Thursday, March 19, 2009
Body Language
A grand example of the effects of body language was during Alex Rodriguez's press conference. He hired a marketing/press relations firm called Outside Eyes, which specializes in crisis management. They decided to have him hold a press conference a few days after the steroid story broke. His actions looked severely coached to the point where he took a scripted 20-30 second pause when he "choked up" while describing his relationship with his teamates, and how they have supported him. Watching the interview, I thought he looked ridiculous. He was clearly coached, pretty badly actually. He attempted a fake crying scene, and used many body language tells like, trying to cover up his face, or sitting back, to try and seem contrite. He just didn't seem realistic, which is a criticism he has faced for years. It has been said that he is just always coached 24/7, and this was just a more blatant example. That's why most of the fans haven't really taken to kindly to A-Rod since the story broke, and why he hasn't done much to fix his image. Maybe he should do away with the coaching and rely on his own to really get his guilt across, if he has any.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
The Elephant in the Room
With the World Baseball Classic going on, and spring training ball in full swing, it appears as if baseball season is fast approaching. With that in mind, i figured i'd make a post about baseball. Now the first thing that pops into my head, communication-wise, is of course A-Rod. He pretty much pops into everyone's head these past few months with baseball. Now how does Alex Rodriguez relate to communication? Firstly, A-Rod, if somehow you have been hidden under a rock the past couple months, was recently outted as a steriods user. Whooooaaaa buddy. Baseball's biggest star on the 'roids? During his highest paid and most productive strech of his career? Yea, its kind of a big deal. Oh sorry, i digress. Communications...
Yes this relates in many ways, but not because of the news itself, but from the reaction of it. Obviously, this was a big deal, and A-Rod, the Yankees, and of course the sports media made sure everyone knew about that fact. First of all, lets look at how the news itself came out. Apparently, back in 2003, an anonymous drug test was conducted across MLB, not to punish players, but just to survey them, and find out how big the steroids problem actually was in the league. The players union promised these players that their names would not be released, and that in no way could they be punished. This was so the players would actually take the test. Now through legal proceedings in 2004, the list was seized by federal prosecutors. Through some investigative reporting by Sports Illustrated's Selena Roberts, the list was seen, or compared with another list, and A-Rod's name was found.
The major ethical issue is see here is the question of, why is Rodriguez's name the only name that has come out. Now i understand he is the biggest name in baseball, but i question Selena Roberts' journalistic motive for releasing just his name. It was make more sense to me if all the names had come out. This is where i wonder if organizational bias has a role. What does Selena Roberts gain by only outting Rodriguez. I doubt that it was her doing unilaterally. I theorize that since SI is in the business of selling magazines, they went with this direction, regardless of ethics. Since A-rod is the biggest name, it would sell more papers, and by only releasing one name, they monopolize the story and center it on A-Rod. Releasing the other 103 names would only dilute their aim. I think that these is an example of an organizational bias. Similar to how Fox News frames it's news from a certain, typically right-winged, point of view, it seems like SI here is framing this story to focus on the biggest star in baseball. I think this selective reporting isn't fair to the fans, the player's union, and of course A-Rod. I just see a huge bias here. They pretty much turned all of the MLB's fans on Rodriguez, and now he'll lose huge amounts of money in endorsements, and repect from the fans.
Yes this relates in many ways, but not because of the news itself, but from the reaction of it. Obviously, this was a big deal, and A-Rod, the Yankees, and of course the sports media made sure everyone knew about that fact. First of all, lets look at how the news itself came out. Apparently, back in 2003, an anonymous drug test was conducted across MLB, not to punish players, but just to survey them, and find out how big the steroids problem actually was in the league. The players union promised these players that their names would not be released, and that in no way could they be punished. This was so the players would actually take the test. Now through legal proceedings in 2004, the list was seized by federal prosecutors. Through some investigative reporting by Sports Illustrated's Selena Roberts, the list was seen, or compared with another list, and A-Rod's name was found.
The major ethical issue is see here is the question of, why is Rodriguez's name the only name that has come out. Now i understand he is the biggest name in baseball, but i question Selena Roberts' journalistic motive for releasing just his name. It was make more sense to me if all the names had come out. This is where i wonder if organizational bias has a role. What does Selena Roberts gain by only outting Rodriguez. I doubt that it was her doing unilaterally. I theorize that since SI is in the business of selling magazines, they went with this direction, regardless of ethics. Since A-rod is the biggest name, it would sell more papers, and by only releasing one name, they monopolize the story and center it on A-Rod. Releasing the other 103 names would only dilute their aim. I think that these is an example of an organizational bias. Similar to how Fox News frames it's news from a certain, typically right-winged, point of view, it seems like SI here is framing this story to focus on the biggest star in baseball. I think this selective reporting isn't fair to the fans, the player's union, and of course A-Rod. I just see a huge bias here. They pretty much turned all of the MLB's fans on Rodriguez, and now he'll lose huge amounts of money in endorsements, and repect from the fans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)