Tiger Woods might believe we only have a right to know what he does on the links, but he may be fighting a losing battle.
Tiger Woods has finally come forward to admit that something was up when he crashed his car in front of his house last week – but what exactly was going on will remain private, if the golf giant gets his way.
In a vaguely worded statement on his website in which he claims to “have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my heart.” Woods also begs for “the right to some simple, human measure of privacy.” But is he entitled?
NO! Says William Jacobson writing on the Legal Insurrection blog. “Next time Mr. Privacy wants privacy, he should remember that sexting is not "off the record." He adds: “Leaving voice messages asking your mistress to expect a call from your wife, doesn't help either.”
YES! Says Quinn Hillyer on The American Spectator, who admits to neither liking nor disliking Woods. “He's a golfer, fergoshsakes. He's not a politician preaching family values. Even celebrity athletes have a right to privacy.”
Ummm, maybe says Courtney Martin of The Christian Science Monitor, in a thoughtful piece titled “Tiger Woods scandal may be news. But we don’t have to gawk.” Martin believes that “as much as we may shake our heads at Woods's impassioned plea, reminding him that the price of fame is scrutiny, we must also take a hard look at ourselves. We regularly complain about the depravity of our culture, the overwhelming busyness of our lives, but we perpetuate both problems by tuning into 24/7 ‘news’ about celebrity missteps.”
Yes he is, but probably won’t get it says Sam Mellinger on the Kansas City Star’s sports blog. “Of course he doesn't owe us an explanation. He is required by no law to sit on Oprah's couch or hold a press conference…but it’s coming at a hell of a price, isn’t it?” He adds: “If there's a lesson in all of this, maybe it's that the dirt of celebrities is easy pickings once the media machine loads up.”