IMAGE RESTORATION IN THE APOLOGETIC RHETORIC OF PROFESSIONAL
ATHLETES: A CASE STUDY OF TIGER WOODS, KOBE BRYANT, AND
MICHAEL PHELPS
by
Adam Epstein
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of
The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts & Letters
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Arts
Florida Atlantic University
Boca Raton, FL
May 2017
Copyright by Adam Epstein 2017
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would first like to thank my wife Nicole, my parents, sister and extended family for their unconditional support and patience throughout this process. The extended years of study were not easy for those around me. Without them, this accomplishment would not have been possible.
I would also like to thank my Thesis advisor Dr. Becky Mulvaney for the tolerance to work with me for these past years. Her guidance has allowed me the opportunity to finish my research and become a better version of myself in the process.
Lastly, I must thank Mrs. Jamie Spooner for her tireless help reading, proofreading and reading again over the years. Thank you.
iv ABSTRACT
Author: Adam Epstein
Title: Image Restoration in the Apologetic in the Apologetic Rhetoric of Professional Athletes: A Case Study of Tiger Woods, Kobe Bryant, and Michael Phelps
Institution: Florida Atlantic University
Thesis Advisor: Dr. Becky Mulvaney
Degree: Master of Arts
Year: 2017
This purpose of this study is to investigate the apologetic rhetoric of professional athletes’ off-field scandals. The three case studies used were Tiger Woods, Kobe Bryant, and Michael Phelps. A genre analysis was conducted to determine the success or failure of the speech by examining the image repair strategies used during the rhetoric.
Further research revealed that the audiences’ perception plays a large role in determining if the rhetoric was successful or not. Two factors that aid the audience are the medium in which the public address was given, and the time it took to deliver the speech once the off-field scandal took place.
The findings determined that Tiger Woods apologia was not successful, while
Kobe Bryant’s was successful. The rhetoric of Michael Phelps’ speech lacked in delivery and strategies chosen. To have a successful apologia, one should have a clear use of strategies as well as a timely public address.
v IMAGE RESTORATION IN THE APOLOGETIC RHETORIC OF PROFESSIONAL
ATHLETES: A CASE STUDY OF TIGER WOODS, KOBE BRYANT,
AND MICHAEL PHELPS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Background ...... 2
Thesis Questions ...... 3
Literature Review...... 4
i. The Rhetoric of Apologia ...... 4
ii. Apologia and Image Restoration ...... 6
Types of Apologia...... 9
i. Political Apologia ...... 9
ii. Religious Apologia ...... 9
iii. Athletic Apologia ...... 10
iv. Criticism of Image Repair Theory ...... 12
Conclusion ...... 15
CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY ...... 16
i. Genre Criticism ...... 16
ii. Criticisms of Genre Analysis ...... 20
iii. The Apologia Genre ...... 22
Selection of Case Studies ...... 26
Artifacts...... 27
vi Conclusion ...... 27
CHAPTER THREE: CASE STUDY 1: TIGER WOODS ...... 28
Introduction ...... 28
Context ...... 28
Analysis...... 31
Woods' Apologia Strategies ...... 33
i. Denial ...... 33
ii. Evading of Responsibility ...... 34
iii. Reducing Offensiveness of Event ...... 34
iv. Corrective Action ...... 37
v. Mortification ...... 39
Conclusion ...... 40
CHAPTER FOUR: CASE STUDY 2: KOBE BRYANT ...... 44
Introduction ...... 44
Context ...... 44
Analysis...... 46
Bryant's Apologia Strategies ...... 47
i. Denial ...... 48
ii. Evading of Responsibilities ...... 48
iii. Reducing Offensiveness of Event ...... 48
iv. Corrective Action ...... 49
v. Mortification ...... 49
Conclusion ...... 51
vii CHAPTER FIVE: CASE STUDY 3: MICHAEL PHELPS ...... 54
Introduction ...... 54
Context ...... 54
Analysis...... 57
Phelps' Apologia Strategies ...... 58
i. Denial and Evading of Responsibilities ...... 58
ii. Reducing Offensiveness of Event ...... 58
iii. Corrective Action ...... 59
iv. Mortification ...... 60
Conclusion ...... 62
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONS ...... 64
i. Summary of Findings ...... 64
ii. Limitations and Further Research ...... 70
APPENDICES ...... 73
REFERENCES ...... 79
viii LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Five Strategies and Key Characteristics of Mortification ...... 25
Table 2: Strategies Employed in Tiger Woods’ Apology Speech ...... 42
Table 3: Kobe Bryant’s use of Benoit’s IRT in His Apologia ...... 52
Table 4: Michael Phelps’ Employment of Benoit’s IRT Strategies in his Apology ...... 62
Table 5: Summary of Apology Techniques Employed by Aforementioned Athletes ...... 67
ix CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
The professional sports world has a vast following, and with the help of today's technologies, sports events have spread to all corners of the globe. With increased viewership comes an increased fan base. However, multitudes of fans mean athletes have an increasingly difficult time keeping their private lives private. The media and the public have become increasingly interested in the misfortunes and scandals that surround professional athletes. The following study is an in-depth look into three specific case studies of sports figures and their private actions becoming public. The study focuses on examining the rhetorical process of image restoration used in the apologia speeches of three athletes in their discursive attempts to offset negative implications of specific scandals. The study examines Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps and his alleged marijuana pipe smoking, National Basketball Association superstar Kobe Bryant and his charge of sexual assault, and professional golfer Tiger Woods and the allegations that he cheated on his wife. This study deepens our knowledge of the rhetoric of apologia, and more importantly, the apologia rhetoric of athletes.
This chapter includes a brief description of the background of the issue, an introduction to the main thesis question, a review of relevant literature on the rhetoric of professional athletes, apologia, and image repair strategies.
1 Background
Lies, dishonor, shame, humiliation, disgrace: these accusations and their consequences are prominent when two worlds clash, professional athletes and scandals.
Professional sports are no stranger to scandal. Athletes have constantly had the spotlight on them, and they are one of the subjects of celebrity gossip that can be found right next to the story about the leading actress in drug rehabilitation or the mayor who cheated on his wife. Sports fans are quick to judge their athletic celebrities for imperfections
(Summers and Johnson Morgan, 2008). These athletes’ private lives are looked at under a microscope, and the public often hears about whatever they do or say.
Scandals about athletes cheating, using steroids, or behaving in an unsportsmanlike manner are not new. These stories are about characteristics related to sportsmanship and gaining the upper hand in a competitive spirit, but what happens when the scandals become a little more personal and are about addiction or adultery? It is becoming increasingly difficult for matters of an athlete's private life to stay private.
As with all types of celebrities in entertainment, politics, sports, or other public spheres, if the 21st century basketball player cheats on his wife, it becomes front-page news, both in print and electronic media. Athletes’ sexual escapades at times even trump national and international news of utmost importance. And like political figures, athletes respond to those situations with a formal statement of apology. What exactly should the athlete say in this apology? Does what they say really matter? Does when and how they say it matter? These are all important questions when athletes and their public relations team sit down to decide how to react to negative media reports. These questions also lead us to the core questions of the thesis.
2 Thesis Questions
As the literature review in this chapter reveals, apologia and image restoration have been important issues for rhetors throughout history. However, little attention has been given to the apologia rhetoric of professional athletes scandalized for off-field behavior. This thesis will address pertinent questions related to image restoration in the apologetic rhetoric of professional athletes: (1) Why are some public apologies by professional athletes more effective than others? (2) What are the athletes’ goals in their apologia discourse, and are they met? (3) What rhetorical strategies do they use? (4) Are rhetorical strategies influenced by athletes' corporate brands?
K. M. Hearit (1994) argued that an apology and apologia are not one in the same.
He says that although a corporate apologia may eventually consist of an apology, an apologia, first and foremost, entails “a defense that seeks to present a compelling counter description… alleged organizational wrongdoing in a more favorable context” (Hearit, p.115). William Benoit furthers this definition by centering most of his studies of apologetic rhetoric on how people and organizations “reduce, redress, or avoid damage to their reputation (or face or image) from perceived wrong-doing” (Benoit, 1995, p.vii).
According to this viewpoint, when an offender offers an apologia, they are not seeking to earn forgiveness (Hearit, 2006), but rather “to avoid punishment and damage to their reputation” (Lazare, 2004, p.134). In other words, the apologetic rhetoric is the tool used to defend oneself and one’s career.
3 Literature Review
To help answer these thesis questions, the literature review looks at a short history of William Benoit and is a precursor of his Image Repair Theory. This review covers image restoration as well as the rhetoric of political, religious, and sports apologia.
As Smudde and Courtright (2008) note, William Benoit is the parent of Image
Repair Theory (IRT) and is influential in the study of apologia. To be more specific, apologia typically focuses on individuals, while IRT focuses on corporations. Benoit’s writings on apologia and IRT are at the forefront of “his 1995 book, at least five single- authored articles, and nearly 20 co-authored essays” (Smudde and Courtright p.2). Since a vast majority of research on apologia refers back to Benoit, a discussion of Benoit's theory is central to the literature review. However, the precursor to Image Repair Theory is work done in rhetoric on apologetic discourse.
The Rhetoric of Apologia
Benoit's theory, then, builds on the works of specific theorists who have previously attempted to address the rhetoric of apologia.
Rosenfield’s (1968) rhetorical model is the initial building block that others used to develop the more recent concept of image restoration. Rosenfield stated that there are four similarities in broadcast apologia. First, there is a short and sharp controversy.
Second, a verbal counterattack on the critics occurs. Third, there is “data and facts placed in the center of the speech, and (finally) the apology speeches are composed of earlier statements” (Rosenfield, p. 449). Rosenfield used this model in 1968 to dissect two separate political speeches. “The first was Nixon’s ‘Checkers’ speech (1952), given as
Dwight D. Eisenhower’s running mate, and the second a speech by Harry S. Truman
4 while President” (Benoit, 1995, p. 10). Nixon’s speech was predominately a defense against charges that he maintained a “slush” fund throughout his campaign. Rosenfield concluded that there were “four similarities in the two discourses which I take, at this time, to represent constants in the apologetic equation” (p. 449).
Rosenfield identified four characteristics of apologetic discourse: “a brief, intense controversy; attacks on the opponent; a concentration of data in the middle third of the speech, and a recycling of arguments from past speeches.” (Benoit 1995, p. 11). Benoit, while indicating Rosenfield’s work was a useful beginning, also identified its shortcomings. Rosenfield “describes the scene more than the discourse, and the third and fourth factors give us no idea what sort of claims or rhetorical strategies are developed by the data lumped in the middle or by the recycled arguments” (Benoit 1995, p. 11).
Eventually, Rosenfield’s theory was abandoned for the newer and more extensive theoretical ideals of Ware and Linkugel.
B.L Ware and Will A. Linkugel (1973) identify four rhetorical strategies used by speakers in apologia: denial, bolstering, differentiation, and transcendence. According to
Ware and Linkugel in "They Spoke in Defense of Themselves: On the Generic Criticism of Apologia" (1973), the act of denying is useful in apologetic discourse in that, as long as the truth is not distorted, it “allows the apologist to respond to charges in a way that does not conflict with the values and beliefs of the audience” (Ware and Linkugel, p.
275). They say bolstering will occur when the person making the apology “attempts to identify himself with something viewed favorably by the audience” (Ware and Linkugel p.277). The third rhetorical strategy Ware and Linkugel discuss is differentiation, which is a speaker’s attempt to redefine a certain situation so that their actions can be seen in a
5 positive light (Ware and Linkugel). Moreover, the audience can distinguish a part from the whole. The fourth and final rhetorical strategy of apologia as described by Ware and
Linkugel is transcendence, which is a shift of focus from the individual to broader
“conceptual ideals that the audience views favorably” (Ware and Linkugel, p. 280).
Opposite of differentiation, transcendence builds parts together to look at the whole.
Apologia and Image Restoration
According to Angela Jerome (2008), the third building block Benoit used to create his Image Restoration Theory was the work of Kenneth Burke. More specifically,
Burke (1968) argues that purification can be accomplished rhetorically in two different ways. The first is victimage or scapegoating. This is the transferring of guilt from oneself to another person or group of people. The second strategy of purification is mortification.
Mortification is the symbolic killing of the self (Jerome). We symbolically kill off the aspects of ourselves that cause guilt, thus leading to purification. Typically mortification includes admitting the truth and accepting responsibility for the wrongdoing, thus cleansing oneself of guilt. The rhetor with blame the behavior on drungs, for example, then kill off that behavior. The rhetor never accepts the guilt; rather it is freed from the guild.
Benoit’s research on apologia and image repair of institutions led to his development and work on crisis communication (1995). Benoit notes that, similar to individuals, organizations and institutions endorse image restoration attempts when they perceive that their reputation/image/face comes under threat. Benoit describes this “face” as an important commodity, not only for an individual, but also for organizations as well.
If stakeholders perceive the “face” of an organization with high regard, it creates a certain
6 sense of prestige. Hence the organization engages in communicative behavior "to reduce, redress, or avoid damage"(Benoit 1995 p.vii) to their face.
Benoit’s IRT identifies five major rhetorical strategies that include a variety of specific tactics: Denial, evading responsibility, reducing offensiveness, corrective action, and mortification.
Benoit’s analyses of IRT appear in many of his works. One of his most well known analyses is of the Tylenol debacle. In October of 1982, Tylenol, which at the time was the leading pain killer medicine in the United States, was the cause of the death of seven people in Chicago after they took Tylenol Extra Strength Capsules. It was reported that an unknown suspect pulled the product from shelves and injected deadly amounts of cyanide into the medicine and then returned it to the shelves. Benoit and William Lindsey
(1987) analyzed the response from Tylenol. Benoit and Lindsey explain how Tylenol tried to shift the blame for the poisonings from themselves to an unknown person. They said it is extremely important to report plans to correct and/or prevent the same problem from happening. They conclude that “Tylenol denied responsibility for the deaths from poisoned capsules . . . introduced tamper-resistant packaging after the first incident and phased out capsules altogether after the second incident” (Benoit, Lindsey 1987 p 37).
Thus, they had concluded that Tylenol’s Image Repair Strategy was a success based on how the company shifted blame, as well as the fact that the company took corrective actions.
Another example of image restoration that Benoit analyzed was that of actor
Hugh Grant, who was arrested for public misconduct with a prostitute on June 27, 1995.
Benoit explains that the timing of his arrest helped in his image restoration. Before the
7 incident, Grant was scheduled for several interviews on “The Tonight Show” and “Larry
King Live” to promote his new movie, Nine Months. Benoit reports that instead of rescheduling his promotional appearances, Grant used these shows as an opportunity to repair his damaged image. Grant “effectively repaired his image following his arrest for lewd behavior with a prostitute by utilizing mortification, bolstering, and attacking the accuser” (Benoit, p. 256). In this particular instance, Grant was applauded for his honesty and for admitting that he had made a mistake.
Another key aspect of apologia identified by Benoit and his successors is the audience. Smudde and Courtright articulate the importance of audience in public apologia:
Because image repair opportunities may be of interest to a number of
different publics and stakeholders, you must identify the key groups of
people inside and outside your organization that must receive the
messages and determine what they need. What do your audiences want to
know, and how can the messages be tailored to address their self-interests?
(Smudde and Courtright, p. 68)
It should be noted that public apologies engage multiple audiences. The primary audience is the one that the rhetor is directly speaking to; it is the physical audience. This audience is the corporate stakeholders, the ones that are directly exposed to the message. There are also secondary audiences who may receive the message via the mass media or who may be indirectly affected by what is said in the speech. Speakers must first know their audiences in order to craft effective apologia rhetoric.
8 Types of Apologia
Image repair theorists have analyzed apologia in a variety of settings, including political, religious, and athletic apologia.
Political Apologia
Political apologia has been a popular area in the research of image repair. Based upon the existing research, the unifying strategy employed in political apologia is denial either through simple denial or blame shifting. In addition, image repair attempts in the political arena appear to be more effective when the rhetor is able to identify with the audience. This idea may be supported by the apparent success of Nixon’s “Checker’s” speech previously mentioned.
Religious Apologia
Religion has been a major scene for apologia throughout history. In 2001, Blaney and Benoit explored the Gospel of John in order to identify which image repair strategies were used by Jesus Christ. Their findings concluded that Jesus attempted to reduce the offensiveness of his actions through transcendence. Blaney and Benoit concluded that
Jesus’ actions were an attempt to “expand religious and moral consciousness” (Blaney and Benoit, p. 23). They also described that “transcendence can be an especially apt strategy for those who defend theological doctrines” (Blaney and Benoit, p. 30). They also noted that in dire cases, Jesus was forced to use simple denial in order to counter damning charges, like blasphemy. Ultimately, transcendence appears to be both the overarching strategy as well as the default defense strategy in religious apologia.
9 Athletic Apologia
Benoit joined with Robert Hanczor to critically analyze the Image Repair
Strategies used when professional figure skater Tonya Harding attacked fellow skater
Nancy Kerrigan prior to the 1994 Winter Olympics. Benoit and Hanzcor report that
Harding employed bolstering, denial, and attacking her accuser during numerous interviews. She responded by “painting herself as a victim of child abuse and abuse by her estranged husband, and then alleged co-conspirator, Jeff Gillooly” (Benoit, Hanczor p. 427). However, this representation of her image was significantly different from her
“bad girl of figure skating” image that the public had become so accustomed to at the time. Based largely on inconsistent statements that reduced her credibility, Benoit and
Hanczor concluded that it was counterproductive for Tonya Harding to create a different image in the middle of a crisis. They evaluated Harding’s efforts as weak and ineffective.
"Those who threaten team harmony violate the sport ethic by placing egocentric needs above the good of the group by demonstrating lack of commitment to the organization" (Kruse, p. 175). Noreen Kruse illustrates this when she analyzed Dallas
Cowboys' football star Tony Dorsett. In 1978 when Dorsett missed a Saturday practice, the coaching staff removed Dorsett from his starting position for the next game. Dorsett claimed his alarm did not go off, and that he did not intentionally miss practice. The fans thought he was being selfish, putting himself above the team, and booed him every time he touched the ball in the game. What the fans did not see or know was that Dorsett apologized to his teammates stating "We're winning now, and I didn't want to be the person responsible for us falling apart" (Kruse, p. 276). Dorsett said that his behavior was accidental: "wasn't an intentional thing." Kruse's conclusion is that Dorsett denied intent,
10 his statement incorporated the strategy of denial, thus Kruse deems this an effective use of apologia.
In 1979 Pete Rose signed a free agent contract with the Philadelphia Phillies for
$3.2 million. This professional baseball contract was exceptionally devastating for the loyal Cincinnati Reds fans who had watched Rose play for the hometown team for the previous fifteen years. The fans deemed him a traitor for leaving the team with which he had begun his career. However, Rose successfully shifted blame from himself to the
Reds’ organization stating "It was something I was forced into doing by the Cincinnati ball club . . . if the people who wanted me to stay with the Reds - the fans, the other players - had anything to say about it, I'd still be in Cincinnati. But it just so happens that the man who runs the Reds' show is the one guy who didn't want me there" (Kruse p.
276). Rose avoided mentioning that when he signed his free agent contract, he became the highest paid athlete at the time. Along with shifting blame, Kruse concluded that
Rose's statements were "a justification - a redefinition of his action as ‘right’ rather than
‘wrong’" (Kruse, p. 280).
LeAnn Brazeal (2008) explored the statements made by NFL player Terrell
Owens after he was deactivated from the Philadelphia Eagles when he began insulting the coaching staff and organization publicly. Owens' antics off the field were constantly overlooked because of his talent. He and his agent employed many commonly successful image repair strategies when he was deactivated by the Eagles, but he never admitted fault nor took corrective action to eliminate the problem in the future. Brazeal deemed
Owens' attempt at image repair unsuccessful because of his failure to employ two important IRT strategies.
11 Public perception goes a long way in determining the success of IRT. Pete Rose was successful because he appealed to the fans. He acknowledged that the fans wanted him to stay, and that he himself would have stayed in Cincinnati if the front office personnel would have given him a better contact. By contrast, Terrell Owens did not appeal to the fans as he never proposed a corrective action or even apologized for his attitude toward his former employer. Therefore, that is why even though Owens did implement some IRT strategies, his attempt was unsuccessful.
Criticism of Image Repair Theory
Benoit’s theory of IRT is widely accepted because the strategies can be applied in a variety of situations that range from individuals to corporations, as previously demonstrated. However, there is some criticism of the theory and its application that must be discussed in order to grow the field of IRT.
In the article, “Appropriateness and Effectiveness of Image Repair Strategies,”
Benoit and Drew (1997) recognized the limitations of current image repair research. They noted that “our understanding of how accounts function to restore one’s image is unfortunately hampered by concerns that limit comparison of the results of these studies”
(Benoit and Drew, p. 153). Together, Benoit and Drew identified four reasons for this lack of interconnectedness. First, there are several different typologies used by researchers to examine image repair strategies; this lack of consistency makes comparisons more difficult. This criticism would suggest that a unified vocabulary needs to be established in order to reduce confusion around terms and to be able to make direct comparisons among findings. Second, only certain strategies are detailed in research and therefore all of the strategies are not included and are unable to be compared since the
12 research foci are not always the same. As Benoit and Drew (1997) explained, “this piecemeal approach inevitably makes integration of the various results problematic”
(Benoit and Drew, p. 154). Third, “specific verbal image repair utterances are used in studies, but conclusions are drawn at a more general level” (Benoit & Drew, p. 154). It is then assumed that the conclusions reached about the effectiveness of one tactic can apply to the overall effectiveness of the overarching strategy. Finally, some research looks only at the production of accounts as opposed to how the audience receives these strategies.
Burns and Bruner (2000) also criticized several components of Benoit’s Image
Repair Theory in their article “Revisiting the Theory of Image Restoration Strategies.”
They recognized that the theory may be “constrained by its current language and mental representations and even invites misinterpretations” (Burns and Bruner, p. 27). Burns and Bruner are also concerned that IRT focuses too much on analyzing the source of the image repair and not enough emphasis is placed on audience analysis. They suggest there is a need to “flesh out fragments, themes, and issues from the perspective of significant audience(s)” (Burns and Bruner, p. 34). Benoit (2000) argues that since his theory is “a menu of options for those who feel the need to engage in image repair” (Benoit, p. 40), it inevitably focuses more on the source and less on the audience. Benoit (2000) goes on to remind his reviewers that the entire purpose of image repair is to influence audience perception and each strategy of the theory was written with the audience’s most likely reactions in mind. Burns and Bruner also noted that the theory does not take into account the point of view of the audience.
Burns and Bruner offered four suggestions in order to help improve IRT. First, they suggest that the researcher needs to expand on the framework in order to provide
13 additional background on the accused. Second, they suggest that the researcher needs to detail the “fragments, themes, and issues from the perspective of significant audience(s)”
(Burns and Bruner, p. 34). Third, they encourage “assessment of effectiveness and methodological issues” (Burns and Bruner, p. 34). Finally, Burns and Bruner suggest structural factors be analyzed to account for factors outside of discourse.
As a response to Burns and Bruner’s criticism, Benoit (2000) wrote “Another
Visit to the Theory of Image Restoration Strategies.” Benoit agrees that the audience needs to be taken into consideration and says that he has always valued their perspective.
Benoit first notes that the audience ultimately defines an image through its perception of a person, group or organization. Secondly, he explains that the rhetor becomes forced to respond to accusations only if “the relevant audience believes the actor to be the source of the reprehensible act” (Benoit, p. 72). Again, Benoit acknowledged the importance of the audience in image repair discourse and analysis.
I agree with Burns and Bruner that the audience is important when deciphering the validity of these apologies. However, what becomes of the rhetoric when athletes become bigger than themselves; when they become so much of a household name that they are their own brand and organization? In the current work on athlete apologia there is a lack of understanding that these athletes do not solely make their strategic plan by themselves. Rather they have a team of people who help manage the athletes in a variety of ways. My research will have an added focus on the framework in order to add additional background leading up to the apologia. It will also assess the effectiveness of methodological uses.
14 Conclusion
The literature reviewed provides a baseline of analysis conducted by previous rhetorical scholars. The choice of an analytical method should aid in answering the research questions here. Benoit and others have explored important aspects of image repair discourse; however, there appears to be a lack of scholarly research that examines apologetic rhetoric of professional athletes accused of off-field wrong doing. Thus, there is a gap in analysis of apologia strategies for off-field scandals in the athletic realm. To begin closing this gap, this thesis examines apologia and image repair in instances when athletes are scandalized by these "off-field" incidents. The rhetoric of the apologies themselves fit into one or more categories outlined by Benoit; however, not all apologies where effective. Previous scholarly works emphasized the importance of using multiple apologia strategies. This being said, there are other important factors in determining if an apology was effective or not. This thesis also addresses some of these other factors that can aid in apologia effectiveness such as who is present for the initial apology, the time between the incident to the initial apology given, and the communication medium used to present the initial apology.
As it stands right now, most image repair strategies take an approach to their crisis communication discourse in which messages are strategically created by the rhetors and are presented to the audience. Sports apologia has a wide audience and to be effective must address a variety of audiences. The athletes in this thesis have created a brand of their own with their fandom, and in some ways are an organization. This means their apologies must reach a broader spectrum of audiences.
15 CHAPTER TWO
METHODOLOGY
To widen our understanding of apologia discourse presented by athletes, this study will employ genre criticism. I will first describe genre criticism in general and then explain how it will be employed to analyze the apologetic rhetoric of Kobe Bryant,
Michael Phelps, and Tiger Woods in order to answer my research questions.
Genre Criticism
Rhetorical criticism probes and evaluates the content of rhetorical acts in order to differentiate the rhetorical process (Foss, 1989). Genre criticism provides a means to classify and compare artifacts of communication and to assess their effectiveness and contribution to a community. Moreover, genre analysis is a form of rhetorical criticism that determines criteria on which to evaluate similar forms. Genre is generally seen as a fusion of stylistic and substantive features that over time become conventional to the audience. Genre criticism's goal is to discover commonalities in rhetorical patterns across recurring situations. A genre analysis allows the rhetor to recognize differences in a generic formation, thus creating a pattern or template to recognize the importance of those differences.
Rhetoricians Karlyn Campbell and Kathleen Jamieson discuss in their foundational essay "Form and Genre: Shaping Rhetorical Action" (1978) that it is a methodological approach that recognizes shared rhetorical situations and common rhetorical patterns that begin to emerge in them. They say a genre is the recurrence of similar forms that are “groups of discourses which share substantive, stylistic, and situational characteristics” (Campbell and Jamieson p.20). Campbell and Jamieson later
16 group substantive and stylistic elements together and actually add a third element. "The three elements of genre criticism according to Campbell and Jamieson are: "1) substantive and stylistic strategies, 2) situational requirements, and 3) an organizing principle or internal dynamic" (Campbell and Jamieson, p. 21).
Campbell and Jamieson outline three main assumptions when using genre criticism. First are shared situations, patterns and expectations. The second main assumption is repetition; that is, social reality is manufactured through repetition.
Repetition of certain rhetorical forms creates an appetite or set of expectations about the characteristics of a rhetorical genre. It is the rhetors' "duty to satisfy that appetite." In other words, with repetition, the pattern manufactures an expected matrix of reasoning.
The third assumption is that there is a similar core; the internal logic or dynamic of the situations is shared. This is how individual texts, when put together, create a whole, and how a whole text is used to judge the individual. Moreover, there cannot be one without the other; the whole determines the individuals, and the individuals determine the whole.
Campbell and Jamieson also explain that there are three main procedures in conducting a genre analysis. The first is definitional; the critic must first determine the genre of the discourse to be analyzed. Once the critic identifies the genre, the second procedure is to conduct a textual analysis. The third and final procedure of the generic criticism is to compare and contrast results with respect to history. That is, does the discourse analyzed follow the generic characteristics of its historical counterparts? Can a pattern be detected from comparing current and past examples of the rhetorical genre under examination?
17 "A generic approach to rhetorical criticism would culminate in developmental history of rhetoric that would permit the critic to generalize beyond the individual event which is constrained by time and place to affinities and traditions across time . . ."
(Campbell and Jamieson, p. 27). This is what Campbell and Jamieson see as the ultimate goal of generic criticism. It would help provide a critical history to explore how rhetorical acts have influenced one another. "The concept of an internal dynamic fusing substantive, stylistic, and situational characteristics permits the critic to determine the generic significance of recurring elements" (Campbell and Jamieson, p. 21). Furthermore,
Campbell and Jamieson state that "It seeks to recreate the symbolic context in which the act emerged so that criticism can teach us about the nature of human communicative response and about the ways in which rhetoric is shaped by prior rhetoric, by verbal conventions in a culture, and by past formulations of ideas and issues" (Campbell and
Jamieson, p. 27). This concept also allows for recognition of what is unique to a position of a genre.
Foss (1989) reiterates Campbell and Jamieson's findings and explains that “a rhetorical genre is a constellation, fusion, or clustering of three different kinds of elements so that a unique kind of artifact is created” (Foss, p. 193). The first of these elements includes the “substantive and stylistic characteristic of the rhetoric—features of the rhetoric chosen by the rhetor to respond to the perceived requirements” of those situations (Foss, p. 193). Moreover, it is the form and the content of the rhetoric. The second element is the “situational requirements or the perception of conditions in a situation that call forth particular kinds of rhetorical responses” (Foss, p. 193). This can be classified as the context of the rhetoric. Finally, the third element is the “organizing
18 principle” of the genre—an “umbrella label for the internal dynamic of the constellation” formed by the first two elements (Foss, p. 194). This is the process of the above elements working interdependently to create rhetoric within a genre.
Foss discusses three types of generic analysis. Generic Description - Does a genre exist among a set of artifacts? Generic Participation - Does an artifact participate in a particular genre? Generic Application - Is an artifact successful in meeting the characteristics of its genre?
The first is Generic Description. This is where the critic seeks to describe a genre by examining various artifacts to see if a genre exists. It includes four steps. Step one is the observation of similarities in rhetoric in response to particular situations. Step two is the collection of artifacts from similar situations. The third step is the analysis of artifacts to see if they share characteristics. The last step is the formulation of an organizing principle of the genre.
The second type of generic analysis as described by Foss and Foss is Generic
Participation. This is where the critic seeks to determine which artifacts participate in which genres. Moreover, a specific rhetorical artifact is tested against a genre to discover if it participates in that genre. It includes three steps. Step one is to determine the description of perceived situational requirements. Step two is to determine the description of the rhetorical artifacts, and the third step is to compare the characteristics of the artifacts with characteristics of the genre.
The third type of generic analysis is Generic Application. This is where the critic uses a description of a genre to evaluate particular rhetorical examples. Furthermore, the critic applies a generic model to a particular rhetorical artifact in order to assess the
19 artifact. This step allows us to recognize the rhetorical differences within the genre. This analysis includes four steps. The first step is to determine the description of the genre.
Step two is to determine the description of the artifact(s) as a representative of the genre.
The third step is to compare these artifacts with the genre. The last step is evaluating the artifacts in terms of its (their) success in fulfilling the characteristics of the genre. The critic should take the generic expectations of the audience into consideration during this step. If the artifact(s) violate conventional audience expectations, then this may create confusion, or it may actually enhance rhetorical effectiveness.
Criticisms of Genre Analysis
One of my own criticisms of genre analysis is that there are a slew of over generalized statements. Regardless of vocabulary, a genre is a group of texts unified by a foundation of shared features. Over time, the vernacular has become accepted, and I am not sure this should be the case. Yes, there is an abundance of comparing and contrasting; however, not much is being done to evaluate the quality of the particular members of the genre.
Jackson Harrell and Wil Linkugel (1978) believe that generic criticism is too loosely defined for continued development. They believe that the organizing principle or internal dynamic identified by Campbell and Jamieson is the central feature of a rhetorical genre. However, "Harrell and Linkugel do not view the internal dynamic as resulting from a dynamic relationship between the situation and the substantive and stylistic strategies. Rather, they believe that the internal dynamic is a mode of thinking yielding principles of classification unrelated to situation". A “root term” within the
20 internal dynamic, “represents an idea [and] serves a canopy-like function” (Harrell and
Linkugel, p.264).
Sharon Downey’s “The Evolutions of the Rhetorical Genre of Apologia” gives a history of the study of apologia. She claims that the strategies used have changed through the ages, as the rhetorical situations have changed. For instance, she says that medieval apologists “adjusted to the futility of argument” (Downey, p. 50). She says that over time,
“the drama that bound accused, accuser, and audience in the classical period gradually gave way to audience alienation, ambiguous accuser, and aversive apologist” (Downey, p. 59). She writes that rhetors' “Charges against the accused were implied and not explicit, often emanating from rumors and innuendo” (Downey, p. 56). Contemporary apologists lack a clearly defined opponent. She also remarks that apologies that are completely defensive will be viewed with contempt, not sympathy (Downey, p. 60).
Although there are many criticisms of genre analysis, including one of my own, this form of analysis is still the best formula to situate my study. This thesis will utilize genre analysis, but will attempt to avoid some of its problems.
In regards to Ware and Linkugel's criticism that genre is too heavily dependent on
Aristotelian style types, I agree. Apologia has been around since ancient Greece.
However, this study focuses on the marriage of the individual and the company that each case study represents. We can use classical genres to examine changes in contemporary strategies and situations.
To respond to my own criticism that genre analysis relies too heavily on categorization and not enough evaluation; this study will be one attempt to fix this, as it
21 focuses on substantive analysis and evaluation of each case study in regards to the content and context.
Harrell and Linkugel strongly believe that the internal dynamic is not related to the situation. The analysis of the three case studies may affirm or disprove this viewpoint.
I agree with Sharon Downey that strategies have changed throughout the ages. However, it is important to note that the situations have also changed. Thus there is a need for fluidity and appreciation for the audience.
The Apologia Genre
For the purposes of this study, it is important to note that the act of presenting a formal apologia should not be confused with mere apology or simply asking for forgiveness. That is, while apologetic discourse can be the speech of self-defense in regard to one’s actions, it is also actualized as a defense of one’s position or even a defense of one’s opinion.
This study will utilize Foss's four guidelines for Generic Application. This will provide a systematic formula for analyzing each of the three case studies. Each case study will perform the four procedures of Generic Application. William Benoit's strategies will help answer steps three and four of generic application.
The first procedure in generic criticism has already been established by identifying the discourses under examination as speeches of apologia. According to
Campbell and Jamieson, "the apologia is a speech in which one responds to forensic charges in a non-forensic way - by transcending them to present one's life and character to one's judges" (Campbell and Jamieson, p. 28). William Benoit (1995) identified five
22 simple rhetorical strategies used during a public apology: denial, evading responsibility, reducing offensiveness, corrective action, and mortification.
The first strategy, according to Benoit, is denial. The speaker is hoping to restore their image by denying they committed the act. This can be done in two different ways, the first being simple denial. For example, an organization totally denies that a crisis or situation occurred. When engaging in denial, Benoit's (1995) second definition of the term also makes allowance for instances in which an organization shifts the blame
(scapegoating) and thus denies its implication in an unpleasant event. "Arguing that another person or organization is actually responsible for the offensive act" (Benoit, p.
180).
The second strategy identified by Benoit is evading responsibility. This can be done in two different ways. The first is by claiming "provocation" for the act, "that the act was an unforeseeable accident, or that the speaker had good intentions" in performing the act (Brazeal, p. 146). In other words, the act was induced by a third party and the person and/or organization only responded to an external provocation. The second way in which a speaker can evade responsibility is by claiming "defeasibility." Benoit defines defeasibility as an act that occurred due to a lack of information or control over the situation which inevitably made it difficult to avert the crisis. (Blaney, Benoit, & Brazeal,
2002).
The third rhetorical strategy for apologia as described by Benoit is when the speaker downplays the seriousness of the offense, thus reducing its offensiveness. Benoit claims that this can be done in numerous ways, from minimizing the importance or impact of the committed act, trying to bolster the speaker's image, to trying to
23 differentiate the act from other similar but more offensive acts. Benoit continues to say that the speaker may also be "arguing that the act served some greater, transcendent purpose, in an attempt to reduce the offensiveness of the act. They may also take the form of attacking the accusers or offering to compensate the victim" (Benoit, 1995).
The fourth strategy for speakers in their public apology is to promise some sort of corrective action. This can be done by a conscious effort to try and "restore the original circumstances and prevent future occurrences of the act" (Benoit, 1995). Or a speaker may simply ask for forgiveness in an act of pure embarrassment. This is crucial because it shows that the organization or individual is responsible and in control of the situation.
Keith Hearit (2006) “stresses the importance of corrective action asserting that the strategy can be used without fear of litigation, conversely to the early use of compensation that allows stakeholders to assume that the corporation is to be held accountable." (Maiorescu).
Finally, an organization can engage in mortification as a strategy for image repair.
This should be done after close consultation with the legal department. There is a potential drawback to this strategy in that it might invite lawsuits from victims.
Specifically, press releases can be used as evidence in court, and hence should only be employed after more information about the crisis comes to the attention of the management. In his article "Image repair discourse and crisis communication" (1997),
Benoit describes the strategy of mortification, based on Kenneth Burke’s work, in which the accused “admits wrongful behavior, asks for forgiveness, and apologizes.” (Brinson
& Benoit, p.488). Table 1 outlines the five strategies and key characteristics of each one as defined by Benoit.
24
Table 1: Five Strategies and Key Characteristics of Mortification Strategy Key Characteristic
Denial Simple Denial Did not Perform Act Shift the Blame Act Performed by Another Evasion of Responsibility Pravoction Responded to Act of Another Defeasibility Lack of Information or Ability Accident Act Was a Mishap Good Intentions Meant Well in Act Reducing Offensiveness of Event Bolstering Stress Good Traits Minimization Act Not Serious Differentiation Act Less Offensive Transcendence More Important Considerations Attack Accuser Reduce Credibility of Accuser Corrective Action Plan to Solve or Prevent Problem Mortification Apologize for Act
Smudde and Courtright (2008)
According to Benoit, these strategies are used when two conditions are satisfied: “1) An act occurred which is undesirable, 2) You are responsible for that action” (Benoit 1995 p
71).
Jeffery Courtright and Peter Smudde conducted their own study using Benoit’s theory to determine how applicable Benoit’s findings are to industry use. They used a content analysis of Benoit’s findings and studied the frequencies of individual strategies developed in Image Repair Theory (IRT) used in works published. They looked at published works solely written by Benoit himself, works co-authored by Benoit, and works without Benoit as an author. It was found that “as Benoit worked with others, new analyses of cases that included more strategies were published. It’s at this stage that each strategy in the typology finally has at least one case analysis associated with it” (2008).
25 This is to suggest that yes, Benoit may have indeed been the grandfather of Image Repair
Theory, but other theorists are beginning to expand on his theory.
I will be using Benoit's strategies as a template for my textual analysis of my case studies. They will be used as a cross reference when analyzing the discourse for each case study. I will dissect each rhetorical artifact and determine which, if any or all of the strategies are used. I will also utilize Foss and Foss' framework for a genre analysis. This allows my research to recognize the importance of the delivery of the apologia for the audience's perception as well as the importance of non-verbal communication during the speech. My research will have an added focus on the framework in order to add additional background leading up to the apologia. It will also assess the effectiveness of methodological issues.
Selection of Case Studies
I have chosen to conduct a genre analysis of athletes' apologetic rhetoric in three case studies. These three case studies are relatively recent, were all prominent in the media, and provide examples of apologia across different sports. In addition, the three case studies provide examples of apologia rhetoric by athletes of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. Kobe Bryant is an African American professional basketball player in the National Basketball Association (NBA), Michael Phelps is a Caucasian professional swimmer, and Tiger Woods, is a mixed ethnic (Caucasian, African
American, American Indian, and Asian) professional golfer on the Professional Golfers
Association (PGA) tour. This selection of apologia speakers provides a cross section of examples of contemporary apologia rhetoric by professional athletes, and all three of these case studies focus on off-field allegations.
26 Artifacts
Each case study has its own set of rhetorical artifacts that will be analyzed according to Generic Application criticism which will also examine IRT strategies employed by each professional athlete. Kobe Bryant gave a live press conference, as well as a statement that was released on his behalf. Like Bryant, Tiger Woods also gave a live public address to his audience through national television. Michael Phelps issued a public statement through his marketing agency. Both the live press conferences for Bryant and
Woods have been transcribed for the purposes of this thesis. Phelps' statement can be seen in its entirety in chapter 5.
Conclusion
The following three chapters focus on one case study per athlete. Each chapter follows a similar analytic scheme: a discussion of relevant contextual factors about the athlete and the scandal, a description of the rhetorical artifact (apologia), and an analysis of the artifacts guided by the combined use of Generic Application and IRT theory.
Chapter Three analyzes the public apology that Kobe Bryant gave during a nationally broadcasted press conference after he was charged with sexual assault. Chapter Four examines the statement that Tiger Woods released after the media found out about his extramarital affairs. Charter five analyzes Olympic gold medalist Michael Phelps statement after he was caught allegedly smoking marijuana at a college party in South
Carolina. Each of these chapters includes a summary of the results of the analysis.
Finally, Chapter Six integrates the connections developed in the previous chapters, and conclusions are drawn concerning related to the research questions. This chapter also concludes with a discussion of the implications for further study.
27 CHAPTER THREE
CASE STUDY 1: TIGER WOODS
INTRODUCTION
In this chapter I examine the rhetoric of Tiger Woods' apologia to illuminate the strategies used in his speech and to evaluate their effectiveness. The analytic framework used follows Foss and Foss' four guidelines for Generic Application. The first step is to determine the description of the genre. Step two is to determine the description of the artifact(s) as a representative of the genre. The third step is to compare these artifacts with the genre. The last step is evaluating the artifact in terms of its success in fulfilling the characteristics of the genre. I also employ William Benoit's Image Repair Theory to complete the third and fourth steps in the process of Generic Application. I begin with a discussion of relevant contextual factors.
Context
Tiger Woods is arguably one of the greatest golfers in the history of the sport.
Woods became a professional golfer in 1996, and according to Golf Digest, signed an endorsement deal worth $40 million from Nike (Strege). This single endorsement deal was the highest in golf history. "Woods was named Sports Illustrated 1996 Sportsman of the Year and PGA Tour Rookie of the Year" (Kelley). His second season may have been even more impressive than his rookie campaign. In April of 1997, Woods competed in the Masters and won at 18 under par, also setting a record for margin of victory with 12
28 strokes. In the process he became the "youngest Masters’ winner and the first African-
American to do so" (Kelley). On "June 15, 1997, in only his forty-second week as a professional, [he] rose to number one in the Official World Golf Rankings, the fastest- ever ascent to world number one. He was named PGA Player of the Year, the first golfer to win the award the year following his rookie season" (Kelley). This was an accomplishment that he did not relinquish until 2005, when his father was fighting for his life. After Woods’ father passed in 2006, he took a few months off and failed to make the qualifying round in his first major tour back. However, in true championship form
Woods got back on his winning track, winning the next eight tournaments, two of which were majors.
Woods' reputation, however, was challenged after a series of events during
Thanksgiving 2009. Woods was accused by the media of having numerous extramarital affairs with women around the globe. In late November of 2009, when the first reports of an affair with Rachel Uchitel, a New York native, surfaced, it was not addressed by Tiger
Woods who worked to keep his personal life private. However, in the early morning hours of November 27, 2009, Woods was involved in a single car accident outside his home in Windermere, Florida. The accident which involved Woods’ Cadillac Escalade, a fire hydrant, and a tree, is now considered to be the outcome of a private domestic dispute gone wrong. It was reported that the accident was the result of Elin Woods, his wife, finding text messages from Rachel and numerous other women which sent Woods fleeing from his home.
29 In the days that followed, women from around the world began to come forward with proof that they too had affairs with Woods. This came as a shock to the public because Woods was largely seen as a quiet, respectable role model who presented himself as wholesome and genuine. Woods, since his early days as a professional golfer a decade earlier, has always been portrayed as a family-oriented individual. Woods’ children and wife were always seen on the sidelines of tournaments cheering for him.
Now the world famous golfer was being accused of betraying his family, the one thing he tried so hard to protect. Before this media outburst, one would be hard pressed to find photos of the family outside of the golf course. This loving, caring, devoted father and husband was now at the center of a private matter unfolding right in front of the public eye. After an array of women claimed having sexual relations with Woods, his image was tarnished.
The press conference that Woods gave on February 19, 2010, was nearly three months after the initial single car accident that snowballed the entire affair scandal to the forefront of the media. The scenario of the statement was bizarre in its own right, as
Woods sat down in front of the cameras, read his three page speech, stood up, and left abruptly before any questions could be asked of him. The statement was aired live, not only on mainstream sports networks such as ESPN, but also on well known news networks such as CNN. This fact alone exemplifies the star power that Woods' possessed.
His fame, fortune, and namesake had taken him beyond the realm of sports and transformed him into a global figure who was recognized by just his first name, Tiger.
30 Analysis
The first step in generic application criticism is to describe the genre under examination. Conventional aspects of apologia as well as scholarly identifications of typical characteristics of apologia have already been introduced in chapter two.
The second step in generic application criticism is to determine whether the artifact under examination is a representative of the genre. Tiger Woods' gave a public speech in response to the scandal in an effort to apologize and regain his public approval.
Woods' statement clearly represents an example of apologia.
The third and fourth steps in conducting generic application include analysis and evaluation of the artifacts in relation to generic expectations. The analysis should first address audience considerations. Because Woods used a public platform to state his claim, his audience grew exponentially from his wife, sponsors, agents, and fans to the general public. This is important to note because his tone and rhetoric should change because his audience has grown.
As Benoit (1995) points out, there are three types of audiences that the speaker will face. First, the speaker faces the external audience, those who are the primary people with whom the rhetor hopes to rebuild his/her image. Second, the rhetor tries to establish a positive reputation or image with the secondary audience. The secondary audiences include those not in attendance, but will still hear, read, or may be affected by the speech.
Lastly, Benoit “describes the third-party audience. One example is if the actor attempts to save [their] image from corporate stockholders but not caring what the impact is on the media who spread the negative perception in the first place” (Roberts p. 22-23). Benoit
(1995) made an additional point, noting that there are two types of attacks on image. One
31 attacks the policy, while the other attacks the character. Benoit also notes that sometimes this may not be clear. "The accusation may arise generally in the media, for example, rather than from a rhetor's explicit kategoria," (Benoit, p.85).
Woods' opening remarks (aside from "good morning and thank you for joining me") recognize that he is aware not only of his face-to-face audience, but also the mass secondary audience watching and listening. He immediately tries to connect with the audience: "Many of you in this room are my friends. Many of you in the room know me.
Many of you have cheered for me or you've worked with me or you've supported me"
(Lines 1-3). Even though Woods does not openly greet everyone watching or listening at home, the implication is there.
Woods then clearly admits his behavior has not lived up to his reputation by stating:
I am also aware of the pain my behavior has caused to
those of you in this room. I have let you down, and I have
let down my fans. For many of you, especially my friends,
my behavior has been a personal disappointment. To those
of you who work for me, I have let you down personally
and professionally. My behavior has caused considerable
worry to my business partners (Lines 16-21).
He admits that he has not been as genuine and truthful as his audience thought he was, and he acknowledges that the audience has a role in determining his reputation and his credibility.
32 Woods' Apologia Strategies
It is in Woods' best interest to try and create an atmosphere within his speech that cultivates his traits that made him so loved by his fans. He had established an image as an intelligent, hardworking golfer. This is especially important to remember since the audience's observation and awareness play such a pertinent role in the rhetorical situation.
This is where Wood's mere apology transforms into an apologia to earn vindication and regain acceptance.
Tiger Woods' speech seems very simplistic on the surface; he moves through his defense strategies seamlessly mostly going back and forth among the strategies. He starts with mortification, then moves to a corrective action, and then evades responsibility, back to mortification, back to reducing offensiveness. This is all within the first third of the speech. Below we will look at each of Benoit’s five main IRT strategies as the relate to
Woods’ rhetoric.
Denial
The overwhelming tone of Woods’ apologia is made up of Corrective Action and
Mortification. Since denial is on the opposite end of the spectrum there are only two illustrations of rhetorical evidence of this strategy. The first is when Woods admits he has a sexual addiction.
It’s hard to admit that I need help, but I do. For 45 days
from the end of December to early February, I was in
inpatient therapy receiving guidance for the issues I’m
facing. I have a long way to go. But I’ve taken my first
steps in the right direction (Lines 63-66).
33 Going to therapy can be seen as a corrective action, although he is also shifting the blame to his addiction.
Secondly, earlier (lines 43-49) Woods acknowledged that he thought he was above the rules of society and, ". . . deserved to enjoy all the temptations around me. I felt
I was entitled . . ." He admits that he should not have acted on his temptations, but he shifts the blame. Woods thought he was both sick and above societal rules, which together caused his poor judgment and behavior.
Evading of Responsibility
There is no rhetorical evidence of Woods employing the strategy of Evading
Responsibility, as Benoit describes this strategy, during his public apology. In his speech,
Woods did not indicate that he was provoked, that it was an accident, or that he had good intentions.
Reducing Offensiveness of Event
There are three main examples of Tiger Woods trying to employ the strategy of
Reducing the Offensiveness of the Event throughout his apologia. The first is when
Woods' foundation was brought in. He states:
To everyone involved in my foundation, including my
staff, board of directors, sponsors, and most importantly,
the young students we reach, our work is more important
than ever. Thirteen years ago, my dad and I envisioned
helping young people achieve their dreams through
education. This work remains unchanged and will continue
to grow. From the Learning Center students in Southern
34 California to the Earl Woods scholars in Washington, D.C.,
millions of kids have changed their lives, and I am
dedicated to making sure that continues (Lines 22-29).
Here Woods attempts to bolster his reputation by promoting his foundation. By doing so, he is trying to remind the audience that he is a part of something much bigger and greater than his personal problems.
The second example is when Woods diverts attention away from his wrongdoing to illustrate how protective he is of his wife:
I have a lot to atone for, but there is one issue I really want
to discuss. Some people have speculated that Elin somehow
hurt or attacked me on Thanksgiving night. It angers me
that people would fabricate a story like that. Elin never hit
me that night or any other night. There has never been an
episode of domestic violence in our marriage, ever. Elin
has shown enormous grace and poise throughout this
ordeal. Elin deserves praise, not blame (Lines 34-39).
The complexity lies in the fact that he shifts the focus from his admittance of wrongdoing to rumors of poor behavior by his wife. Even though he states that she didn't do anything wrong, this shifts the audience into focusing on Elin. By doing so, Woods tries to minimize the offensiveness of the event by portraying himself as a respectful, protective husband. This is also meant to help provoke the audience's perception of Woods into becoming more positive.
35 The third example of Woods’ attempt to reduce the offensiveness of his behavior is by criticizing the media. He always tried very hard to make sure his two children and wife stayed out of the lime light when his career was at its highest point. He said that he wanted his private life to remain private. In his speech, Woods criticizes the media for attacking his family instead of him.
I have always tried to maintain a private space for my wife
and children. They have been kept separate from my
sponsors, my commercial endorsements. When my children
were born, we only released photographs so that the
paparazzi could not chase them. However, my behavior
doesn’t make it right for the media to follow my two and a
half year old daughter to school and report the school’s
location. They staked out my wife and they pursued my
mom. Whatever my wrongdoings, for the sake of my
family, please leave my wife and kids alone (Lines 78-85).
Woods wants to divert negative attention to the media while showing remorse for what he has done to his children and his wife. Woods states "However, my behavior doesn’t make it right for the media to follow my two and a half year old daughter to school and report the school’s location" (Lines 81-83). In these excerpts Woods attacks the media, insinuating that they lied and stalked his family. Here Woods is trying to reduce the offensiveness of the event by attaching some blame to the media.
36 Corrective Action
Throughout the speech, Tiger Woods continuously shows his plan for corrective actions. He begins on lines 11-15 when he states:
Elin and I have started the process of discussing the
damage caused by my behavior. As Elin pointed out to me,
my real apology to her will not come in the form of words;
it will come from my behavior over time. We have a lot to
discuss; however, what we say to each other will remain
between the two of us (Lines 11-15).
The communication between Woods and Elin is the start of his corrective action to change the views and paths of his wrongdoing. He continues with mortification and his course for corrective action by saying:
I was wrong. I was foolish. I don’t get to play by different
rules. The same boundaries that apply to everyone apply to
me. I brought this shame on myself. I hurt my wife, my
kids, my mother, my wife’s family, my friends, my
foundation, and kids all around the world who admired me.
I’ve had a lot of time to think about what I’ve done. My
failures have made me look at myself in a way I never
wanted to before. It’s now up to me to make amends, and
that starts by never repeating the mistakes I’ve made. It’s
up to me to start living a life of integrity (Lines 50-57).
37 Woods is reaffirming that his actions are his own fault. This might be an embellishment of mortification, but in the same breath because he chose mortification as his main defense strategy, he needs to explain what he did and how he plans to fix it.
Woods’ claims he lost his adherence to the Buddhist faith. This functions as another corrective action. He talks about his religion and his failure to continue its practice:
I have a lot of work to do, and I intend to dedicate myself
to doing it. Part of following this path for me is Buddhism,
which my mother taught me at a young age. People
probably don’t realize it, but I was raised a Buddhist, and I
actively practiced my faith from childhood until I drifted
away from it in recent years. Buddhism teaches that a
craving for things outside ourselves causes an unhappy and
pointless search for security. It teaches me to stop
following every impulse and to learn restraint. Obviously I
lost track of what I was taught (Lines 90-97).
Woods suggests he would like to get back on track, regain his faith, and make amends for what he has done to hurt his family, colleagues, and fans.
This leads directly into lines 98-110. Here Woods opens up about how he has been in therapy and will go back to Accenture (his treatment center) to continue to work on finding his “balance and be centered so I can save the things that are most important to me, my marriage and my children” (Lines 105-106). Woods also points out that he needs
38 the help and support of his peers. This gives the audience a clear idea of what Woods is learning and working on as he progresses through the rehabilitation process.
When examining Woods' speech further, one paragraph stands out. It reads:
I don’t rule out that it [golf] will be this year. When I do
return, I need to make my behavior more respectful of the
game. In recent weeks I have received many thousands of
emails, letters and phone calls from people expressing good
wishes. To everyone who has reached out to me and my
family, thank you. Your encouragement means the world to
Elin and me (Lines 111-115).
This suggests that he has been humbled by this experience and realizes that the audience is what drives his fame and fortune. If they did not enjoy his golf game and aid in his fame and fortune, he would not be above everyone.
Mortification
Woods' strategy of Mortification can be seen throughout his Apologia attempt.
This starts at the very beginning of his speech: "Now every one of you has good reason to be critical of me. I want to say to each of you, simply and directly, I am deeply sorry for my irresponsible and selfish behavior I engaged in." (Lines 4-6). Woods openly admits that what he has done is wrong. Throughout his public address, Woods tries to connect with the audience on an emotional level. Once he admits he is wrong, and did have relationships with women other than his wife, he attempts to explain himself.
Lines 30-32 continue when he says “But still, I know I have bitterly disappointed all of you. I have made you question who I am and how I could have done the things I
39 did. I am embarrassed that I have put you in this position.” Woods tries to connect with his entire audience and show that he is remorseful about what he has done.
Woods' mortification continues when he openly admits that he cheated on his wife and hurt his family. "The issue involved here was my repeated irresponsible behavior. I was unfaithful. I had affairs. I cheated. What I did is not acceptable, and I am the only person to blame." (Lines 40-42).
Woods continues this thought a few paragraphs later when he says:
I was wrong. I was foolish. I don’t get to play by different
rules. The same boundaries that apply to everyone apply to
me. I brought this shame on myself. I hurt my wife, my
kids, my mother, my wife’s family, my friends, my
foundation, and kids all around the world who admired me.
(Lines 50-53).
He is once again trying to connect with the audience and make them feel that he is talking to them directly by turning the secondary audience into the primary audience. Woods is reaching out to every person he affected, or may have affected to make sure they understand he is remorseful.
Revisiting lines 63-66, when Woods admits that he was in therapy for addiction, this can be seen as a scapegoat for his actions. This is mortification because he is insinuating that his addiction was to blame, and that he has killed off that behavior.
Conclusion
Woods has served as a role model for kids all across the globe who strive to be better athletes. Perhaps, Woods thanking his fans for the support and best wishes, is him
40 thanking them for continuing to believe in him (lines 119-121), because, in reality they want to believe in Tiger Woods, and more specifically his brand.
Tiger Woods is more than just a golfer, or a public figure. He himself is a brand, the brand of Tiger. When Woods apologized to his fans and followers, he also had to apologize on behalf of his self-made brand. Woods needed to understand that the situation he put himself in was bigger than just affecting him; it affected everyone he associated with, including his foundation, family, and colleagues.
Based upon Woods’ speech, how does the audience view Woods and his scandal?
Tiger Woods was a great golfer before Thanksgiving of 2009, before the first public knowledge of his affairs. As a person he cheated on his wife, openly admitted to his affairs, and he gave an apology statement on behalf of the subject. He apologized to his family, friends, colleagues, fans, children, and to the world. Nevertheless he still was in the wrong. Woods can go back to playing golf, and even achieve the same level of success on the golf course, but he will struggle to gain this former fandom in part because of his ineffective speech.
Table 2 is a chart illustrating the strategies used in Tiger Woods’ apology speech.
41 Table 2: Strategies Employed in Tiger Woods’ Apology Speech
Strategy Subcategory Tiger Woods’ Strategies Denial Simple Denial Shifting the blame Addiction was to blame Evading of Responsibility Provocation Defeasibility Accident Good Intentions Reducing Offensiveness of Bolstering Promoted his foundation Event Minimization Differentiation Transcendence Said the events were a marital issue Attack accuser Insinuated the media lied & stalked Compensation Corrective Action Seeking therapy, regaining faith Mortification Admitted wrongdoing, stopped playing golf temporarily, using his addiction as a scapegoat
Tiger Woods' public address lasted 13 ½ minutes long; the transcript is two and half pages long. There was little emotion in his voice, and he was repetitive in his remarks. The delivery of Woods' speech not only lacked emotion but he also denied any questions or remarks from the audience. This negatively effects the audiences' perception as they relate to Woods' apologia.
Also effecting the audiences' perception was the timing (kairos) of Woods' speech. He made his public remarks in February when the car accident that steamrolled the allegations happened Thanksgiving weekend, late November. The three months absence from a public address negatively effects the audience. If Woods were to address the issues at hand in a more timely fashion, he would have had a greater chance to earning the much needed support from the audience.
42 More importantly to note, Woods' used contradictory strategies (Denial and
Mortification) which may have confused the audience and damaged his credibility. The speech also tried to do too much deflecting of responsibility. Therefore, Tiger Woods’ apologia was not successful. If Woods had focused solely on Mortification and then laid out his entire plan for Corrective Actions, his apologia would have had a better chance at success.
43 CHAPTER FOUR
CASE STUDY 2: KOBE BRYANT
INTRODUCTION
This chapter looks at the rhetoric of Kobe Bryant's public apology delivered in
July, 2003. It examines the strategies used in his speech and evaluates their effectiveness.
Just as in the previous chapter, the analytic framework utilizes the guidelines for Generic
Application articulated by Foss and Foss and William Benoit's IRT to complete the
Generic Application process. First is a discussion of relevant contextual factors.
Context
Kobe Bryant's name has been mentioned with the likes of Michael Jordan, Dr. J, and Kareem Abdul-Jabar when discussing the greats of basketball. However, his image has not always been respected off the court. On Friday July 18, 2003, the National
Basketball Association (NBA) superstar was charged with one count of sexual assault of a 19 year old woman in an Eagle County, Colorado hotel where she worked. At the time the Los Angeles Laker star was 24 years old, married, and the father of a daughter who was born in January of 2003.
The alleged victim was a former high school cheerleader who friends described as
"honest and ambitious, even auditioning for American Idol last year" (Tuchman and
Cabell). She claimed that she was the victim of sexual misconduct by Bryant on June 30 at the Lodge and Spa Hotel where she worked. According to reports, the woman filed a police complaint the following day. The police reports stated "it is alleged that he caused
44 sexual penetration or intrusion, and he caused submission of the victim through actual physical force” (CNN). When this was discussed in the courtroom, Bryant’s trial transcript states "According to the woman, Bryant grabbed her by the neck, bent her over a chair, and raped her while she cried and asked the athlete to stop. Bryant repeatedly warned the woman not to tell anyone about the incident at the luxury hotel where she worked" (Kobe Bryant's hearing transcripts).
On the contrary, during a prolonged conversation with Eagle County Sheriff's investigators in July 2003, Kobe Bryant "first denied having sex with the woman and then claimed their encounter was consensual" (Tuchman and Cabell). If Bryant was convicted he could have served four years to life in prison or 20 years to life on probation. At the time, the charge also carried a fine of up to $750,000.
In order to fully understand the context of why this incident was so prominent, the reader must first understand why Kobe Bryant is considered one of the greatest professional basketball players in the world. The six foot six inch shooting guard was a member of the Los Angeles Lakers team that won three straight NBA championships in the 2000-2002 seasons. In addition, he was named most valuable player in the NBA All-
Star game in the 2002 season. However, Kobe Bryant's professional career started much earlier than most as he turned pro directly out of high school. He was a first-round draft pick by the Charlotte Hornets in 1996 and later that year was traded to the Lakers. Bryant was only seventeen years old at the time of the draft. He was so young that he was not legally allowed to sign his own contract; his parents had to co-sign with him.
Before the sexual assault charge, Bryant was often characterized as a husband and a father who was a good citizen with a squeaky clean image (Cooper, Tuchman, et al
45 2003). He was also described as polite, courteous, gracious, and philanthropic (Grace,
2003). Bryant’s persona was one that exemplified a well-rounded person. He was intelligent, spoke three languages, and had traveled throughout the world. He was the definition of what an All-American athlete should be. “[H]is publicists had always promoted the star as different from other NBA players, someone with a clean lifestyle"
(J. Kennedy). This image was called into question when sexual assault charges were brought against Bryant in the summer of 2003.
Analysis
Foss and Foss' Generic Application has four steps. The first step is to determine the description of the genre. Both conventional aspects of apologia as well as scholarly identifications of typical characteristics of apologia have already been introduced in the
Methodology Chapter.
The second step of Generic Application is to determine the description of the artifacts as a representative of the genre. Kobe Bryant gave a public speech in an effort to apologize and regain his public approval. It is important to remember that this was a live press conference, which means that the emotions portrayed by both Kobe Bryant and his wife Vanessa play an integral role in the audience's perception and connection to what they saw and heard. This clearly illustrates an example of apologia.
The third and fourth steps in conducting generic application include analysis and evaluation of the artifacts in relation to generic expectations.
In contrast to the other case studies, Bryant provided the audience with two apologies, a written statement and a press conference. Both of the platforms used virtually the same message and aside from a few different synonyms used, said the same
46 thing. Therefore since Bryant's wife was present at the press conference it will be used for a majority of the analysis. The goal of this chapter is to decipher if Bryant’s speech was crafted to its optimal potential. Also, did the context in conjunction with the content of his speech aid in the success of his apology, or did it diminish his credibility? Foss' guidelines for Generic Application as well as William Benoit's IRT strategies compose the framework for this analysis.
Bryant's written statement was issued to the press the morning of July 18, 2003. It was short and to the point, all of 16 sentences (Appendix C). The press conference was held the evening of the 18th, originally slated to only be presented by Bryant’s lawyers and agents. However, a surprise took place when Bryant himself and his wife, Vanessa, sat down together. The emotionally charged press conference then took place, during which Bryant cried, looked visibly distressed, and took long breaks to gather his composure. Bryant confessed to having committed adultery with his accuser, but claimed he was innocent of the sexual assault charges brought against him (Appendix B).
Bryant's Apologia Strategies
Kobe Bryant's press conference was full of emotion as he sat next to his wife giving his statement. This is important to remember as the audiences' interpretation plays a key role in determining the acceptance of the apologia.
Kobe Bryant's speech seemed to move smoothly from strategy to strategy. Below we will look at each of Benoit’s five main IRT strategies as they relate to Bryant's rhetoric.
47 Denial
Both of Bryant’s public addresses, written and verbal, started with the same three words: “I am innocent.” This is the simplest form of denial. However, it is not that simple. Bryant pleads innocent to charges of rape. He does openly admit to engaging in sexual relations with his accuser, but states there was mutual consent. Some rhetoricians may say this is a form of mortification, admittance of wrong doing. Yet, I believe this falls into two sub-categories of denial.
The first sub-category of denial that Bryant employed is simple denial. Plainly stated, “I am innocent” directly states his denial of the allegations. As ironic as it sounds, by Bryant claiming there was mutual consent, the second form of denial that is present in his speech shifts the blame because he claims that the act was consensual, thus implying the accuser lied. Yes, Bryant admitted that he cheated on his wife; however, he argues he is innocent of rape.
Evading of Responsibilities
As previously noted, Bryant states: "I didn't force her to do anything against her will" (Line 1). Bryant reminds the audience that he did not rape the young woman.
Therefore, by verbalizing that there was mutual consent, he implies his intentions were in good taste, which is a subcategory of evading of responsibility.
Reducing Offensiveness of Event
In Bryant's written statement he wrote "These false allegations have hurt my family. I will fight against these allegations with all my strength." He verbalized a similar point when he said
48 But I'm innocent. Together, my wife and I and my family
are going to fight these false accusations. We have a lot at
stake, I have a lot at stake, and it has nothing to do with the
game of basketball and nothing to do with endorsements.
Nothing at all. It's about us. It's about our family. I’ve been
falsely accused of something. (Lines 10-13).
Bryant attacks the accuser by saying the allegations are false, trying to reduce the offensiveness of the incident from rape to adultery.
Corrective Action
Bryant's commitment to fight the false allegations is both a corrective strategy
(Lines 10-13), and an attempt to reduce the offensiveness of the event. Bryant shows the public his plan for discrediting the allegations. He continues on line 14 when he states
"I'm innocent. And shoulder to shoulder, we're going to fight this all the way to the end."
Although not directly stated by Bryant during his speech, another corrective action taken was for Bryant to stay out of the media's attention and just focus on basketball. (Buckley et al., 2003). The idea here was to get back to "normal" and allow the media to talk about his athletic performance on the basketball court rather than his pending trial.
Mortification
Bryant's humiliation cannot be questioned because of what the visual cues coupled with the spoken rhetoric depicted for the audience. To have the microphone for over four minutes and only vocalize 16 written lines (transcribed from Bryant's press conference) meant there were a number of long pauses. During these pauses, Bryant
49 clearly appears emotional; tears start to form under his eyes, he develops a soft stutter, which coupled with the squeezing of his wife's hands and negatively shaking his head, suggests that Bryant is remorseful.
It is very clear that Bryant did not want to tarnish his family nor his own personal image. He felt it necessary to display his remorse and admit to the act of adultery. Bryant also did two things in his press conference that were unrelated to the words that he uttered that really bolstered his ethos. First and most noticeable, he had his wife sitting next to him during the press conference. This showcased the love and undying support that his wife still has for him. The second act was that the defense attorney that Bryant chose was a female. According to Grace (2003), this limited Bryant's image as a sexual predator.
With such a high profile professional athlete in the middle of criminal charges, individuals of power within the Los Angeles Lakers organization felt it was necessary to speak up and try to ease the tension that had been created. Lakers' general manager Mitch
Kupchak supported Bryant, saying the allegations were out of character for his team's star athlete, and that Bryant was one of the finest young men the team has known (Cooper et al., 2003). Bryant's wife, Vanessa Bryant, also released a statement: "I know that my husband has made a mistake, the mistake of adultery. He and I will have to deal with that within our marriage, and we will do so. He is not a criminal." These statements lent credibility to Bryant's case by creating a perception that he is able to maintain strong relationships with both his loved ones and his professional colleagues, affirming his good conduct and good nature.
50 Conclusion
Timing is everything. It was critical that throughout the process, Kobe Bryant cooperated with the authorities, furthering his defense strategy that he had nothing to hide and he was a good citizen (Grace, 2003). As soon as the district attorney announced that charges would be filed, Bryant and his wife both issued statements. This was important because the "truth" can be uttered immediately, whereas a false report would take some time to formulate.
The criminal charges against Kobe Bryant were dropped because the alleged victim refused to testify, and a civil suit was settled out of court. Without a conviction, neither side was ever proven. Bryant's wrongdoing no longer seemed exceptionally significant to the public because the charges were dropped.
Through the guidance of his agents and media relations personnel, Bryant remained relatively quite after his press conference, maintaining a low profile. This seemed to be accepted by the media, as after his press conference and until his trial started, media coverage of Bryant focused on his athletic talent (Buckley, Toobin, Choi,
2003). One of Bryant's image repair strategies was to stay out of the headlines on personal issues and allow his talents on the basketball court to dictate the medias' perception of him. He has made a strong comeback from this personal hick-up.
Kobe Bryant created a platform for himself to be heard and understood. Yes, he cheated on his wife, but Bryant argued his innocence related to the sexual assault charge.
Table 3 is a chart illustrating Bryant's use of Benoit’s IRT in his apologia.
51 Table 3: Kobe Bryant’s use of Benoit’s IRT in His Apologia
Strategy Subcategory Kobe Bryant’s Strategies Denial Simple Denial Innocent of sexual assault Shifting the blame There was mutual consent Evading of Responsibility Provocation Defeasibility Accident Good Intentions There was mutual consent Reducing Offensiveness of Bolstering Event Minimization Differentiation Transcendence Attack accuser Wrongly accused, did not rape Compensation Corrective Action Fight false allegations, Stay out of media for personal issues, Let basketball speak for itself Mortification Visual cues during press conference, Guilty of adultery
It is fair to say that Bryant's public image has been restored, and he has made a full recovery from his incident. Nike and Coca-Cola have resumed their endorsement deals (Smith, 2009) with Bryant, and he was the face of a public service announcement for the Make-A-Wish Foundation (Kang, 2005). Besides becoming a positive public figure again, Kobe Bryant's jersey is also one of the highest selling in the NBA (Miller,
2009).
Bryant's delivery of his speech gave his audience a positive indication of the apologia. Not only was it a live press conference, but the speech happened weeks after the allegations surfaced. These are very important aspects for the audience and their perception, helping Bryant create a successful apologia.
Also during the delivery the nonverbal cues spoke very loudly. Although the content of Bryant's speech was simple and repetitive, he was also giving a visual
52 performance which was nationally televised. By doing so, the nonverbal visual cues mentioned above carried weight along with the spoken word. This further solidifies the importance of non-verbal communication during the delivery of the rhetoric. It is safe to argue that apologia rhetoric is better received when the rhetor appears emotionally sincere. Bryant's public relations team was extremely successful in tapping into the audiences' hearts when they prepared him for his press conference.
53 CHAPTER FIVE
CASE STUDY 3: MICHAEL PHELPS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter examines the rhetoric of Michael Phelps' apologia to determine the strategies used in his speech and to assess their effectiveness. Just as in the previous chapters, the analytic framework capitalizes on Foss and Foss' guidelines for Generic
Application as well as William Benoit's IRT.
Context
Michael Phelps has been noted as the “greatest swimmer of all time” (Mark Spitz). In the
2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, China, Phelps solidified this by winning an unprecedented eight gold medals in a single Olympic Games, breaking the then record of seven gold held by Mark Spitz from the 1972 Munich Olympics. However, even the greatest Olympian of all time is not immune to character flaws nor protected from scrutiny.
In February of 2009, Michael Phelps's image was tarnished by a viral photograph of him smoking a water pipe, most commonly used for marijuana, at a University of
South Carolina party. The British Tabloid News of the World posted the photo taken three months earlier. The tabloid did not say that Phelps was smoking marijuana, but it did allude to the fact that the pipe was often used for that purpose. Phelps was visiting the
University after the Beijing Olympics, during which time he was taking an extended
54 break from swimming. This incident cost Phelps millions of dollars in corporate sponsorships, the trust of thousands of fans, and the authenticity of his wholesome image.
To fully understand the magnitude of the controversy this picture caused, we must explore why Michael Phelps is not only considered the best swimmer of all time, but arguably the greatest Olympian of all time. Phelps started swimming at the age of seven to follow in his older sisters' footsteps and to release his excess energy as he was diagnosed as having Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). By the age of 15, he qualified for the 2000 Sydney Summer Olympics, becoming the youngest American male swimmer to participate at the Olympic Games in 68 years. Though he did not win a medal at the games (5th place), he would go on to break the World Record in the 200 meter butterfly five months later, becoming the youngest male ever with a world record in swimming (Mills).
Flash forward four years to the next Olympiad in Athens, Greece; Phelps, now 19, sought the unprecedented eight gold medals, but fell short winning six gold and two bronze medals. The illustrious seven gold medals in one Olympiad eluded him. Yet, in only his second Olympiad, he broke two world records and three Olympic records. He was well on his way to fame and fortune after inking endorsement deals with Kellogg brand and Subway. However, this was also the first time that Phelps was in the spotlight for something other than swimming. Following his return from Greece, Phelps was arrested for a DUI in his home state of Maryland. Since this was his first offense of any kind, he had to pay a fine of $250 dollars, serve 18 months probation, and speak to high school students about drinking and driving.
55 Four years later, at the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, Phelps, now 23 years old, received his chance yet again to chase down Mark Spitz's record and become the
“greatest swimmer of all time,” entering in eight events. On August 17, 2008, Phelps was to swim his last event of the games as a member of the 4 x 100 Meter Medley Relay that captured the gold medal. (He had won all seven of his previous races). This victory solidified Phelps as the greatest Olympian of all time with his record breaking eighth gold medal in a single game. Meredith Kile writes that in an interview with Entertainment
Tonight, Mark Spitz said:
Epic. It goes to show you that not only is this guy the
greatest swimmer of all time and the greatest Olympian of
all time, he's maybe the greatest athlete of all time. He's the
greatest racer who ever walked the planet.
Spitz’s words illustrate the magnitude and distinction of Phelps' eight gold medals.
Perhaps the only two people who thought this could be accomplished were Phelps and his coach Bob Bowman.
Phelps's success garnered him the cover photo on Sports Illustrated on August 25,
2008. This cover placed Phelps on a pedestal. In fact, nothing else on the cover alluded to the issue covering anything other than Phelps. The cover included a photograph of Phelps with his eight gold medals draped around his neck. The bottom banner lists the eight events that he won, with his time and a notation if it was a Word Record (WR) or
Olympic Record (OR).
56 Analysis
In this chapter we are looking at the rhetoric of Michael Phelps' written public apology. The aim of this chapter is to decipher the rhetoric of Phelps' written statement.
Did the context in conjunction with the content of his statement aid in the success of his apology, or did it weaken his audience's perception of him? My Analysis uses Foss' guidelines for Generic Application as well as William Benoit's IRT strategies as a critical framework.
The Generic Application outlined by Foss and Foss has four steps. As mentioned in previous chapters, the first step is to determine the description of the genre. All forms and characteristics of apologia have already been introduced in the Methodology Chapter.
Phelps' goal is to address the audience and state his claim. The audience's views and understandings of the statement are pertinent to the success or failure of the apology.
The second step of Generic Application is to determine the description of the artifact as a representative of the genre. Michael Phelps gave a written apology to his marketing agency to publicize. Phelps' speech was widely disseminated; therefore, his audience grew from not just swimming fans and sports fans, but to sponsors and agents as well.
The third and fourth steps in conducting generic application include analysis and evaluation of the artifacts in relation to generic expectations.
Once the British tabloid published the photograph of Michael Phelps smoking a water pipe, he very quickly validated two things. First, that the picture was in fact him and second that he was smoking marijuana. In a statement released by his marketing agency, Octagon, Phelps said:
57 I engaged in behavior which was regrettable and demonstrated bad
judgment. I’m 23 years old and despite the successes I’ve had in
the pool, I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way, not in a
manner people have come to expect from me. For this, I am sorry.
I promise my fans and the public it will not happen again.
This is a very short apology. Phelps did later make similar remarks when interviewed by various media and news outlets, but since the aforementioned statement was the public apology officially released by Phelps in the timeliest manner once the picture circulated, it is this statement that I analyze.
Phelps' Apologia Strategies
Michael Phelps' statement was extremely short, leaving the audience yearning for more. Also, to reiterate, the written statement was released by Phelps' team to the mass media. Contrary to the other case studies, no press conference was given.
In Phelps' four sentence statement he produced three defense strategies. The first strategy Phelps employs is mortification. Then he utilized reducing the offensiveness of the event while the other is suggesting a corrective action.
Denial and Evading of Responsibilities
Michael Phelps did not employ the strategy of denial in his official statement, nor did he try to evade any responsibilities.
Reducing Offensiveness of Event
Phelps tried to minimize the offensiveness of the event by telling the public he was young, and it was a childish mistake. The context of what he says "I'm 23 years old .
. . I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way" gives the perception that he is still young
58 and innocent. Perhaps his audience will forgive him from his youthful actions. One might think this would also fall under William Benoit's strategy of evading responsibility, but
Phelps is not running away from the issue. He fully admits that he was smoking marijuana illegally; therefore, he tries to portray himself in a harmless and childish role that some might deem as immature.
Corrective Action
The corrective action is taken when he says "I am sorry . . . This will never happen again." Again, this is very straightforward. Phelps put himself in a situation where he did something illegal and says he will not let it happen again. However, that is just the surface of what he says. Looking at the content of his rhetoric, one might become suspicious. He says "I promise my fans and the public this will never happen again." His fans may become weary of Phelps' proclaimed corrective action, since four years prior he said almost verbatim the same thing when he was arrested for a DUI: "I recognize the seriousness of this mistake, I've learned from this mistake and will continue learning from this mistake for the rest of my life" (CBS sports). Although he did not directly apologize for his actions, he alludes to the promise that it would not happen again. Yes, a
DUI and marijuana are two different things, but they both illustrate poor judgment and in the eyes of the fans, it is still a blemish on his record. Since his first implied promise was not kept, the audience may have difficulty believing he is serious about the second, similar promise. Also, Phelps does not suggest any specific course of actions he will take to ensure this doesn't happen again.
59 Mortification
In the first sentence of his written statement, Michael Phelps uses mortification.
He says "I engaged in behavior which was regrettable and demonstrated bad judgment" which is admitting to wrong doing. It seems clear his audience might doubt Phelps' sincerity in this statement for two reasons. First, as previously mentioned, the apology is extremely short (only four sentences). Second, it was a written statement dispersed by his management team rather than a live press conference. This devalues the apology because there is no emotion for the audience to connect to. More importantly, it looks like Phelps is afraid to show his face, which sends the audience the message that he is not sincere with his apology. This not only affected his audience's perception, but it resonated with his sponsors as well.
Throughout his Olympic journey, before February 2009, Phelps had partnered with numerous corporate sponsors. Forbes Magazine says these include companies such as Speedo, Visa Inc., Omega, PowerBar, AT&T, Kellogg Co., Hilton Hotels, Subway and
Rosetta Stone. Combined, Phelps was making $40 - 50 million a year solely on sponsor money (Badenhausen), making him one of the highest paid Olympic athletes in history.
However, once news broke on Phelps smoking marijuana, his sponsors were conflicted.
The New York Times reported that Kellogg Co. was the first sponsor to drop
Phelps. Susanne Norwitz, a spokeswoman for the company said in a statement:
"Michael's most recent behavior is not consistent with the image of Kellogg." USA
Swimming, one of the governing bodies of American swimming, publically reprimanded
Phelps. Not only did they suspend him for three months, they temporarily withdrew their financial support to him. USA Swimming said in a statement: "We decided to send a
60 strong message to Michael because he disappointed so many people, particularly the hundreds of thousands of USA Swimming member kids who look up to him as a role model and hero" (Macur).
Endorsement deals are a large part of keeping Olympic athletes relevant during non-Olympic years. Deutsch is one of the leading advertising agencies in Los Angeles. In an interview with Matt Lauer on Today, their president and Chief Compliance Officer
Eric Hirshberg said:
This kind of thing is harder for his image to sustain than someone
with a bad boy image. If this was Kid Rock this wouldn't be a
problem. Kid Rock wouldn't lose any endorsements over this
photo, Michael Phelps might.
It becomes apparent that Michael Phelps, the Olympic superstar, is expected to be clean cut, wholesome, and appeal to the American youth. Phelps is held to a higher standard. Smoking marijuana tarnished his image as an athlete.
To further Phelps' demise, not only did he lose sponsorship monies, but he also impaired his positive relationship with the youth. In the same interview with Lauer on
Today, The United States Olympic Committee (USOC) expressed its disappointment by releasing the following statement:
Michael is a role model, and he is well aware of the responsibilities
and accountability that comes with setting a positive example for
others, particularly young people. In this instance, regrettably, he
failed to fulfill those responsibilities.
61 Not only did Phelps fail to fulfill his responsibilities this time, but he failed in 2008 after his DUI, an under-aged DUI at that. These lapses of judgment cost Phelps more than he could have imagined.
Conclusion
Phelps' statement was short, he really only delved into three of Benoit's IRT strategies. Table 4 below outlines these strategies.
Table 4: Michael Phelps’ Employment of Benoit’s IRT Strategies in his Apology
Strategy Subcategory Michael Phelps' Strategies Denial Simple Denial Shifting the blame Evading of Responsibility Provocation Defeasibility Accident Good Intentions Reducing Offensiveness of Bolstering Event Minimization I'm only 23, youthful Differentiation Transcendence Attack accuser Compensation Corrective Action I'm sorry, it will never happen again Mortification Admitted to the act.
Phelps remained streamlined in his approach, stating he was sorry for his action and claiming his corrective action is that he wouldn’t do it again. So for the general public,
Michael Phelps apologia may have worked quite well. Swimming is not a mainstream sport. Its popularity is only highlighted every four years during the Olympic Games.
According to Josh Schoch, a sports analyst for the Bleacher Report, swimming was the most watched sport during both the 2008 and 2012 Olympics. It is easy to see why a
62 DUI can be forgotten, when the athletes are only in the media every four years for their athletic ability.
However, the aquatic fan who follows his or her favorite athletes during non-
Olympic years will be reminded that Phelps is, once again, not a the model athlete. For these fans, Phelps' apologia may not be successful because they have heard the same corrective action from him before. Should this have been his first offense, it may have been more effective.
The delivery of Phelps' speech also negatively impacts the audiences perception.
By only being a written statement rather than a public speech, the audience can only go off of the written word meaning there are no nonverbal cues to help aid the audience in their determination of their viewpoint of Phelps. Also the timing of Phelps' release plays a pertinent role in the audiences perception. The picture of Phelps smoking marijuana surfaced in February of 2009 and his statement was also released in February of 2009.
The timeliness of the apology gave Phelps' audience a positive perception.
It becomes clear that prior knowledge plays a factor in determining the success of apologetic rhetoric. The glaring similarities between Phelps' 2004 and 2009 apologies make it nearly impossible for the athletic fans to find Phelps credible.
63 CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSIONS
In this chapter, I discuss the findings from the three apologia case studies examined: Tiger Woods, Kobe Bryant, and Michael Phelps. It draws final conclusions related to the four key research questions, it discusses the limitations of this study and it provides suggestions for future research.
Summary of Findings
The first research question addressed in this thesis is why are some public apologies by professional athletes more effective than others? My study indicates with certainty that the success of an apology is not solely based on one characteristic. Rather it is a culmination of many elements. One of those elements is the effective use of William
Benoit's image repair theory (IRT) strategies.
Benoit's five major rhetorical strategies of image repair rhetoric include denial, evading responsibility, reducing offensiveness, corrective action, and mortification.
Among the three apologies I examined, the more effective ones used simple strategic choices.
Kobe Bryant used a blend of denial, corrective action, and mortification. Michael
Phelps used three main IRT strategies as well, corrective action, reducing the offensiveness of the event and mortification. However, Tiger Woods used all of Benoit's categories except denial. This suggests that the more streamlined and focused the use of strategies the better. When the apology is focused the audience can better follow the
64 direction of the public apology and not be confused about the athlete’s intentions. This also suggests that if an athlete were to use all five major strategies, it might create confusion for the audience. For example, it is difficult to use both denial and mortification effectively in the same apology (but in the case of Bryant, not impossible), as doing so tends to be contradictory.
Another element in determining effectiveness is the audiences' perceptions. This leads into the second research question: what are the athletes’ goals in their apologia discourses and are they met? For all three athletes, the goal of their discourse was to persuade the audience to forgive them for their actions. The ideal effect would be for these athletes to present their public apologies and then have the audiences perceive them as they had prior to their respective incidences. For case study number one, Tiger Woods, the speech did not help him regain his former image. The audience certainly did not forget the domestic dispute between Woods and his wife of the time, Elin Nordegren.
When Woods was interviewed by Charlie Rose on November 21, 2016, he was asked what his biggest regret was. Woods' response was "The only regret I have in life is not spending another year at Stanford, I wish I would've had one more year." Rose pried again asking "That's the only regret? Of all the things that happened to you?" Woods responded that he had made a lot of mistakes in his life, but that not going back to
Stanford was his only regret (Rose). Rose’s line of questions suggest that the earlier incident is still associated with Woods’ image. This sentiment hit mainstream news such as CNN and Fox, reaffirming the audiences’ poor impression of Woods.
In case study number two, Kobe Bryant, the objective was met. Bryant, with his wife Vanessa by his side, convinced the audience that his act of adultery was a lesser
65 crime than the accusation of rape. The audience was also aided in its evaluation of Bryant because Vanessa forgave Bryant, which seemingly made it ok for the audience to forgive him as well. In July of 2015 Fox news reported that "Kobe Bryant and his wife Vanessa have remained strong despite sexual encounters and a rape accusation in 2003" (B.
Johnson).
Case study number three, Michael Phelps, on one hand met his goal, yet on the other hand fell short of creating a public persona of youthful and harmless traits. As explained in Chapter 5, for the average sports fan, Phelps may have done all he needed to do to regain his audiences' approval. However, for the avid swimming fan, Phelps offered the same corrective action that he had promised four years prior (he wouldn’t do it again).
His failure to keep his word certainly may have damaged his credibility with swimming fans.
The third research question reads: What rhetorical strategies do they use? Tiger
Woods employed the most image repair strategies. In Chapter 2, Table 2 shows that
Woods used evading of responsibility, reducing offensiveness of event, correct action, and mortification. Table 3 in Chapter 4 depicts what major strategies Kobe Bryant used during his rhetorical discourse. These include denial, evading of responsibility, corrective action, and mortification. The third case study analyzed Michael Phelps’ apologia. Table
4 in Chapter 5 shows that he used corrective action, reducing offensiveness of the event, and mortification as his main defense strategies. Table 5 gives a visual summary of strategies used in each of the three case studies in one chart.
66 Table 5: Summary of Apology Techniques Employed by Aforementioned Athletes
Strategy Subcategory Tiger Woods' Kobe Bryant’s Michael Phelps' Strategies Strategies Strategies Denial Simple Denial Innocent of sexual assault Shifting the Addiction was to There was blame blame mutual consent Evading of Provocation Responsibility Defeasibility Accident Good There was Intentions mutual consent Reducing Bolstering Promoted his Offensiveness foundation of Event Minimization I'm Only 23, youthful Differentiation Transcendence Said the events were a marital issue Attack accuser Insinuated the Wrongly accused, media lied & did not rape stalked Compensation Corrective Seeking therapy, Fight false I'm sorry, it will Action regaining faith allegations, never happen again Stay out of media for personal issues, Let basketball speak for itself Mortification Admitted Visual cues Admitted to the act wrongdoing, during press stopped playing conference, golf temporarily Guilty of adultery
Question number four asks: How do rhetorical strategies used by athletes vary in different situations? Each situation will shape the response. Kobe Bryant was wrongfully accused of rape. Therefore, his most significant rhetorical defense strategy was denial, which proved effective. Even though Tiger Woods' incident also involved the theme of
67 sexual misconduct, he was not accused of rape, but of adultery. Woods responded by saying “Elin and I have started the process of discussing the damage caused by my behavior” (Woods, line 11), referring to corrective actions. He also employed mortification as he apologized for his wrongdoing. The key component in Woods’ rhetoric is different than Bryant’s based on the accusations the athletes were addressing.
The defense strategy that all three case studies had in common was corrective action. Interestingly enough, only one athlete stated that they would like their athletic record to speak for itself. Kobe Bryant was told to keep a low profile and let his basketball skills speak for themselves, hoping the media would focus on his talents rather than his court cases (Buckley, Toobin, Choi, 2003). However, both Woods and Phelps took extended breaks from their sports (Phelps was suspended), which only heightened the public’s awareness of their off-field troubles. Because Bryant continued to play well, he was successful.
The final question asked in this thesis reads: Are rhetorical strategies influenced by the athletes' corporate brands? In the first two chapters I talked about how major sports stars have created their own brands. Sponsorships aside, all three of the athletes studied had created a fandom known world-wide by just their first (Kobe, Tiger) or last name (Phelps). To take it a step further, each of these athletes has partnerships with one or more of their sponsors to have their own name brand. Kobe Bryant also has a shoe and clothing line with Nike, and Tiger Woods has his own line with Nike. Michael Phelps partnered with Aquaphor to create his own line called MP.
These sports figures have become so large that they have not only created their own brand, but these brands are partnered with high profile corporations, placing these
68 individual athletes on a level parallel to the corporations they partnered with. When the athletes created their apologies, they knew they had to cater to the audience and to corporate sponsors in an attempt to prevent the negative impact on their brand. This study found that athletes with corporate brands used the same apologia and image repair strategies as other rhetors, but audience considerations included the potential economic fallout related to their brands.
In addition to addressing the four research questions, my analysis of the three athletes' rhetoric illuminated the importance of the communication medium chosen to address the public as well as the timing of the public apologia. These are two elements that Benoit does not sufficiently account for in his image repair theory.
Both Woods and Bryant used a live television broadcast for their public apology platform. This was not successful for Woods, as his nonverbal communication showed a lack of emotion, which may have affected the audiences’ perception of Woods negatively. In contrast, Bryant’s nonverbal communication was emotional and seemingly sincere. This coupled with the visual support from his wife enhanced his credibility.
Michael Phelps, however, merely released a written statement, not allowing the audience to consider nonverbal elements. This could be interpreted as a cowardly approach (not showing his face) which can damage the rhetor’s credibility. The written statement denied the audience the opportunity to engage with Phelps “face to face.”
Of at least equal importance is the timing or kairos of the public response. An immediate response (Bryant and Phelps) suggests the rhetor is decisive and in control.
This gives the speaker the ability to stop media and audience speculations and may provide an immediate counter narrative if needed. Giving a delayed response (Woods)
69 may be interpreted as evidence of the rhetor’s confusion, shame, lack of control, and lack of concern for the fans and audience.
Limitations and Further Research
The research and analysis presented does not come without its limitations.
However, these limits also create avenues for future research. First, all three of the athletes studied were male. The analysis of a woman's apologia might reveal gendered consideration in apologia rhetoric. Moreover, there are far more male athletes who have made public apologies for non-sport related issues than their female counterparts. Further research could reveal if strategies differ in relationship to gender.
Second, the research and analysis conducted for this thesis was done years after the scandals took place. Even though the analysis focused on the rhetoric of the public apology given, hindsight could result in a biased critical evaluation. Over time, athletic success may improve the public perception. Time allowed some of the athletes discussed to rebuild their athletic careers. Kobe Bryant went on to win four NBA Championships with the Los Angeles Lakers after his February 2003 scandal. Phelps too saw athletic success after his marijuana photo circulated in 2009. He went on to win another six medals, four gold and two silver, at the 2012 London Olympic Games. However, years later Tiger Woods is still associated with his domestic troubles. Further research examining the rhetoric of professional athletes' apologias immediately following their public apology might render different results.
This study increased our knowledge of sports apologia and expands the groundwork laid by Benoit and so many others working on genre analysis, apologia, and image repair theory. My research indicates that the public apology of off-field scandals
70 by professional athletes needs to have a clear and concise framework for their defense strategies. In addition, it uncovered at least two weaknesses in Benoit’s image repair theory: the need to address the audience in a timely manner and use a medium that allows the audience to see and hear their nonverbal cues. These three suggestions will provide the rhetor the optimal chance for a successful public apology.
71 APPENDICES
Appendix A: Transcript of Tiger Woods’ Apology ...... 72
Appendix B: Transcript of Kobe Bryant's Press Conference July 18, 2003 ...... 75
Appendix C: Kobe Bryant’s Written Statement ...... 76
Appendix D: Michael Phelps – Apology Distributed by Octagon ...... 77
72 Appendix A
Transcript of Tiger Woods' Apology
1 TIGER WOODS: Good morning, and thank you for joining me. Many of you 2 in this room are my friends. Many of you in this room know me. Many of 3 you have cheered for me or you’ve worked with me or you’ve supported me. 4 Now every one of you has good reason to be critical of me. I want to 5 say to each of you, simply and directly, I am deeply sorry for my irresponsible 6 and selfish behavior I engaged in. 7 I know people want to find out how I could be so selfish and so 8 foolish. People want to know how I could have done these things to my wife 9 Elin and to my children. And while I have always tried to be a private person, 10 there are some things I want to say. 11 Elin and I have started the process of discussing the damage caused by 12 my behavior. As Elin pointed out to me, my real apology to her will not come 13 in the form of words; it will come from my behavior over time. We have a lot 14 to discuss; however, what we say to each other will remain between the two of 15 us. 16 I am also aware of the pain my behavior has caused to those of you in 17 this room. I have let you down, and I have let down my fans. For many of 18 you, especially my friends, my behavior has been a personal disappointment. 19 To those of you who work for me, I have let you down personally and 20 professionally. My behavior has caused considerable worry to my business 21 partners. 22 To everyone involved in my foundation, including my staff, board of 23 directors, sponsors, and most importantly, the young students we reach, our 24 work is more important than ever. Thirteen years ago, my dad and I 25 envisioned helping young people achieve their dreams through education. 26 This work remains unchanged and will continue to grow. From the Learning 27 Center students in Southern California to the Earl Woods scholars in 28 Washington, D.C., millions of kids have changed their lives, and I am 29 dedicated to making sure that continues. 30 But still, I know I have bitterly disappointed all of you. I have made 31 you question who I am and how I could have done the things I did. I am 32 embarrassed that I have put you in this position. 33 For all that I have done, I am so sorry. 34 I have a lot to atone for, but there is one issue I really want to discuss. 35 Some people have speculated that Elin somehow hurt or attacked me on 36 Thanksgiving night. It angers me that people would fabricate a story like that. 37 Elin never hit me that night or any other night. There has never been an 38 episode of domestic violence in our marriage, ever. Elin has shown enormous 39 grace and poise throughout this ordeal. Elin deserves praise, not blame. 40 The issue involved here was my repeated irresponsible behavior. I 41 was unfaithful. I had affairs. I cheated. What I did is not acceptable, and I am 42 the only person to blame. 43 I stopped living by the core values that I was taught to believe in. I 44 knew my actions were wrong, but I convinced myself that normal rules didn’t 45 apply. I never thought about who I was hurting. Instead, I thought only about 46 myself. I ran straight through the boundaries that a married couple should live 47 by. I thought I could get away with whatever I wanted to. I felt that I had worked hard my entire life and deserved to enjoy all the temptations around 48 me. I felt I was entitled. Thanks to money and fame, I didn’t have to go far to 49 find them. 50 I was wrong. I was foolish. I don’t get to play by different rules. The
73 51 same boundaries that apply to everyone apply to me. I brought this shame on 52 myself. I hurt my wife, my kids, my mother, my wife’s family, my friends, 53 my foundation, and kids all around the world who admired me. 54 I’ve had a lot of time to think about what I’ve done. My failures have 55 made me look at myself in a way I never wanted to before. It’s now up to me 56 to make amends, and that starts by never repeating the mistakes I’ve made. 57 It’s up to me to start living a life of integrity. 58 I once heard, and I believe it’s true, it’s not what you achieve in life 59 that matters; it’s what you overcome. Achievements on the golf course are 60 only part of setting an example. Character and decency are what really count. 61 Parents used to point to me as a role model for their kids. I owe all 62 those families a special apology. I want to say to them that I am truly sorry. 63 It’s hard to admit that I need help, but I do. For 45 days from the end 64 of December to early February, I was in inpatient therapy receiving guidance 65 for the issues I’m facing. I have a long way to go. But I’ve taken my first 66 steps in the right direction. 67 As I proceed, I understand people have questions. I understand the 68 press wants to ask me for the details and the times I was unfaithful. I 69 understand people want to know whether Elin and I will remain together. 70 Please know that as far as I’m concerned, every one of these questions and 71 answers is a matter between Elin and me. These are issues between a husband 72 and a wife. 73 Some people have made up things that never happened. They said I 74 used performance enhancing drugs. This is completely and utterly false. Some 75 have written things about my family. Despite the damage I have done, I still 76 believe it is right to shield my family from the public spotlight. They did not 77 do these things; I did. 78 I have always tried to maintain a private space for my wife and 79 children. They have been kept separate from my sponsors, my commercial 80 endorsements. When my children were born, we only released photographs so 81 that the paparazzi could not chase them. However, my behavior doesn’t make 82 it right for the media to follow my two and a half year old daughter to school 83 and report the school’s location. They staked out my wife and they pursued 84 my mom. Whatever my wrongdoings, for the sake of my family, please leave 85 my wife and kids alone. 86 I recognize I have brought this on myself, and I know above all I am 87 the one who needs to change. I owe it to my family to become a better person. 88 I owe it to those closest to me to become a better man. That’s where my focus 89 will be. 90 I have a lot of work to do, and I intend to dedicate myself to doing it. 91 Part of following this path for me is Buddhism, which my mother taught me at 92 a young age. People probably don’t realize it, but I was raised a Buddhist, and 93 I actively practiced my faith from childhood until I drifted away from it in 94 recent years. Buddhism teaches that a craving for things outside ourselves 95 causes an unhappy and pointless search for security. It teaches me to stop 96 following every impulse and to learn restraint. Obviously I lost track of what I 97 was taught. 98 As I move forward, I will continue to receive help because I’ve 99 learned that’s how people really do change. Starting tomorrow, I will leave for 100 more treatment and more therapy. I would like to thank my friends at 101 Accenture and the players in the field this week for understanding why I’m 102 making these remarks today. 103 In therapy I’ve learned the importance of looking at my spiritual life 104 and keeping in balance with my professional life. I need to regain my balance 105 and be centered so I can save the things that are most important to me, my 106 marriage and my children. 74 107 That also means relying on others for help. I’ve learned to seek 108 support from my peers in therapy, and I hope someday to return that support 109 to others who are seeking help. I do plan to return to golf one day, I just don’t 110 know when that day will be. 111 I don’t rule out that it will be this year. When I do return, I need to 112 make my behavior more respectful of the game. In recent weeks I have 113 received many thousands of emails, letters and phone calls from people 114 expressing good wishes. To everyone who has reached out to me and my 115 family, thank you.Your encouragement means the world to Elin and me. 116 I want to thank the PGA TOUR, Commissioner Finchem, and the 117 players for their patience and understanding while I work on my private life. I 118 look forward to seeing my fellow players on the course. 119 Finally, there are many people in this room, and there are many 120 people at home who believed in me. Today I want to ask for your help. I ask 121 you to find room in your heart to one day believe in me again. 122 Thank you.
75 Appendix B
Transcript of Kobe Bryant's Press Conference July 18, 2003
I'm innocent. I didn't force her to do anything against her will. I'm innocent. I sit here in front of you guys furious at myself, disgusted at myself for making a mistake of adultery. I love my wife with all my heart. She's my backbone. (looking at his wife) You're a blessing. You're a piece of my heart, and you are the strongest person I know. I'm so sorry I put you through this and having put our family through this.
I'm a human being. I'm a man, just like everybody else. I mourn. I cry, just like everybody else. I sit here before you embarrassed and ashamed for committing adultery. I go through this feeling, 'If I could just turn back the hands of time.' I love my wife so much, she's so special to me.
But I'm innocent. Together, my wife and I and my family are going to fight these false accusations. We have a lot at stake, I have a lot at stake, and it has nothing to do with the game of basketball and nothing to do with endorsements. Nothing at all. It's about us. It's about our family. I’ve been falsely accused of something.
I'm innocent. And shoulder to shoulder, we're going to fight this all the way to the end.
I appreciate everyone out there for your support. We are going to need your support and prayers now more than ever.
Thank you.
76 Appendix C
Kobe Bryant's Written Statement
I am innocent of the charges filed today. I did not assault the woman who is accusing me.
I made the mistake of adultery. I have to answer to my wife and my God for my actions that night and I pray that both will forgive me.
Nothing that happened June 30th was against the will of the woman who now falsely accuses me.
These false allegations have hurt my family. I will fight against these allegations with all my strength. My wife is the strongest person I know. She is willing to stand by me despite my mistake. That means everything to me.
I have so much to live for. And by that I do not mean the contracts, or the money, or the fame. I mean my family. I will fight for them.
I appreciate all those who have supported me. Thank you for believing in me. My family and I are going to need your support and prayers now more than ever.
77 Appendix D
Michael Phelps - Apology Distributed by Octagon
I engaged in behavior which was regrettable and demonstrated bad judgment. I’m 23 years old and despite the successes I’ve had in the pool, I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way, not in a manner people have come to expect from me. For this, I am sorry. I promise my fans and the public it will not happen again.
78 REFERENCES
Aristotle, and Lane Cooper. The Rhetoric of Aristotle: an Expanded Translation with Supplementary Examples for Students of Composition and Public Speaking. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1960. Print.
Armstrong, Richard N., James R. Hallmark, and L. K. Williamson. "Televangelism as Institutional Apologia: The Religious Talk Show as Strategized Text." Televangelism as Institutional Apologia: The Religious Talk Show as Strategized Text 4.2 (2005): 67-83. : Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 8 May 2010.
Axtell, Roger E. Do's and Taboos of Public Speaking: How to Get Those Butterflies Flying in Formation. New York: Wiley, 1992. Print.
Badenhausen, Kurt. "Michael Phelps Locks up Olympic Immortality And Post-Career Millions." Forbes. Forbs Magazine, 03 Aug. 2012. Web. 30 Dec. 2016.
Benoit, William L. Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies: a Theory of Image Restoration Strategies. Albany: State University of New York, 1995. Print.
Benoit, W.L.(1995). Image repair discourse and crisis communication. Public Relations Review, Summer 1997 v23 n2 p177(10)
Benoit, W. L. (1997). “Hugh Grant’s image restoration discourse: An actor apologizes.” Communication Quarterly.45.3 (1997), 251-267.
Benoit, William. "In Defense of Generic Rhetorical Criticism: John H. Patton's 'Generic Criticism: typology at an Inflated Price." Rhetorical Society Quarterly 10 (1980): 128-34
Benoit, W.L. (2000). “Another Visit to the Theory of Image Restoration Strategies.” Communication Quarterly. 48, 40-43.
Benoit, W. L. & Drew, S. "Appropriateness and effectiveness of image repair strategies." Communication Reports, (1997). 152-163.
79 Benoit, W. L. & Hanczor, R. S. “The Tonya Harding controversy: An analysis of image restoration strategies.” Communication Quarterly 42.4 (1994), 416-433.
Benoit, William L. Lindsey, James J., "Argument Strategies: Antidote to Tylenol's Poisoned Image," Journal of the American Forensic Association 23 (1987), 136- 146.
Blaney, J. R. & Benoit, W. L. (1997). The persuasive defense of Jesus in the gospel according to John. Journal of Communication and Religion, 20, 25-30.
Blaney, J., Benoit, W., & Brazeal, L. M. (2002). "Blowout! Firestone’s image restoration campaign." Public Relations Review, 28, 379–392.
Brazeal, LeAnn M. "The image repair strategies of Terrell Owens." Public Relations Review. 34 (2008) 145–150
Brinson, S. L., & Benoit, W. L. (1996). Dow Corning’s image repair strategies in the breast implant crisis. Communication Quarterly, 44(1), 29–41.
Brown, G. "Jerry Falwell and the PTL: The Rhetoric of Apologia." Journal of Communication and Religion 14 (1991): 9-18. Google Scholar. Web. 8 May 2010.
Brown, Robert S. Foreword. Eds. Robert S. Brown and Daniel O’Rourke. Case Studies in Sport Communication. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2003. 4-6
Burke, K. (1968). Dramatism. In D.L. Sills (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (vol. 7, pp. 445-452). New York, NY: Macmillan and Free Press.
Buckley, F., Toobin, J., & Choi, S. (2003, July 18). Friend of alleged Kobe Bryant victim speaks out. Live From the Headlines [Television Broadcast]. CNN.
Burns J., Bruner M. (2000). Revisiting the theory of image restoration strategies. Communication Quarterly, 48, 27–39.
Campbell, K.K., & Jamieson, K.H. (Eds.). (1978). Form and Genre: Shaping Rhetorical Action. Falls Church, VA: The Speech Communication Association.
Cooper, A., Tuchman, G., Buckley, F., & Hinojosa, M. (2003, July 18). Kobe Bryant admits to adultery, maintains it was consensual. Live From the Headlines [Television Broadcast]. CNN. Corbett, Edward P. J. "Forward." Oratorical Encounters: Selected Studies and Sources of Twentieth-Century Political Accusations and Apologies. By Halfors R. Ryan. Wertport: Greenwood, 1988. Ix-Xi. Google Books. Web. 8 May 2010.
80 Downey, Sharon D. "The Evolution of the Rhetorical Genre of Apologia." Western Journal of Communication Winter 57.1 (1993): 42-64. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 10 May 2010.
Fisher, Walter. "A Motive View of Communication." Quarterly Journal of Speech April 70 56.2 (1970): 131-39. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 9 May 2010.
Foss, S.K. (2009). Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice. (Fourth ed.) Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Foss, Sonja K., Karen A. Foss and Robert Trapp. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. 3rd ed. Prospect Heights: Waveland, 2002.
Gold, Ellen R. "Political Apologia: The Ritual of Self-Defence." Communication Monographs Nov 45.4 (1978): 306-17. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 9 May 2010.
Grace, N. (2003, July 18). Kobe Bryant charged. CNN Larry King Live [Television Broadcast]. CNN.
Gronbeck, Bruce E. "Character, Celebrity, and Sexual Innuendo in the Mass-Mediated Presidency." Media Scandals: Morality and Desire in the Popular Culture Marketplace.ed. James Lull, and Stephen Hinerman, New York: Columbia UP, 1997. 122-42. Print.
Harrell, Jackson, and Wil A. Linkugel. "On Rhetorical Genre: An Organizing Perspective." Philosophy & Rhetoric Fall, 1978 11.4 (1978): 262-81. Jstor. Web. 8 May 2010.
Hearit, K. M. (1994). Apologies and public relations crises at Chrysler, Toshiba, and Volvo. Public Relations Review, 20, 113–125.
Hearit, K. M. (2006). Crisis management by apology: Corporate response to allegations of wrongdoing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
"How Should Tiger Woods Apologize?" Interview by Chris Connelly, James Carvelle, Chritsine Brennen, and George Stephanopoulos. ABC News. 19 Feb. 2010. Web. 11 May 2010.
Jerome, A.M. (2008). "Toward prescription: Testing the rhetoric of atonement’s applicability in the athletic arena." Public Relations Review, 34, 124-134.
81 Johnson, Blanche. "Celebrity Spouses Who Stand by Cheaters." Fox News. FOX News Network, 22 July 2015. Web. 22 Mar. 2017.
Johnson, Nancy. "Christian Bale’s Account of a Profane Tirade: Salvation or "Bale- out?"" Relevant Rhetoric 2 (2011). Print.
Kallendorf, Craig, and Kallendorf, Carol. "The Figures of Speech, Ethos, and Aristotle: Notes Toward a Rhetoric of Business Communication." Journal of Business Communication Winter 85 22.1 (1985): 35-50. Google Scholar. Web. 8 May 2010.
Kelley, Brent. "Tiger Woods Biography." Golf.com. Web. 20 Apr. 2010.
Kennedy, George A. "Latin Rhetoric in the Silver Age." In A New History of Classical Rhetoric. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 1994, pp. 128-158
Kennedy, Jennifer. "Image Reparation Strategies in Sports: Media Analysis of Kobe Bryant and Barry Bonds." The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, Winter 2010. Web.
Kile, Meredith B. "Farewell to Michael Phelps, The Greatest Olympic Swimmer of All Time." Entertainment Tonight. ETOnline, 13 Aug. 2016. Web. 30 Dec. 2016
Klayman, Ben. "Tiger Woods Popularity Slumps after Sex Scandal." Thomson Reuters [New York] 15 Dec. 2009. Print.
Kruse, Noreen Wales. “Apologia in Team Sport.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 67 (1981): 270-283.
Lauer, Matt. "Michael Phelps Smoking Marijuana Apologizes." Today.com. Today, 2 Feb. 2009. Web 18 Nov 2016
Lazare, A. (2004). On apology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Macur, Juliet. "Phelps Disciplined Over Marijuana Pipe Incident." The New York Times. The New Your Times, 05 Feb. 2009. Web. 30 Dec 2016.
Maiorescu, Roxana. "Benoit, W.L. (1995). Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies: A Theory of Image restoration Strategies. Albany: State University of New York." Blog post. Crisis Communication.28 June 2010. Web 9 Aug. 2015.
82
Meyrowitz, Joshua. "Displaying the Body Politic." Rhetorics of Display. By Lawrence J. Prelli. Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina, 2006. 374-97. Print. "Michael Phelps Biography: Swimming, Athlete (1985–)". Biography.com (FYI / A&E Networks). Retrieved November 18, 2015.
Mills, Doug. ""The Baltimore Bullet": Michael Phelps and His Impact on American Swimming." Michael Phelps: American Long-Form. New York Times, Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
Osborne, John Walter. Talking Your Way to the Top. San Marcos, CA: Avant, 1990. Print.
PR Newswire. "TNS Presenting New Influence-Based Consumer Tracking Model at ARF; Tiger Woods' Case Study Illustrates Effectiveness of New Model." PR Newswire 3 Mar. 2010. Lexus Nexus Academic. Web. 8 May 2010.
Robers, Glen F. Image Restoration Theory: An Empirical Study of Corporate Apology Tactics Employed by the U.S. Air Force Academy. University of South Florida Scholar Commons, 10 Apr. 2006. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.
Rose, Charlie. "Tiger Woods." Charlie Rose., 20 Oct. 2016. Web. 22 Mar. 2017. Rosenfield, Lawrence W. "A Case Study in Speech Criticism: The Nixon-Truman Analog."" Monographs Nov 35.4 (1968): 435-51. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 9 May 2010. Ryan, Halford. "Kategoria and Apologia: On Their Rhetorical Criticism as a Speech Set." Quarterly Journal of Speech Aug82 68.3 (1982): 254-62. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 9 May 2010. Schoch, Josh. "2012 Olymics: Power Ranking Top 10 Sports at Summer Games." Bleacher Report. Bleacher Report, 23 July 2012. Web 18 Nov. 2016. Smudde, Peter M., and Jeffery L. Courtright. "Time to Get a Job: Helping Image Repair Theory Begin a Career in Industry." Public Relations Journal 2.1 (2008). Print. Strege, John. "Tiger Woods Signs a New Nike Contract". Golf Digest. July 17, 2013. Web. September 13, 2017. 83 Summers, J. & Johnson Morgan, M. (2008). "More Than Just The Media: Considering the Role of Public Relations in the Creation of Sporting Celebrity and the Management of Fan Expectations." Public Relations Review, 34, 176-182. Sullivan, Dale L. "The Ethos of Epideictic Encounter." Philosophy & Rhetoric 26.2 (1993): 113-33. Jstor. Web. 8 May 2010. Sullivan, Dale L. "The Ethos of Epideictic Encounter." Philosophy & Rhetoric 26.2 (1993): 113-33. Jstor. Web. 8 May 2010. Tiger Woods' Apology Full Text. YouTube. CNN, 19 Feb. 2010. Web. 14 Mar. 2010. Tiger Woods at Press Conference. Digital image. Tiger Woods. Tiger Woods, 19 Feb. 2010. Web. 24 Mar. 2010. Tuchman, Gary, and Brian Cabell. "Kobe Bryant Charged with Sexual Assault." CNN. Cable News Network, 19 July 2003. Web. 03 Oct 2016. Ware, B. L., and Wil A. Linkugal. "They Spoke in Defense of Themselves: On the Generic Criticism of Apologia." Quarterly Journal of Speech 59 (1973): 273- 83. Google Scholar. Web. 9 May 2010. Wilson, Gerald R. "A Strategy of Explanation: Richard M. Nixon's August 8, 1974, Resignation Address." Communication Quarterly Summer 24.3 (1976): 14- 20.Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 9 May 2010. 84