Last week, the eyes of the media and the public were focused on the resolution of the saga surrounding Lance Armstrong, a former national hero, athlete, and philanthropist who chose to appear on the iconic Oprah Winfrey show as the first step in redeeming his image.
To that ‘high priestess’ of the star world, Armstrong admitted that he had been using doping since the mid-nineties and that these prohibited substances helped him achieve seven consecutive titles at the Tour de France, thus becoming the most successful cyclist of all time. Parts of that penitential interview held last Thursday were covered by all relevant global media, ‘tranching’ his statements and trying to answer the question of whether there is any chance that Lance Armstrong will ever restore his completely destroyed brand. And indeed, can the public forgive a man who has so disappointed them after years of celebrating his heroism?
The Fallen Myth If we are to judge by the headlines published in Forbes, The Guardian, or Marketing Week, media and marketing experts are divided in their opinions. Some argue that Lance was much more than an athlete or, as the ancient Greeks would say, a divine man, and that is why both the disappointment and his fall are greater, a fall into the abyss. Others wonder: if the public has forgiven many, such as Martha Stewart or, more recently, Tiger Woods, why not him? However, when it comes to the latter, it is hard not to notice that there are indeed differences between them that could tip the scales towards the final demise of the brand.
Namely, for years, a whole entourage of marketers has gathered around Lance, who have tied themselves to his brand or, more accurately, brands (individual, athlete) with million-dollar contracts. Lance was seen as a superman, a person of exceptional athletic abilities who, like Tiger Woods, projected a humble, warm image of a family man. This realization that someone as ordinary as Lance could achieve such successes served as inspiration or, even better, motivation for other mortals. It was the foundation of the Lance Armstrong brand, and given that it has been shown that he had been using testosterone, erythropoietin, cortisone, growth hormones, and other wonders for years, the whole tale of perseverance and will as a key factor in achieving life successes has fallen apart.
Armstrong and Livestrong In this sense, Tiger Woods had an advantage. Indeed, one could argue about the gravity of his lies (companies were ‘buying’ his image as an athlete and family man, while he preferred busty starlets over his marital bed), but he was still an athlete, continuing to rack up successes on the golf course. Lance had nothing left because he lost every right to ever engage in professional sports again. Now, the value of the Lance Armstrong brand multiplied at the end of the nineties, after he was diagnosed with testicular cancer. His fans kept their fingers crossed, offered him comfort and support, and after his recovery, he triumphed in how the public began to perceive him: not only as the most successful cyclist of all time but also as someone who had defeated a deadly disease. He spoke publicly about it, instilling hope in all those who had encountered such a tragedy in any way. To prove that he cared, he founded the Livestrong foundation, which functioned as an extension of his heroic brand. According to some data, Livestrong raised an incredible $470 million thanks to sponsors for raising awareness and researching malignant diseases in men. Clearly, Armstrong did not fake the illness, but the public now wonders whether he deceived with the collected funds and whether he actually exploited global sympathy for the sick to amass wealth.
