Golf Digest is a Conde Nast publication, and a Conde Nast spokesman would not comment to the Post on whether Woods will continue to be paid while articles with his byline are withheld, and nobody at Conde Nast or the magazine has commented on how long it expects to keep the Woods-bylined articles out of the magazine.
The Post's media columnist reports:
Golf Digest has an exclusive long-term contract with Woods valued at $3 million per year. ...The complex contract bars Tiger from doing cover shoots or interviews with other sporting or men's magazines. Golf Digest also pays for the glossy programs at his charity golf tournament, flies him first-class to some events, and makes contributions in his name to his foundation and other charities.
The Post's Keith J. Kelly suggests that the suspension might have something to do with the January GD cover, which bad timing rendered something of an embarrassment. That cover touted the article "10 Tips Obama Can Take from Tiger," and hit newsstands and mailboxes just as the Tiger Woods scandals were really starting to blow up.
It seems more likely to me, however, that the suspension might have something to do the part of Woods' contract that the Post said "bars Tiger from doing cover shoots or interviews with other sporting or men's magazines."
Recall that a couple years ago Woods did a photo shoot and interview with Men's Fitness magazine. That spread has been the subject of some recent attention after the Post earlier reported - and the Wall Street Journal just recently confirmed - that Woods' interview with Men's Fitness was part of a deal brokered to keep the National Enquirer from reporting on Woods' affairs two years ago.
According to the WSJ, the National Enquirer had photos of Tiger and another woman in a car in a church parking lot in Florida, and was ready to run the photos and an article on Woods' cheating in mid-2007. So why didn't the Enquirer run that story?
Because a deal was brokered. The Enquirer and Men's Fitness are owned by the same media company. Woods agreed to the Aug. 2007 Men's Fitness spread in exchange for the Enquirer killing its Tiger-cheating story.
And the WSJ reported that Golf Digest officials were not happy upon learning about Woods' Men's Fitness spread. Keeping in mind that Golf Digest did not know at the time why Woods agreed to the spread:
Golf Digest editor Jerry Tarde acknowledged that he was "mystified" that Mr. Woods had agreed to this. ... Never had Golf Digest been granted the level of access to the golfer's private life allowed for in the article and photo shoot published in Men's Fitness in August 2007.
Now Golf Digest does know why Woods agreed to that Men's Fitness spread - as part of deal to squelch a National Enquirer story in 2007.
And Golf Digest has now suspended Woods' articles, since the truth - about Woods and about the Men's Fitness spread - has emerged.
(It should also be noted that the WSJ and Post reports disagree over the terms of Woods' Conde Nast contract - whether Woods was contractually prohibited from appearing in rival publications. The Post says yes, the WSJ indicates no.)
Comments