? He was unconscious - do you suppose they were going to do a field sobriety test? They went to his home the following day. Do you suppose they would detect an odor emanating from his clothes or breath? Those answers were not going to come from a face-to-face. The only way they will get these answers is from a blood test, and if the police want it badly enough, they will get it and it won't take months.

Voice of Reason

December 2, 2009 - 3:14 pm EST

If they had seen him that night, wearing the clothes he was wearing, unconscious, they could have smelt him, yes. They could get blood, and it prolly would still have taken months. And at some point he did wake up, I assume, before he left the hospital= the police should have been there. An accident involving injury has to be reported, and if the subject was knocked out from a single vehicle crash just outside his residence at 2 am you can bet the officer's DUI radar was blowing up. See, you're replying to my comments as if you have some idea of what goes on in cases like this, which you clearly do not. For law enforcement personnel, this case screams DUI, and if police weren't allowed access to Tiger then someone is guilty of obstruction of justice. That is my concern with this case- whether he received preferential treatment because of who he is, or whether the police allowed someone to stonewall their investigation, or, which seems likely, both. As a citizen, it angers me that a celebrity would receive this special treatment that you or I would not. If Tiger is out there driving under the influence, he needs to be appropriately dealt with before he kills someone.

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 6:26 pm EST

First of all, the accident was reported - the recordings of the neighbor's call to 911 have been played in the media ad nauseam. Law enforcement certainly had rudimentary knowledge of the situation based on the 911 call and if they suspected DUI, they should have requested the appropriate tests from hospital personnel. So many of your comments have made it clear that you are working off of suppositions rather than knowledge easily gleaned from the countless news stories readily available.

Second, I have more than enough knowledge of what goes on in "cases like this" and will reply to your comments if only to correct the innuendo you put out. While this may well have been a case of DUI or obstruction of justice, there is no evidence of such behavior yet. It is not up to Mr. Woods to prove he is not guilty, it is up to law enforcement to prove he is, and Mr. Woods does not have to help them do that.

Panacea

December 2, 2009 - 3:48 pm EST

Sorry, Voice. You're wrong on that one. If the hospital drew a BAC, they get the results back in less than an hour.

If the police draw one, then it goes to an independent lab. It's a quick test. It's back in days, not weeks.

There were police on the scene. Because of the head injury, you can't do an alcohol or drug screening and differentiate between being impaired and brain trauma. If alcohol is a factor, though, you can smell it on the persons breath. If they smelled alcohol, then I'm sure they'd have gotten a BAC draw done at the hospital. They didn't, so they must not suspect alcohol.

Drugs is a different issue. I'm sure the hospital also did a urine tox screen, or at least it should have been ordered. It's routine with these kinds of injuries. The police may be able to subpoena the hospital records, but again, they'd need probable cause, ie reasonable suspicion he was impaired.

Get A Clue

December 2, 2009 - 7:32 am EST

I second what VoR says. No one is above the law. Refusing to supply license, proof of insurance and vehicle papers 3 times to officers of the law is inexcusable behavior for anyone. Anyone.
I don't care if the man was servicing a harem or if his wife was chasing him with a golf club. Driving a motor vehicle is a serious responsibility.

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 7:41 am EST

The story I heard on the news said all information was provided (license, insurance, registration). He just did not personally meet with the officers.

Voice of Reason

December 2, 2009 - 8:35 am EST

So, a third party told police he wasn't drunk? Do you even realize how ridiculous that sounds?

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 9:20 am EST

Where exactly did I say a third party told police he wasn't drunk? Go back to bed and get up on the other side - both of your comments indicate you are looking to argue.

Voice of Reason

December 2, 2009 - 9:25 am EST

Seriously? You said he never met with police. If he never met with police, how could they know alcohol wasn't a factor? Either somebody told them or they couldn't get to Tiger. My comments indicate you have no idea what you are talking about.

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 9:48 am EST

I never said he didn't meet police, the media did. And the only thing your comments indicate is that YOU have no idea what I am talking about. Either you don't read the comment completely or you can't read without interjecting your own thoughts into other's comments.

AirDoc

December 2, 2009 - 7:33 am EST

I like the comment about "ownership by the masses". It's true that many people feel an ownership to athletes, actors and other "celebrities" who are commonly in the spotlight. While much of that is understandable, we don't in fact own any part of that person or celebrity regardless of how much we might feel we do. I can't help thinking though that Tiger, a child prodigy in every sense of the word, has served as a role model for so many young people trying to accomplish similar skills through the same manner in which Tiger did......lots and lots of hard work and practice. And it is Tiger who has chosen (for money of course) to have his likeness posted everywhere on the countless products he endorses. As a representative of those establishments and as a man, Tiger himself should feel an "ownership" or responsibility to conduct himself in a manner that is supportive of those products. With his near flawless public personna, Tiger simply should have handled this much much differently. Yes, the "Inquirers" are going to try and eat him alive, but who haven't they sought? Those that matter don't base their opinions on that rubbish anyway. There's an old saying that goes something like, "It's not hard to be a man when things are good - but the real measure of a man's worth is how he handles himself when things go bad". Tiger was a total failure in this situation.

Interested

December 2, 2009 - 7:45 am EST

How was he a "total failure"? Because he failed to put an end to all the salacious gossip? Because he had a bump up? Because you suspect some of the gossip is true? Because he is not flawless? As the kids would say - OMG!

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Mobile
  • Social
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search