Much ado about no Tiger
You know all these stories in newspapers and on TV about how Tiger Woods' injury will affect golf's popularity? I haven't read a single one of them. Please tell me if I'm missing anything.
Let me guess: Many people like to watch Tiger Woods play golf. If Tiger doesn't play, fewer people will watch golf. Period.
As a newspaper editor and writer who has to decide what to cover, I can't ignore signs that this or that sport is getting more or less of a following. But as a fan, I don't give a damn what everybody else is watching, or whether network executives are happy with the NBA Finals matchup, or whether Big Brown's rise and fall will cause more or fewer people to bet on horse races.
I mean, if they tell me golf's audience is going to shrink because Tiger Woods misses the rest of the season, what am I as a fan supposed to do with this information? Stop watching because the cool kids have stopped watching? Sell all my stock in argyle sweaters? Cancel the commercial time I bought on the British Open telecast for that department-store chain I own?
The media have to get over this idea that there are two kinds of sports -- those that everybody cares about, and those that nobody cares about -- a notion that leads to the premise that everybody cares about a tournament with Tiger, and nobody cares about a tournament without him.
The Los Angeles Times story on the likely impact of Tiger's absence had a chart of golf's TV ratings with and without the PGA Tour's star.
The chart shows that "when Woods does play," the average TV rating in 2007 was 3.4 (percent of TV households), but "when Woods doesn't play," it was 1.7.
That's quite an impact, unless you look at it this way: When Woods doesn't play, 98.3 percent of households couldn't care less. When Woods does play, only 96.6 percent of households couldn't care less.
About this blog
Kevin Modesti watches sports from a new angle since his promotion from sports columnist to sports editor for the Los Angeles Newspaper Group. In his new blog, Modesti not only comments on the big sports stories of the moment-- he talks about what makes them big. Think of it as a conversation with readers about how these stories should be covered.
Leave a comment