So, when it comes to public figures having personal transgressions, what is the better way to come clean? The Tiger Woods or David Letterman route? Specifically, does one hide out, avoid, use euphemisms, and, for the first time in 12 years not want to be interviewed? Or, do you jump in front of the camera and belt it out in the very best medium called prime time television?
One process leads to questions, stigma, curiosity, rumor mills and drama, drama, drama. And, Google, Google, Google.
The other leads to more of an assessment on the delivery and perhaps, slightly less focus on the transgression itself.
By the way, is it a transgression if you have an affair for roughly 25% of the time you have been married, or, is it simply a behavior? Mmmmm….
Tiger has been photographed like, 1 billion times – about as many times as his net worth - and been interviewed what, like, 371,451 times? He is familiar with the tabloids; after all, he and his wife showcased and sold the story and photographs of the birth of their first child to PEOPLE (my fave) and other high paying tabloids. Now, these very same journalistic mediums, and his bff Oprah, want to hear the real story. We always want the story. He now wants nothing to do with his famous stature. Refusing to talk to anyone. Leaving more stories about the story than the story itself.
David created his livelihood in the television industry, but doesn’t hold nearly the notoriety of Tiger. Nonetheless, his approach was very different: be quick and beat 'em to the punch. He went very public ASAP after disclosing his affair to his wife. Then, everyone from the AP to Esquire.com could simply tell the aftermath, without the speculation, gossip, and remarkable innuendo.
What ever way of coming clean - one extreme or the other – or, some version in between, the story always comes out. Even post mortem. Ain't that right, Mr. Jefferson?
Here is to life and love.
Drive Your Bargain,
Anne
www.twitter.com/womendrivers
