[Moecat]

http://content.usato.../1#.T6P3YujY9M9

Phil Mickelson had some fun mocking Tiger Woods' online video, in which he asked, and answered, softball questions to himself from fans via social media rather than talking to real media before the PGA Tour's Well Fargo Championship.

"You guys didn't see my video, huh?" deadpanned Lefty to the assembled media horde on Wednesday. Then Mickelson let loose with a few belly laughs at the expense of his longtime rival. Here's clip of Mickelson goofing on Woods' video via ESPN2's First Take morning show Thursday ... http://espn.go.com/v...egoryid=2378529

Look, Woods can do whatever he wants. The PGA Tour and sponsor Wells Fargo didn't object to him bypassing his usual presser before the tournament. And who knows? Woods could be on to something here, with athletes in the future doing an end-around on traditional media and trying to control the message through carefully parsed statements on their own web sites, Twitter and Facebook..

But media critics and and image experts say Woods missed an opportunity. The same media ripping him for spurning them at the tournament in favor of a video in which he looks like a "hostage" would be praising him as a social media pioneer if he did both the fan video AND his normal presser, said Kevin Sullivan, the former White House communications director.

Golf Channel anchor Eric Kuselias tweeted the nearly 15-minute video -- in which Woods served as both interviewer and interviewee -- reminded him of one of those old "Soviet" propaganda sessions where Comrade Tiger could stick to his own state-approved message. And not have to answer tough questions about drop-kicking his clubs at the Masters or addressing ex-coach Hank Haney's tell-all book, The Big Miss.

Woods held a presser Thursday. He shot a 1-under 71 in the first round of the tournament.

[Tyk]

Ahh Tiger. . .what a mess you've become. Its fascinating that someone can be so incredibly talented and at the same time be so clueless in dealing with his fame and his fans. Of course there is no reason to assume that the ability to expertly swing a golf club automatically comes with social skills.

It just seems that for all the damage Tiger has done to himself with his off-course actions, that all of it would be fairly easily overcome with just a bit of genuine effort on his part. The reason we all love Phil is not only because he's a fantastic golfer, but because he is unguarded. You feel that when he speaks, especially after something has knocked him into the dirt, that there really is a man behind the words. We love him when he succeeds and we see the pure joy, and we feel for him when he fails and we see the real dissapointment. With Tiger, its like watching a politician. So careful and guarded, his words are rehearsed and he usually says nothing in as few words as possible. He's at the same time almost impossible to like as a person and impossible to not like as a golf talent.

[RoverRick]

But Phil as usual comes out of this a witty nice guy who gets more and more likable as it goes on.

[stevenhw8]

LOL Tyk, this is exactly the case we had at the office a few weeks ago.

I have a colleague who is a genius programmer, but has 0 social skills/common sense. He can't interact with people, always making silly demands and being a huge baby. For instance, he had a project interview and the guy had to ask the boss whether he needed to wear a suit to the interview. Or the guy has to go on a business trip and is not able to book his own hotel.

Apparently this is the case with Tiger, pure golfing talent, but seriously clueless on some aspects that would appear to be common sense for the average Joe.

[JBones]

Tyk, on 04 May 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

He's at the same time almost impossible to like as a person and impossible to not like as a golf talent.

This may be the best description of Tiger I have ever heard (or read).

[GolfSpy Frank]

Tyk, on 04 May 2012 - 11:05 AM, said:

He's at the same time almost impossible to like as a person and impossible to not like as a golf talent.

JBones, on 05 May 2012 - 11:27 PM, said:

This may be the best description of Tiger I have ever heard (or read).

I second that. That is exactly how I think of him in my mind.

[R.P. Jacobs II]

Tyk, on 04 May 2012 - 11:05 AM, said:

Ahh Tiger. . .what a mess you've become. Its fascinating that someone can be so incredibly talented and at the same time be so clueless in dealing with his fame and his fans. Of course there is no reason to assume that the ability to expertly swing a golf club automatically comes with social skills.

It just seems that for all the damage Tiger has done to himself with his off-course actions, that all of it would be fairly easily overcome with just a bit of genuine effort on his part. The reason we all love Phil is not only because he's a fantastic golfer, but because he is unguarded. You feel that when he speaks, especially after something has knocked him into the dirt, that there really is a man behind the words. We love him when he succeeds and we see the pure joy, and we feel for him when he fails and we see the real dissapointment. With Tiger, its like watching a politician. So careful and guarded, his words are rehearsed and he usually says nothing in as few words as possible. He's at the same time almost impossible to like as a person and impossible to not like as a golf talent.

+1 cubed......Should be an italicized caption @ the bottom of screen on every Tiger interview/press shot....I find the most amazing thing being that he's either paying his people good $$ for garbage advice, or he's paying them good money to sit there & patronize him, "Yea Tiger, that's the ticket...Ask & answer your own questions...God are you brilliant"...

Unfortunately, we're stuck with him & his carnival act for the foreseeable future, at least for the next 15 years....Obviously, golfing talent aside, I'm not a fan......Fairways & Greens 4ever....

[Shambles]

People make mistakes and Tiger made one. That joke from Phil was just a guy thing and I doubt there was anything more behind it than levity.

To my mind reporters too often fall into an adversarial mode with their questions. If the interviewee puts limitations on the questions that may be asked, the reporter always has the option of refusing to participate or report.


Shambles