A lot of people seem to think the latest Nike spot, effectively marking Wood’s return to Golf and the brand, is some kind of bold and daring piece. I have to disagree with these people.
If you haven’t seen it, take a watch:
While it has all the affectations of a serious and daring spot – the formal framing, the back & white, the stern narration – I find it devoid of any seriousness at all. It is in fact, possibly the safest, and ultimately most insulting, route Nike could have taken.
What I’m presented with is this sad sack, hunched over Tiger Woods, pleading for my forgiveness like I’m his wife. Only, it’s not him asking for forgiveness, it’s HIS DAD. That’s right, you made his dad do the dirty work, all the while asking literally nothing of Tiger:
- Tiger, tell me about YOUR thoughts?
- Tiger, how are YOU feeling?
Is everything okay big guy? You doin’ alright? You need a soda?
In my mind, there are really only two legitimate tracks here:
1) What ever Tiger did in his personal life is morally reprehensible, but Nike is all about golf, so lets get it on!
2) What ever Tiger did in his personal life is morally reprehensible, this matters to Nike, so lets address it honestly.
Of course I apparently forgot about secret option 3
What ever Tiger did in his personal life is morally reprehensible, we know it, you know it, we know you know it, but instead of addressing it directly or saying nothing, either of which WOULD ACTUALLY BE DARING, we’re going to attempt to LOOK like we’re addressing it, all the while trying to reposition Tiger as a pitiful victim man-child being defended by his DEAD DAD. You can’t be mad at that guy. Right?
Look, I’m not naive, Nike has a golden calf that can’t keep it’s pants on. They can’t toss him overboard. But they also can’t tie themselves too close to him in case this goes further south. So they did what they had to do. I get it. But lets call a spade a spade. All moral outrage aside, looking at this from a purely strategic point of view, this wasn’t daring, edgy or powerful.
It was the safest thing they possibly could have done.
Update
Buzzfeed seems to agree
White and Wong think it’s alright
These guys liked it a lot
“a golden calf that can’t keep it’s pants on.”
Great line.
Tweets that mention A Very Sad Tiger -- Topsy.com // Apr 7, 2010 at 9:55 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by trevoratnemo, Justin Spohn, Ross McKeen, Peter, Dave Allen and others. Dave Allen said: The latest Tiger Woods Nike ad is not a bold and daring piece – http://thisisviolence.net/2010/04/07/a-very-sad-tiger/ [...]
I always aim to please Jeremy.
Nice post Justin,
I am with Jeremy on the Golden calf line being a gem.
But let’s be frank here. If Nike were to get super creative, it would draw attention to the issue even more. Some of the most powerful Jordan spots were not super creative, almost corny and hackneyed, but by george, they managed to stir the emotions.
I commented earlier today on someone expecting the players Nike aligns themselves to be paragons of marital fidelity. I didn’t realize that was part of the Nike sponsorship criteria. Michael Jordan wasn’t either – I think it’s safe to say that investing in “his airness” was not a bad business move for Nike.
Tiger is a golfer. Sure he is a role model, but he never set out to become the moral gold standard for which we should all should use to live our lives. Sure his actions were reprehensible, but, none more so than the pope turning a blind eye/covering up the offenses of child abusers within his ranks. The difference is, the Holy Father bases his existence on living by example – Tiger did what pretty much all professional sportsmen do – and he has become a pariah for it – at least until he wins his next major.
Perhaps when he was on the fence about having several of his affairs he could hear the subtle whisper in his head — “just do it”
Hey Charlie -
First of all, I agree that Tiger hasn’t done anything any number of athletes have. But I think there were two fundamental things he did wrong:
1) He got caught
2) He created a public persona that wasn’t even in the same time zone as his actual persona
Either one of these isn’t deadly, but both together are.
Any way – back to the advertising part of this. You know, the IMPORTANT part. Like I said, I think this ad was probably the safe route to go, and thus, probably the right ad. My main quibble was that I don’t think it was daring or creative. Going back in Nike history, remember the Charles Barkley ads from the 80′s. There he was, without any parent to shield him, standing tall, saying effectively. “Fuck you, Im Charles Barkley, you pay me to play basketball, take it or leave it.” Now THAT was about as close to daring as I can remember in similar situation.
My feeling remains that in order to move the needle in any significant way, or in order to be considered daring, the ad needed one of 2 things
1) Tiger to speak for himself, and take ownership of his actions off the course.
2) Tiger to speak for himself, and say “F-off, you pay me to play golf.”
You forgot daring option 3: Busting into his rendition of Beyonce’s Single Ladies.
Good points — it would have been much more ballsy going the “Sir Charles” path. That was a great campaign.
But that approach was was never going to be Tiger’s schtick. he doesn’t like being the butt of any joke. He only smiles when he wins.
Even though Barkley was a damn good player – he was always seen as the kind of lovable buffoon off the court. Barkley would be the kind of guy that whips a guy on the ass with the rolled up towel and Tiger is the guy who would’ve looked on disapprovingly while every one else laughed.
Perhaps this comes back to Tiger’s desire to come off as something that he simply is not. Some of the jokes he told to journalists off the record that cam out after the scandal broke made me blush for their shocking poor taste, and I’m no shrinking violet.
He wants to cultivate the role of the responsible upstanding, prefect amongst a bunch of frat boys and that is simply not who he is. He cultivated that image so in order to maximize his marketability.
But that said – no one likes a hypocrite – so I guess that’s why he was really torched by the public who felt like he hoodwinked them into believing he was something other than he was.
Indeed – no one likes a hypocrite. Ironically, I think Americans in particular are want to forgive nearly celebrity, except when it comes to being cast a liar. Tiger at risk of that I think.
Anyway, I think would have been very old school WK to take a progressive, and daring path with. It used to be what that shop turned out all the time. The last decade or so I feel like they’ve really lost their edge. It’s been replaced by faux edge.
Nice post Justin,
I am with Jeremy on the Golden calf line being a gem.
But let’s be frank here. If Nike were to get super creative, it would draw attention to the issue even more. Some of the most powerful Jordan spots were not super creative, almost corny and hackneyed, but by george, they managed to stir the emotions.
I commented earlier today on someone expecting the players Nike aligns themselves to be paragons of marital fidelity. I didn’t realize that was part of the Nike sponsorship criteria. Michael Jordan wasn’t either – I think it’s safe to say that investing in “his airness” was not a bad business move for Nike.
Tiger is a golfer. Sure he is a role model, but he never set out to become the moral gold standard for which we should all should use to live our lives. Sure his actions were reprehensible, but, none more so than the pope turning a blind eye/covering up the offenses of child abusers within his ranks. The difference is, the Holy Father bases his existence on living by example – Tiger did what pretty much all professional sportsmen do – and he has become a pariah for it – at least until he wins his next major.
Perhaps when he was on the fence about having several of his affairs he could hear the subtle whisper in his head — “just do it”
Hey Amy – thanks for the thoughtful feedback.
I agree that Nike isn’t under any obligation to assert themselves or their athletes as any sort of moral pillar, and as you pointed out, Tiger isn’t the first to falter. While I have my own person feelings about the whole situation, my hope with this post was to look at the commercial from the point of view of someone who does this for a living in response to people calling it “daring.”
From that perspective, I still feel like it was a failure. In my view, it failed to take a stand in either direction. It was neither defiant, nor genuinely apologetic.
What I do like are the most recent EA ads with Tiger. If you haven’t seen them – take a look: http://adweek.blogs.com/adfreak/2010/06/ea-trying-to-lighten-mood-with-tiger-woods.html
In this case, EA choose a distinct point of view: It’s all about the golf, personal life be damned. Again, I’m not sure I agree with that, but I do like that they went a real direction.
So any way, you never said – did you like the original spot?