ESPN Plays by Tiger’s Rules, CBS Doesn’t

In the most recent chapter of Tiger Woods’ public relations saga, the embattled golfer granted interviews Sunday to ESPN and the Golf Channel that were aired simultaneously.

The interviews were arranged by Woods’ new PR representation, Ari Fleischer Sports Communications, and included two unique and (most likely) unprecedented parameters that each network had to agree on in order to receive the tasty media treat.

Woods’ reps insisted that the interview last no longer than five minutes and could not be promoted or announced publicly until one hour prior to airing. The networks, it was reported, were allowed to choose who conducted the interviews and could ask any question they wanted. But the restrictions of interview length and interview promotion had to be adhered to.

So despite the provisions, ESPN and the Golf Channel’s communications’ bosses agreed to the interview.

CBS, however, who broadcasts many PGA TOUR events including the Masters (were Woods will make his dramatic return to golf in April), was also offered the Woods’ interview with same restrictions but declined  – reportedly deterred by the five minute rule.

So why would CBS balk at the time restriction and turn down the sure ratings hit while ESPN and the Golf Channel agreed to the rule and conducted the interview?

It’s understandable why Woods would insist on the five minute rule. He remains in the extremely awkward situation of attempting to re-enter public life. Woods is fighting to regain (as much as possible) his popularity among fans and sponsors while, at the same time, trying to put his embarrassing scandals and domestic issues behind him.

As a result, Woods has no choice but to deal with the media and make himself available, to some degree, for interviews and other media requests.

But knowing how thirsty the media is for any Tiger Woods news or stories, Woods’ PR reps cleverly leveraged that hysteria into some extremely beneficial treatment for their client. By requiring the interview to last no more than five minutes (a very short time frame for any interview), Woods’ PR reps were able to, in essence, control the topics and limit the airtime of Woods discussing his unfortunate events during the last four months.

The time restriction allowed Woods to glaze over the extremely sensitive questions from ESPN’s Tom Rinaldi and the Golf Channel’s Kelly Tilghman and drag out answers to questions he was more comfortable with – hence, running out the clock. The limited time also prevented the interviewers from pressing Woods to answer questions more thoroughly. They had to hurry to get their next question in.

So, again, why did CBS say no to Woods while ESPN and the Golf Channel said yes?

It comes down to standards. ESPN has built its empire by blending sports reporting with entertainment. The network has increasingly blurred the line between journalism and celebrity and does not hold itself to the same journalist rules and integrity of most reputable media outlets.

ESPN is not a true news media outlet. It’s entertainment that’s wrapped around the façade of sports reporting.

CBS, on the other hand, has different standards and interests. Both the network’s sports and news divisions incorporate very high journalist standards into its content. The network could not, in good faith, air an interview with Woods in the guise of true journalism when the resulting product would have been compromised.

Even though CBS would have scored very high ratings with a five minute Woods interview, the network maintained its credibility as a trusted news source and passed on the opportunity.

(The Golf Channel is a minor player in the sports media world and simply could not afford to pass up the Woods’ interview, regardless of the network’s journalistic standards.)

CBS should be applauded for its decision not to cater to Woods’ PR reps. A real and legitimate media outlet should never allow its subject to manipulate an interview.

A media interview is either true or not. There’s no in between.