Friday, July 18, 2014

The "Emperors" new prose.

The timing of this weeks discussion about athlete media use couldn't have been planned any better. On Friday July 11th Lebron "King" James announced through an essay co-authored by Lee Jenkins that he was returning to the Cleveland Cavaliers. In the article he states "I’m doing this essay because I want an opportunity to explain myself uninterrupted." Way to take control of the message Lebron! Lebron's announcement shows a seemingly matured, media savvy approach to his brand. A bright contrast to "The Decision" of four years earlier, which came off as arrogant and contrived. After his announcement to "take his talents to Miami" in 2010 Cleveland fans were burning his jersey in the streets and Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert shot off a vitriolic letter criticizing James and calling him a traitor. Fast forward to 2014 and the announcement of the return of the King caused grown men to shed tears and the break out of spontaneous celebrations.

What was the difference? Aside from Cleveland's dearth of championships since the beginning of the Superbowl era I believe that the message James sent was framed properly and was what Cleveland area residents wanted to hear. That the best player in a sport had chosen to come to Cleveland because he wanted to. Framing was crucial in this case. Reporters may have told the story correctly but then attempted to place the decision to return within their idea of the appropriate context which may not have agreed with Lebron's motives. For example one might say that the only reason he chose to come back to Northeast Ohio was to make as much money as possible. While that may or may not be true, its not the way any athlete wants to be perceived (it's never about the money, right?). By addressing the fans directly in a close approximation of his own voice, James owned the message and delivered it well. Kill the fatted calf, the prodigal son has returned!      

No comments:

Post a Comment