By Beaker
I’ve been away. Like you care. But I felt I should check in for my reader (Hi, mom. The voices haven’t stopped I’m afraid) and offer a couple of thoughts about Roger Clemens and Jay Mariotti.
First, Clemens. Guy is a mean, egotistical asshole from what I’ve read and observed over the years. He sounds a lot like Barry Bonds. What guys – and the people who personally know them – don’t quite grasp is what they do in private essentially doesn’t exist when it comes to public perception since we’re not privy to it. Once they step out of their private cubby holes they become public domain and what they say and do before our eyes is “reality.”
Therefore when they act incredulously, or in the case of Clemens lie under oath, that’s the image they’re portrayng to the public. It’s not smart PR to say the least.
People sense that and when it comes to pleading before fans and casual observers alike, they shouldn’t expect any sympathy or even understanding. What comes around goes around.
Now, it should be noted, in my humble opinion (whatever the going rate for that is these days), Congress should never have stuck its collective noses into the whole steroid problem in baseball. The whole point was to get ball players to admit using drugs. They didn’t get that – at least in Bonds, Clemens and Mark McGwire’s case – instead they pinched Clemens on purgury or lying to Congress. It’s a pointless exercise and waste of time and money.
It says here on my compooooter there are far more pressing matters in America.
The case of Jay Mariotti is different in that he didn’t lie to Congress or take drugs, rather he allegedly smacked around his girlfriend. Nonetheless, it’s still a case of a negative persona clashing with public perception. Mariotti, though, coulda been a great Congressman given he’s made a career being a finger wagging “do as I say not as I do” cantankerous moralizer. Sounds a lot like a crusading politician with a penchant for censorship to me. He should start cracking and knock on some doors. November is right around the corner.
Seriously. Should we really care?
This is the sad fact of our poorly ventilated fish bowl lives these days. At the click of a button everyone and anybody and anything under the sun, stars and moon, not just the rich and famous, can end up on Vimo or Youtube.
Why do we consume gossip so much? People take glee (for whatever reasons including jealousy) in watching perceived jerks get clipped. That’s a fact. Who knows what’s the psychology of this? However, people who have built up a respected reputation too have been torn down by our infinite graving for gossip. It can take a lifetime building credibility and goodwill and but a single moment to destroy it and all the goodwill to go with it. At that point, you may as well be a leper seeking Jesus.
A guy can be great in public and be a master of slithering around working the room and do the same thing as Clemens and Mariotti yet people will be far more willing to listen despite committing the same indiscretions or felonies. He “seems” so nice. Don’t under estimate the power of “coming off nice.” My wife who holds two masters and possesses a natural intelligence and powerful intellect still comes with a “I can’t believe that “Hollyood couple” are divorcing! They seemed perfect!”
We crave. There’s something about celebrity (of which I include athletes) voyeurism people get off on. It’s like an aphrodisiac. And the media – thought you were going to get away with it, eh? – are all too willing to satisfy our appetite. They come with hors d’oeuvres, antipasto, first and second entrees and dolce in one full swoop. I’ve always asked myself why certain writers are employed to begin with. Some of their stuff is so puerile and frighteningly generic it makes me wonder what the heck is going on in the minds of sports editors.
I realize one can be a great writer and be a jerkoff, but when a person is universally reviled he’d (or she) better offer insights that surpasses anything out there. You have to really get a guy like me to say, “Yeah, I’d punch him but holy shit he makes a great point and writes like he’s possessed by Dante’s soul.”
Does Mariotti fit that mould to be have been employed by big companies? What makes him so special to be on ATH being the character he is? Or is it exactly because of his polarizing personality he gets so many gigs?
In any event, these days, Mariotti is just another voice on the internet. True, not many get to be on PTI or ATH but that’s only important if you think the opinion-express begins and ends there. Don’t get me going on the access thing. And the blog versus mainstream journalism debate. That’s for another time.
Mariotti and Clemens are just two examples of two unlikeable guys who didn’t comprehend the reality that when you’re a celebrity the request for privacy is a suggestion if not loose request. You can’t on one end feed a naricissistic impulse to further a career that makes you fabulously rich and expect to be left alone at McDonald’s. It’s just unrealistic.
Now they must live with the whimsical wrath of fickle individuals.
