Friday, March 31, 2006

Kid gloves


No News Is Woods's News

Richard Sandomir in the Times: In the midst of Ed Bradley's worshipful two-part profile of Tiger Woods on "60 Minutes" last Sunday, I wondered if it was an infomercial or if Woods had paid a fee for these adoring 25 minutes. With nothing new to report — and not a single tough question in his arsenal — Bradley chose to join Camp Tiger.

Bradley looked to be enjoying himself too much as he smiled and chuckled along with Woods in various locales, conjuring comparisons to the buddy act of Ahmad Rashad and Michael Jordan, who, like Woods, surrenders so little to journalists but whose consent to be interviewed is deemed an occasion to send a camera crew.

This puffy profile reminded me of a "documentary" about Woods — "Son, Hero, Champion" — that preceded CBS's fourth-round coverage of the Masters in 1997. It was produced by IMG, the agency that represents Woods, so you know how objective and unconflicted it was.

Softball journalism seems anomalous in the "60 Minutes" canon, but its sports and entertainment profiles sometimes veer to the squishy. At least Bob Simon's recent Bode Miller piece, in which the skier talked about competing with a hangover, made some news and dogged Miller throughout his dismal Olympics in Turin, Italy. ...

As friendly as Bradley was (at one point declaring that Woods's best years are ahead of him), Woods placed limits on him. He would not, as Bradley said, let him into his home or onto his boat, or, more important, to speak to his wife, Elin — restrictions that send up red flags. If entree to elements of his life that would further humanize him are prohibited, why participate? One of the best profiles on "60 Minutes" featured Jackie Gleason, the late Great One, discoursing while playing pool and drinking booze, which enlivened him.

There is only one clear reason for accepting the Tiger Rules and recycling his saga: ratings. Sunday's Tiger-dominated edition of "60 Minutes" generated an 11.0 rating, 18 percent above its season average.
I don't really blame Tiger--who wouldn't try to control their image as much as possible, especially with all the issues of race and power that dog him.

And I'm not surprised that the softball interview was done by Ed Bradley--he's as tough as any in the 60 Minutes stable, except when he's trying to show how hip he is with someone he loves from the world of sports or music or entertainment--especially when it's an African American. Curious as to how the Times reporter justifies that mentioning that aspect in a story ostensibly about hard-nosed journalism.

It's a broader issue than Bradley, of course. Entertainment stars are used to kid treatment from the 'reporters' who cover them, most of whom aren't real journalists. And even real journalists get all star-struck sometimes; it's always been appropriate to me that Barbara Walters' interviews with the stars use those soft-focus lenses.

I think nobody cared about the coverage back in the day when celebrities were limited to Hollywood--but now that they're all over the place, their impact goes beyond their sphere, so the coverage should reflect that. So this attitude that stars have of not being accountable to anyone for anything, and not being held to the fire or forced to back up their childish lives with logic, increasingly grates as the try to have an effect in the real world. I have no problem with Richard Gere pontificating on Tibet--but someone should ask him why Tibet under the Dali Lami was literally a fedual society.

As for sports, I think the journalists covering that sphere do an underappreciated job. Many of the best discussions I've read on race and class in our society has been from the sports section. Some of that I think is because white reporters are inherently comfortable questioning black athletes, and holding them accountable. But it's also because of the historic legacy of tough-nosed journalists who have covered sports, a record contemporary reporters are always trying to live up to.

Maybe we should let loose sports reporters on Hollywood?

AP photo of Tiger Woods after winning the 2005 Masters by Amy Sanetta.

No comments: