Post User Polls

Is Tiger Woods's new Nike commercial in poor taste?

Nike has unveiled a new commercial featuring Tiger Woods and the voice of his deceased father, Earl Woods, using recordings that appear as though he is addressing his son about his recent sex scandal.

By Jodi Westrick  |  April 8, 2010; 9:59 AM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Should proper nouns be allowed in new version of Scrabble? | Next: Is Glenn Beck sincere about politics?

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



How can it be in poor taste? It's his father's voice.

Posted by: tundey | April 8, 2010 10:19 AM

I think asking the question is poor taste.

Why go negative, the man is using Nike as a vise to get his message out about how sorry he is....and i appreciate his efforts.

What i don't like are people like you who write up this crap just to get the public fired up. Of course those Americans that don't like him are going to jump on your band wagon.

No intelligence at all you have, and i hope the Post sees the weakness of your thoughts.

The man has his fathers voice asking him a serious question, think about that?

I am sorry but you are lame!

Thanks

Posted by: weaverf | April 8, 2010 10:21 AM

It is a great ad.

Posted by: rastaman48 | April 8, 2010 10:41 AM

Tiger, your dead daddy would be proud of both you and that video. Yes sir. H*ll after watching that, even I'm now proud of you. Go Tiger. Go.

Posted by: state82 | April 8, 2010 10:41 AM

pathetic ad by nike period...made me sick just to watch it..

Posted by: wmnatzakanian | April 8, 2010 10:44 AM

It's more poor marketing then poor taste.

Woods needs to do more "under-the-radar" marketing that the media would cover. There doesn't need to be any stupid call to the carpet adds.

Just lay low, play golf. Eventually it will blow over. Think Kobe's legal battle of yesteryear.

Posted by: boblas | April 8, 2010 10:45 AM

Get over it Tiger. No need to display any more remorse to the undeserving public who probably didn't give a flying fu*k how many ho's you were banging (I sure didn't).
Now, just get out there and swing the club like your paid to do. And quit crying and bit*hing!

Posted by: digger76 | April 8, 2010 10:59 AM

It's a stupid Ad, but it is not in poor taste.

Posted by: rihardy | April 8, 2010 11:30 AM

Nike and Tiger Woods banked on an easily manipulated public, and they won the gamble going away. On a side note, the fact we don't teach children how to navigate the consumer world and comprehend the intent of its carefully crafted messages is appalling.

Look, lemmings: Nike is not in the business of educating. It is in the business of selling merchandise, spreading positive brand awareness and increasing shareholder value. Period. Those are its sole missions.

Tiger, as a living corporation, has full participation and control over his commercial image. So what he is doing is not "expressing remorse" via Nike, it is -- a mere four months after he was caught living a porn fantasy at odds with the self-manipulated public myth he made hundreds of millions of dollars perpetuating -- turning said revelation into a marketing device.

And tweaking his dead dad's recorded voice to serve his calculated plan, to boot.

And you just bought it. Swoosh.

Posted by: scrappledog | April 8, 2010 11:33 AM

Instead of getting all negative, Tiger is using his marital problems as an opportunity to sell shoes.

Posted by: posttoastie1 | April 8, 2010 11:36 AM

Not only is it in poor taste, it is incredibly cynical. It also means I will NEVER buy Nike tennis gear again ... or anything else with that hubristic slash on it. This man who exposed his wife to who-knows-how-many sexually transmittable diseases should never be a spokesman for another product ... and whichever company rubs his disingenuous face on MY television screen will lose me as a customer. I used to watch the man in awe. Now I will never watch him again. Nor will I buy anyone's product who is disrespectful enough to use his image to try to sell me. [I repeat this because that is the only moral the average corporation has -- will I buy their product no matter what?]

Do any of his apologists know what his father would think of being used in this way? In death?!

Posted by: JPMcC | April 8, 2010 11:41 AM

Can everyone, including Tiger and Nike, just leave it alone?

Posted by: jpg63 | April 8, 2010 11:44 AM

So shocked was I by the insensitive cynicism of this ad -- to use the words of a dead father, who may well have NOT wished them to be used this way, that I contacted Nike with my protest.

I got this in my email from 'NikeBiz.com' just minutes ago --

"Thank you for contacting us regarding the new Tiger Woods commercial. We support Tiger and his family. As he returns to competitive golf, the ad addresses his time away from the game using the powerful words of his father.":

Those 'powerful words' ... whether Dad would have wished them used to such a purpose or not.

That Tiger could let his father's memory be used in a commercial to excuse him for such disrespectful behavior to his wife is just more evidence of what an inconsiderate self-gratifying juvenile he is at his real center.

Posted by: JPMcC | April 8, 2010 12:25 PM

More Tiger spin from his handlers and Nike that's why i never buy Nike, actually i stopped buying the brand when MJ did nothing while young black kids were being assaulted and in some cases murdered over his air jordans in the inner cities of this country Jordan remained silent and did nothing and that is why to this day nike will never get a dime of my money.

Posted by: dargregmag | April 8, 2010 12:26 PM

Basically for some in our society anything that he does where he is not on his hands and knees begging the get Confederacy for forgiveness will be in poor taste. Isn't that right Gov. McDonnell?

Posted by: jtrob_1 | April 8, 2010 12:28 PM

Number of people blogging or voting about this commercial being in poor taste or refusing to buy another Nike product is around several hundred based on the results of the votes. The number of people who is NOT blogging or are too busy buying Nike products are in the millions. Trust me, these marketing people know what they are doing and do not care about us bloggers. We are the "acceptable risks" for these people.

Posted by: JohnWWW | April 8, 2010 12:45 PM

JPMCC, I couldn't have said it better myself. It's a disgusting reflection on both parties. In recovery programs you're supposed to get a "sponsor", but it's not supposed to be Nike.

Posted by: fan-o-matic | April 8, 2010 12:45 PM

Tiger's dad must be rolling in his grave right now. That is, if he's even really dead.

Posted by: voiceofreason21 | April 8, 2010 1:06 PM

Voting in this poll is sort of stupid as it counts for nothing as unscientific.

My actual vote will come from my own wallet on this issue. YMMV.

Posted by: HillRat | April 8, 2010 1:14 PM

I think Tiger's transgressions were disgraceful, but I think the add is ok because at least it sets an apologetic tone and foregos business-as-usual marketing.
I won't likely be watching pro golf this year and I have never purchased Nike products irregardless of Tiger's connection.
I hate it when people say, "who cares about his personal life, just let him play golf." That is such BS. Winning isn't everything.

Posted by: jjj33 | April 8, 2010 1:40 PM

Someone help me understand: media buzzards stalking Tiger's wife and kids for photos and stories is bad (I agree!), but Nike and Tiger exploiting his late father to sell sporting goods is acceptable. Do I have that right?

As for those who think this commercial was just Tiger's way of showing remorse: please explain why it was necessary to have Nike sponsor the thing? Does introspection somehow seem more genuine when it's followed by your sponsor's logo? Certainly not. Shameful!

BTW, I expect Tiger to win by at least 3 strokes. And see how long he keeps his temper when someone starts shouting "text me!" during his backstroke.

Posted by: edgar3 | April 8, 2010 1:43 PM

I don't get it -- didn't Tiger's father set the example, as far as womanizing?(Although admittedly, he never had the opportunities that Tiger did.)

Posted by: crystal4 | April 8, 2010 1:51 PM

This whole thing is rediculous. All these self-righteous people and their moralizing makes me ill.


It shouldn't need to be said but: What happens in Tiger Woods' pants is Tiger Woods' business.

Men cheating on their wives is (literally) as old as Adam and Eve. If there is still anyone out there that thinks that sports figures are roll models then they're too young and naive to understand what Tiger did anyway. Enough already. Let Tiger play golf and the rest of us will get back to our risque beer commercials and our Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue.

Posted by: robertjonezz | April 8, 2010 3:37 PM

Tiger, stop apologying and get on with your life. Do what you know how to do and that is play golf!

Your marriage was over long before the girlfriends. You and your blonde wife are not equally yorked. You have nothing in common, she was a nanny. Relations are built on a foundation with open communication and friendship. Can't you at least find an educated woman. Someone you can read books with or go on long walks and someone who doesn't want your money but you.

Oh by the way now you see the meaning of being a Black man in America, is no joy ride. Just think of all the children who start at a disadvantage and just need a someone to mentor them.

Posted by: sun52shine | April 8, 2010 6:09 PM

Just heard Donny Deutsch talking about Nike's brilliance in doing that ad--I don't get it. I think the ad is ridiculous and does contain a certain element of creepiness. Before seeing that ad, I really didn't have much feeling either way toward Tiger or Nike. I think that ad makes Tiger look like he is showing "fake" remorse and actually makes a fool of his father. Certainly does not make me want to go out and spend money on Nike!

Posted by: Boiler2 | April 8, 2010 7:50 PM

The ad is intended to get you talking about Tiger Woods and (most importantly) Nike.

It's worked.

Keep in mind advertisers will do whatever it takes to sell you stuff. It doesn't matter if you're outraged, angry, happy, excited. As long as you buy the product.

Once you understand that, nothing else really matters, if you think about it.

"Oh by the way now you see the meaning of being a Black man in America, is no joy ride."

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | April 8, 2010 7:57 PM

If I used my late father's voice like that to sell golf balls he would come back and hit me with a golf club. I bet Earl could swing harder than Elin too!

Posted by: iH8dallas | April 8, 2010 8:00 PM

Eldrick should do spots for Trojan.

Posted by: SeattleOrca | April 8, 2010 9:12 PM

Tiger's dad screwed around on his wife. The ad is such an attempt of manipulation of persception its' disgusting.

Posted by: bal503 | April 9, 2010 12:00 AM

Personally, I couldn't care less about Eldrick Woods' affairs. That's a personal matter between him and his wife and I completely agree that he should have his privacy.

What gets me is the cynical and calculated way Eldrick created a product, called Tiger Woods, to sell to the public and cashed in on it at every turn. He put himself out there for truckloads of cash, we didn't make him. Much like Toyota, his product was less than what he claimed it to be, so he covered it up for as long as he could and then got religion only after he was caught. Simply put, he played us all for fools.

And now he's right back at it. Seriously, why would you believe anything he has to say now? Actions speak louder than words and his actions indicate nothing other than a desire to put this all behind him and get back to the business of separating suckers from their cash again.

I don't hate Eldrick Woods. I don't even know Eldrick Woods (clearly). But I don't care about Eldrick or Tiger or anything either of them has to say anymore either.

Posted by: jeffgraham117 | April 9, 2010 12:28 PM

Nike wins!

Posted by: namrh | April 9, 2010 5:08 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company