Our man Tiger needless to say, has been in all kinds of trouble, and as the tales of his escapades kept multiplying, his endorsement contracts from some of America's top brands (Gillette, Accenture, Gatorade) starting dropping like the 12-foot birdie putts we are used to seeing him sink. Now that he is coming back to golf, I am sure we will see more and more of him in the coming weeks.
Flickr - ATIS547
Tiger may or may not shave with a Gillette razor, never did any strategic or technology consulting, and while he might drink Gatorade, only the most naive among us would conclude that if we too drink Gatorade like Tiger we could become golf champions.
In this new world where everyone's story is easy to share, and our interaction with products, services, and organizations is often laid bare in many cases for the free discovery of anyone that may be interested, (and many who aren't), would many people or organizations care what sports drink Tiger claimed to rely on, or what style of razor he prefers?
For mega-celebrity endorsers, who really believes that the pitch, or the story they are sharing is truly their story that they are telling? Isn't it really just the corporations' story (in the form of an endorsement) that Tiger, or the supermodel or actress pitching do it yourself hair color are simply acting?
But using celebrity endorsers is such a time-honored tradition in advertising and brand building it is still seen as safe, and somehow, despite what common sense would suggest (seriously have you ever chosen a product or service based on a celebrity endorsement?), the expensive practice continues seemingly unabated.
Highly paid and disconnected people, acting in a story crafted by corporations, ad agencies, PR firms, whoever, instead of real, genuine, relatable people telling a story.
I think this same distinction can be made in the communications and messaging that organizations use in their internal settings, or recruiters use when selling the organization to candidates, or even much of the blogging, tweeting, Facebooking many of us engage in every day.
Telling a story is real, authentic, has a kind of history and context, and lets the message take precedence. Acting a story is kind of shallow, flat, and is mostly more about the actor than the story.
I don't know that there is much of a point to this post, having just re-read it.
Perhaps just this, that I should spend more time telling stories, and less time acting.