Let’s be honest. We have all wondered, what would Tiger’s Dad, Earl
have to say about the pickle Tiger finds himself in? That begs the question, would this have happened if his father were still alive?

Five traits Tiger misses most in the absence of his father:

1. structure
In the little we do know about TIGER’S life, we know that his father provided structure. We know when his father was first diagnosed, and missed stops on the tour, Tiger’s game suffered. Too much freedom
Young adults with too much freedom, too quickly coupled with too much money too quickly is a dangerous and often lethal combination. Did Tiger live with too little freedom for too long?

2. accountability
His dad provided accountability. At some point, for young adults, the accountability parents provide is transferred to self-accountability. Which is why some students go to college and struggle or flunk out of their first semester and others are able to provide their own accountability. Where did Tiger’s accountability come from?

3. role model
Charles Barkley tried to say that athletes are athletes and not role models. The fact is that everyone needs a role model. Was Earl the role model for Tiger? And what went wrong in that transfer of power that Tiger’s role model became the bad behavior of the NBA or New York politics?

4. decision-making
Did his father make ALL the decisions WE CAN ONLY GUESS. Children need to begin to make their own decisions from a young age. What happened to Tiger’s ability to make decisions with this head? To make decisions that protected his family, himself, his brand? Was this his personal foray into decision-making?

5. to whom to listen?
We all know Tiger has his team. And his team requires confidentiality. Does he have people to whom he listens? Who replaced his DAD as someone he would listen to? What we don’t know is this: Tiger has the ability to buy the best advice, to gather the most experienced, expert team to advise him. Did they advise him well? Did he not listen?

Today I heard the fourth and final candidate for
George V’s Ohio U.S. Senate seat, Lee Fisher.
Following are observations from a communication expert on his speech and follow up question and answer period.
He started with a connection to the Bliss Institute and Akron. While it took him alittle longer to get there than I would prefer, it was a good quote and did tie things together

WHAT HE DID WELL:

1. in the intro, eye contact very good. Most important that eye contact be strong in the intro and conclusion
2. the connection to Woody Hayes, his father played for him when Woody was a high school coach, a WOW for most Ohioans
3. he had some strong wording, look beyond the barbed wire, confidence is oxygen, not a bail out-a build up
4. returned in the conclusion to a reference to his grandparents who he had referenced in the intro. Tied the conclusion to the intro, thank you
5. used strong words, passionate, civility, dreams, challenges
6. gave specifics for his vision
7. how he talked about his ooponents

WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HIM DO BETTER
1. needs brighter tie, the mono theme does not work for him
2. in the body of the speech, eye contact weak. good eye contact is 4-5 seconds or one for one complete thought
3. outlined 6 areas he was going to cover. I would prefer three, but he did preview those six and then expound on each
4. answers to questions need to be shorter
5. needs to repeat questions asked so audience knows what he is answering
8. use less quotes, and trust more in the quotes that are used

* what worked best for him, in talking about the difference between his opponents and himself, when he uses the quote, don’t tell me what you believe, tell me what you have done and I will tell you what you believe

Does Tiger need to talk to the media? Should he talk?

The answer lies in your relationship with and understanding of the media.
Does he have to talk? This is a free country and he is free to not speak.
Legally, he is not required to speak to law enforcement.

However this whole saga of the fire hydrant and the golf club lives in the
world of communication. And in communication, you have the right to follow the rules or not follow the rules, as long as you are willing to live with he consequences.

Tiger has the same option. If he is willing to live with the consequences,
he can remain silent. Tiger’s consequences are not only a marriage, a Brand
and a legacy.

Tiger is used to having control over all aspects of his personal and professional life. In this communication example, he is the speaker, the world is the audience.
In communication the audience is the final decider of information not the speaker.
Tiger does not have control over this situation, as much as Tiger likes to control.

Look at David letterman. He went on national TV and said, he would n t talk about the “situation” again. Three days later he was talking. Why? Because your audience decides when they have had enough information, not the speaker.

It’s going to be the same for Tiger. He will not be able to control his audience’s need for information whether that need is right or wrong in his eyes.
He is the most familiar face in he world, his brand one of the strongest.
As a Communication Expert, my three pronged strategy to Tiger:

1. Talk
2. Shut up
3. Assess
4.
David Letterman talked. Then he shut up, assessed the situation and talked again. It worked; it has become a non-issue.

Tiger is one of the most recognized people on the face of this earth. But the rules of communication still apply.

They crashed the White House. So what?
Michaele and Tareq Sulahi purposely said, “screw you” to security to attend the State Dinner for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
I don’t think it’s funny. Our country should not think it is funny or trivial. In fact, I would be delighted to see this paparazzi seeking couple charged with a felony. Surely, if it is true they were “crashers”, there must be a federal law somewhere that they violated. I don’t think it is funny, clever, or trivial.

Is the Secret Service at fault? Absolutely. That does not absolve this couple of
Intent to undermine security. NFL Super Bowl standout Plaxico Burress was sent to prison for eighteen months. He chose the wrong state to carry a concealed weapon in a nightclub. While he shot only himself in the thigh and harmed no one else, he is spending this football season in prison. Some critics said that the penalty was too stiff; he did not hurt anyone else. But he could have.

This couple with a morality compass far off center, did not hurt anyone critics might say. But they could have.

What is more important is that just like a person going to a night club, those attending a state dinner have the right to feel safe. This publicity seeking couple did not do any harm. But they could have.

In 1975 Lynette “Squeaky Fromme was given life imprisonment for her attempt to assassinate Gerald Ford. There was no cartridge in her weapon. She was found guilty under a law which made attempted presidential assassinations a federal crime. Did she do any harm? She could have.

I’m not suggesting life in prison, I am suggesting that they are punished. Being on Larry King or getting a reality show, is not punishment enough.

Dancing with the Stars is either TV pablum or divine inspiration.

I prefer to think of it as divine inspiration, which is my rational for being glued to the TV set for all nine weeks. Dancing is not really all about dancing, which is why I believe it is inspirational. It is proof, for two nights a week for nine weeks,

that while you need to be competent, competency does not guarantee you a win, in any field.

Competency is required but is not the determining factor to success. Competency is like your ticket of admission. You may have a ticket to the Super Bowl, but that ticket does not guarantee you first row seats at the 50-yard line. It just guarantees you admission. In season six, Mario Lopez was a better dancer than Emmitt Smith, but he did not win. Mya was arguably a better dancer than Donny Osmond, but she did not win. Donny was better at communicating his overall value.

5 Reasons Why Donny Won Dancing with the Stars

1. He connected to the audience

Whether you are a speaker, a doctor, a lawyer or a dancer, your first job is marketing. You have to connect to your audience. Your audience might be an audience of one or one million. It does not matter. Your job is to connect.

2. He had a following

There are many great singers and bands. The groups that are displayed on the Today Show are groups with a following. Will people stand in the rain to hear you? Will people sit in a waiting room to see you? Everyone needs a following in order to succeed.

3. He improved

Americans don’t care so much, where you start, as long as you improve. That rule applies to celebrities as well as us mortals. And we want to see that desire to improve. The only exception is the superstar like Michael Jordan. We did not want to see the 500 free shots a day in practice, we just wanted to see the superstar fly.

4. He wanted it

Audiences want to see desire. Early in the competition the Olympic swimmer was ousted from the dancing island. Natalie’s parting comments were that she really did want to be there, even if she didn’t look like she did. Audiences want to cheer for the underdog only when the underdog looks like they are trying and want it. Even though Donny was a celebrity, he continually said and did words and actions that communicated his desire to improve and advance.

5. He knew when to be on

Athletes have long had an advantage on the show because they know how to get up for game day. Actors can have re-take after re-take. Athletes have to be on at a certain time and day. Donny knew how to be on when it came to Monday night. And more importantly, he knew to be on in the final freestyle. There is a saying at a horse show that you only have to be good for fifteen feet in the horse show ring. You just don’t know which fifteen feet the judge is watching. Donny knew he had to own the freestyle, and he did. Mya still thought it was about competency

if you have a bad experience with continental you are likely to get their 800 number. it says 1-800 we care. I say it is 1-800 we don’t care.
then you get their customer satisfaction department which I would call customer dissatisfaction. very unhappy with their attitude, the commmunication between their website, their people, their customer.

I remember when Continental really cared about the experience their passengers had when they fly go
chose to gordon bethune’s former airline. in 1996 I actually was sent a huge plant after I complained about service. today I had a bad experience, landed safely, but a bad customer service experience. i called the 800 we care number. it should be called 800 we don;’t care and they should lbe named customer disservice. not only did they not fix my problem – they evidenced no concern as to how I felt about my experience. continental customer service, is 800 we don’t care. what are you saying in yourbusiness?

The talking heads were talking within hours of the Ft. Hood tragedy.

Post traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, was labeled the culprit early in the evening. Until one guest on Larry King ventured to be politically incorrect.

One Army representative disagreed with the other “experts”.. Perhaps PTSD

was not the culprit he pointed out. Perhaps it was an act of terrorism. If some talking heads can make PTSD the culprit, why is it politically incorrect to project terrorism as the culprit. Everyone is guessing. Why is one guess appropriate and not another?

The Army representative contributed a different theory. What if this was an act by a major with an Arabic last name and an agenda. The other talking heads leapt to the defense of PI, being politically correct. Here is the irony: enlisted American men and women fight for our freedom of speech, for our way of life. Then when a former enlistee ventures an opinion, the talking heads yell that you can’t say those things.

When President Obama wanted to speak to school students at the beginning of the year, he encountered an odd array of reactions. Some parents threatened to pull their children from school, some school systems offered to make his speech optional. I wrote an article asking, tongue in cheek, if President Obama was the anti-Christ because of the extreme reaction of some people to his speaking to students. It is a free country and I was allowed to raise that question.

A month later I raised a different question about the freedom of speech. Oprah had herself photo shopped on the cover of her own magazine. She empowers women to be authentic. I questioned her weight. I was told that was slander.

We can question the president and not Oprah?

Where does slander live? Where does PI live? Where does freedom of speech live?

Through the tragedy of Ft. Hood we will learn much. Will we learn to keep our freedom of speech or will it get lost in the fight to be politically correct?

Oprah is fat, period. That’s OK. Most of us struggle with
weight and end up on the losing end at some time.

There are two things that are not OK. One is her self-imposed expert status. Two, is Oprah being photo shopped on the cover of her own magazine. Oprah is a goddess here on earth. She has done amazing work as an angel. And no amount of tonnage will change that.

To protect her own value, Oprah needs to stop talking about weight as if she is the expert. Napoleon Hill said, “It is not enough to know, one must know and do”. We all know what we should do; the difference is in the doing.

Credibility is devised from three sources:
How we identify our value, communicate our value, protect our value.

When Oprah sets herself up as the diet or physical fitness guru, she is not protecting her value. She can interview experts; she just can’t set herself up as the expert. Her value is not in communicating as an expert. Her value is in the quality of guests and the quality of conversation that she can expose the American public to on a plethora of topics. Or actually, any topic she wakes up and chooses.

Oprah can get away with this disconnect between what she says and what she does, because she is Oprah. The problem is that most of us mere mortals cannot protect our value when there is this schism between what we say and what we do. As a professional speaker and expert on communicating value, the damage is in the example she sets.

Oprah is a freak of nature. A good freak, but a freak. Just like LeBron James is a freak of nature. A good freak, but a freak. The unfortunate consequence is that if we do as Oprah does, if what we say contradicts what we do, we will come across s freaks, and not the good kind.
The second error in her near perfect judgment (except for that horrendous movie she produced her record is near perfect) is the cover of her most recent issue of O. Oprah photo shopped? That’s bad on so many levels. From the perspective of her credibility, how is being photo shopped protecting her own value? How is it communicating her own value?
To tell her readers, through a picture, and a picture is worth a thousand words, that what she looks like is not good enough even for her?

Oprah needs the Sarah Palin interview. No really. The Queen of TV talk will benefit from this interview in ten ways.

1. She said she would. Before the election she said she would have Palin on after the election.

2. November is ratings month. Say what you will about the woman who can set back feminism 50 years in one sentence, ratings are ratings.

3. Landing the interview the day before her book comes out is still a feat, and Oprah fights for ratings just like mere mortals.

4. Oprah’s brand is strong and well identified enough to take the few hits she will take for giving air time to the high priestess of rogue.

5. A book, even by Palin, is still a book. Oprah is all about the book.

6. Oprah is in her professional heart, a journalist.
therefore she will embrace the opportunity to go where katie couric and tina fey have gone.
7. She can ask the tough questions ie The Million Broken Pieces public lashing

8. Every single Oprah fan can’t be left-can they?

9. It should be fun to watch if Oprah can make it an hour without throwing up in her mouth, alittle.

10. She said she would