Everyone likes being known and recognized by the public. This aspect is more magnified among sportsmen who work tirelessly to make sure that they have a good name in the eyes of the public. However, things do not always go their way, and they are at times forced to do with bad publicity or no publicity at all. The essay below addresses this issue in greater detail.
According to Welstead (2012), many sports personalities and other sports entities are really concerned about their reputation. They take so many precautions to make sure that in the event of negative publicity there are the proper procedures of handling the issue. This is mainly because the negative publicity can be the last nail in the entities’ business or career. However, since it is not obvious that positive publicity will always be forthcoming; the entities have to make do with either no publicity or with negative publicity. Below is a discussion of three different sports entities and the kinds of reputations they would rather have.
Sugarland Skeeters is a team in the Atlantic League games (Scoggins, 2012). Looking at the nature of the game and the complexities involved, it would be better if the team had to make do with no publicity rather than a negative publicity. It is well known that teams in the lower league always strive to go to the higher levels. As such, if the team has bad publicity, it is highly unlikely that it would have sponsors who would propel it to the higher grounds. Furthermore, there would be no fans for the team, which would make their lives even more desperate. On the other hand, it would be easier to deal with no publicity. All the team would need to do is to advertise itself and produce good result in games. This would be picked up by the press and within no time its publicity would be growing by the day. Therefore, it would be better for the team to have no publicity than bad publicity, since the former is easier to deal with than the former.
For sports personalities, publicity is a must if anything good has to come their way. They have to have fans on their sides and have the different teams wanting to contract them. As such, it is better for some sports personalities to have bad publicity than have no publicity at all. Take, for instance, the case of Roger Clemens (Scoggins, 2012). The 30-years old retired sports personality had a lot going against him. He had accusations of drug use and a ruined life. He spent a lot of money in courts trying to clear his name of the accusations. As a last option, he decided to perform a publicity stunt by turning up for an independent Atlantic League game. Well, after the game, and with his many years of experience, there were scouts from other teams who were eager to have his signature appended in their books for a contract (Scoggins, 2012).
Well, looking at the above case scenario, it can be seen how bad publicity can work for a sportsman. Having no publicity means that there is nobody who is interested in the sports personality. As such, he is noticed by neither the public nor the big clubs, which is not good for his career. However, in case of bad publicity, the personnel can work hard to clear his name. During the entire process, it is definite that a lot of people, including scouts for big clubs, the fans and the media would be following the proceedings. Once the name is cleared, the fortunes turn in favor of the personnel. This is a tricky position, but given the choice between bad publicity and no publicity, this is the way to go and hope for the best.
Bad publicity is a nightmare for the companies producing sports goods. This is mainly because the negative publicity ruins the company’s name and can lead to massive losses once the people ditch the company’s product. Nike is a company known for producing sports wear such as shoes and other sports accessories (Cendrowski, 2012). The company’s brand is popular throughout the world. However, this did not come to them on a silver platter. Rather, the company had to work hard to attain this position. Bad publicity would imply that the company ruins the confidence that it has created in the clients for decades. In the long run, business would be ruined and nothing would work in favor of the company. Furthermore, rebuilding the publicity would not be an easy thing. This is the reason as to why the company has to work extra hard to maintain its reputation. As Scoggins (2012) observes, it can take ten years to build a reputation and only ten minutes to ruin it. Nike would not want to be in such a position.
On the other hard, having no publicity could be better for the company. This is mainly because it would continue selling its products to the sports personnel. Since the products are unique and of high quality, the publicity would start growing bit by bit till it reaches the full blossom. Given the options between no publicity and bad publicity, the company would definitely opt for the former. This is mainly because publicity is at the core of the business. In a nutshell, it can be said that positive publicity is the best option for sports clubs, sportsmen and companies producing the sports products. However, during the rainy days, these entities have to gamble between bad publicity and no publicity. The choice can make or break the sports entity, hence caution is needed.
Cendrowski, S. (2012). How the Legendary Brand Blew Up Its Single Slogan Approach and Drafted a New Playbook for the Digital Era. Retrieved on 4th Sept. 2012 from http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/13/nike-digital-marketing/
Scoggins, C. (2012). Publicity Stunt or Not, Some Scouts had Eyes on Clemens. Retrieved on 4th Sept. 2012 from http://www.lowellsun.com/sports/ci_21455627/publicity-stunt-or-not-some-scouts-had-eyes
Welstead, S. (2012). Handling Bad Publicity. Retrieved on 4th Sept. 2012 from http://www.growingbusiness.co.uk/handling-bad-publicity.html