Poll: Is Accenture Right to Drop Tiger Woods?

I don't always understand why our culture celebrates athletes so much. If you're Nike, sure, it makes sense to keep him. He's still a good golfer, even if he's a sleazebag. Why the other companies insisted on paying him for endorsements in the first place, I'll never know, but absolutely they should drop him if they only reason they had him in the first place was for the halo effect.

Perhaps Accenture and the others could look into having an artist, writer, humanitarian or activist receive their endorsement dollars?

Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com/ ) and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak ( http://tinyurl.com/9pg62e ). She is BlogHer's assignment and syndication editor.

I didn't participate in the poll only because I think that this decision depends on the individual company's image. Accenture was a previous client of mine and I knew immediately that they would severe ties; they are a serious company that prides themselves on intelligence and action. TW has displayed almost none of the former but plenty of the latter ... the wrong kind, of course.

On the same hand, I kind of respect Nike for their statement because they are staying true to their brand - athletic performance ONLY. Accenture liked the idea of Tiger, being #1 and all that. However, Nike is about sports and excelling at your game, period. Tiger is still the guy for that job.

Of course, when he finally picks up his clubs again, we'll see if his performance remains worthy of that Nike swoosh.

~ClizBiz

BlogHer Contributing Editor, Animal Concerns, Proprietor, ClizBiz ( http://www.clizbiz.blogspot.com/ )