The Michael Schumacher Career/Injury/Recovery Thread

I understand that some feel they are entitled to information. I am not one of them.

 

Not if you ski.....

It's actually tragically common, checking the annual deaths.

Among experts maybe, the ratio goes down, among newbs, they die every year.
If you hit hard enough to compromise the helmet, the odds are terrible......

 

I actually suspect he is slowly healing.

It can take some time but the brain automatically starts rerouting the cognitive functions.

Or, I don't know $*^%%^.

 

I dont feel entitled but I do think its ridiculous that the family has not posted squat about
Michael,NOTHING! The lack of info to me means he is not healing at all but just existing.
He is probably in a pretty bad state and Corinna and Co. do not want information leaked out on how the mighty viral Schumacher has now been reduced to a lifeless husk waiting to die as they use their endless resources to keep the freak show alive....
Say what you want about entitlement but millions of fans including me put their hard -earned money up to watch our hero and support his rise to greatness...
Are we owed anything, not really, but SOME status would be nice and it DOESNT have to be gory details either..

 

Let me ask you an extreme example, and see what you think. Suppose our Secretary of Defense--not an elected position, mind you, but rather an appointed position. Suppose our Secretary of Defense, had an acute case of severe paranoia, to the point of being schizophrenic. And this debilitates him enough at times that he makes highly emotional and irrational decisions. And, only his wife and chief of staff know this.

Given that this man can order the killing of people, do you have a right to know his condition?

Let's talk about Senna. There was some hypothesis that Senna was "killed" because the steering column in his car was tampered with. That hypothesis was even sensationalized into several conspiracy theories--that the Russian mob had him killed; that his team boss had him killed because Senna was becoming too powerful; that his rivals had him killed.

Now suppose that those investigating the incident had taken the exact same posture: nobody is entitled to know the results of the investigation. What do you say about this?

Let's take it a step in a more realistic direction. McLaren has claimed that they broke 7:00 on the N'Ring. But they won't publish a time. Do you think you are entitled to doubt McLaren's claim because they won't give a time? (I absolutely believe I am entitled to doubt that claim.)

As a member of the public, I am fully entitled to the information of a public figure. However, the family is equally entitled to keep things private. No question that this is their prerogative. However, I am fully entitled to criticize them for it.


+++++

I think you guys are unfamiliar with the concept of a public figure--as a legal matter. I know it is different in other countries, but in the US, my position is consistent with our law.

 

You are equating the private life of a pro athlete to a federal official responsible for the safety of a country and another pro athlete injured during the course of an actual sport of public interest.

Here's what HIPAA states:

"Patient health information should not be disseminated unless an interest of higher priority exists."

Tell me what is the higher priority of releasing information on a pro athlete who seriously injured his head skiing, as dozens do every year in the US alone, other than to satisfy your curiosity as a fan? Note also that they already gave quite a bit of information voluntarily (as most famous people/families do), but now choose not to provide medical updates on his situation. In the case of Senna, the higher priority is clear - to protect other drivers from potential harm in a sport of public interest - F1. In the case of the Secretary, he/she could put millions in harms way domestically and abroad.

..and here's more on the law:

Publication of Private Facts | Digital Media Law Project

"The courts agree that most facts about public officials and celebrities are of legitimate public concern, but they also recognize that even famous public figures retain a zone of privacy relating to things like sexual activity and medical information."

...actual case law is referenced on that page. So I don't see how you are entitled, even in the US, on a legal basis.

 

Once a celebrity turns his/her name into a brand he/she becomes a public figure. Whether that is MS/Kim Kardashian or Donald Trump

 

What does that irrelevant example have to do with a retired race car driver? What is your compelling personal interest in a private citizen's neurological condition?

Who has suggested otherwise?

No it isn't.

The legal concept of a "public figure" has nothing to do with citizens' entitlement to information about famous people. It has to do with protecting free speech under the First Amendment. You can make wild guesses in public about Schumacher's health without fear of losing a lawsuit brought by the family. That's what it means. It doesn't compel famous people to share anything with you. It doesn't entitle you to anything.

Schumacher's fame is irrelevant. The depth of your curiosity is irrelevant. What it means to support the right to privacy is to acquiesce when somebody says they don't want to tell you about their health.

 

You made your point, and you got the answers you expected.

Now it seems that you are just trolling to get some attention.

 

Thanks for that.

It would seem astonishing to me if, even in the US, the privacy of a public person that has committed no offense, broken no law, had his medical condition becoming public domain without any form of protection.

 

Do not put all the "celebrities" in the same bag.

Some relish public attention to promote themselves or their ambition.

Others just want to be successful in their chosen activity, without being in the limelight.

Even public figures are entitled to their privacy.

It's not because someone sing well, skate well, jump well, or play football well, or drive well, that his private life has to be invaded and exposed.

If the public is too demanding, the public demand should be resisted.

I just watched a programm about ABBA, the pop group.One of the singer, Agneta, said that it was public intrusion and the paparazzi that made her leave the band and retire. Even when she stopped singing, the newspapers kept hounding her for years, and she had to seek legal protection against press intrusion. When she obtained for the photographs to leave her alone, the newspapers started inventing stories on her, claiming "the public has the right to know". She had to sue them for libel, spend time and money to stop the media inventing stuff on her. She became a recluse because of the that.
Like she said, people should be satisfied to buy your records, your music, and see you in concerts; but no, they want to own your life as well, and behave like if they were your family. That is deeply alarming.

The fact that you think a celebrity becomes a brand" (gawd, I hate that expression is deeply disturbing; these are people with feelings and emotions, not just commodities.

 

Branding is one of the most important elements of achieving celebrity. Entire books and conferences are developed on the subject. It's absolutely critical for your name to become a brand if you want to achieve a large fan base. If you go into a career where celebrity goes along with success, then you accept that going in.

 

Bingo.

The MS Collection is a perfect example. As are hotels with the Trump name on it or perfumes with celebs names on them. You are no longer just a celeb but you turned your life into a product. You will get $ but you loose privacy. It is a deal with the devil which in MS' case now handsomely pays for his 24/7 medical staff.

 

So what ?

 

Not that I understand why we are spending so many pages on something I that doesn't make any sense at all: The disregard of 'privacy'.

F1 is a sport and you gotta be there for the sport in the first place. Except lewham no other driver comes to my mind immediately that lives a celebrity life. Massa? Button? Vettel? Rosberg? Kimster? All nope. Schumacher? Certainly not. He showed to be a young talent and people became interested. He became a 2x WDC and people went mad about him. It wasn't him flooding the world with 'celebrity nonsense'.
When I read a book or two a while ago it was people that accompanied him that spoke... not himself. He was known to struggle with media.

I think if you want to maximize the $$ self marketing comes into play but I don't see where in F1 you need to be particularly excessive about it.

Many celebrate Mad Max as the next big one. What has he done for it except stuff he does while wearing his racing boots? Best self marketing done.

If you guys think it helps your life with buying merchandise then that is your way of spending your cash. How that should have any consequences for what the Schumacher family does with their private life, I don't understand.

 

I was only answering William's comment about hating branding. Anyone in the entertainment industry knows it's necessary. I am a complete introvert but part of my success is creating and marketing my public persona. It's a necessary evil of the business I chose. Others don't have to work as hard to create a brand because they are hyper successful at what they do, but that doesn't make their brand worth less.

 

But not everyone wants to be a celebrity and trade privacy for "a large fan base" (whatever that means.

Some people want just to become successful in the field they have chosen, but without exposure to the public. In fact, the most successful people are often shy and retiring and lead a life in complete anonimity.

This "branding" business, goes completely against the Teutonic values I was raised with: humility, self effacement and modesty.

 

But F1 is a sport first, and not a marketing excercise, right

You equate F1 with show business.

 

Absolutely right!

Spot on !

 

By the sound of it, people must be pretty gullible is they buy a product because of its "brand".

I wouldn't buy a David Beckham aftershave, or a Hamilton watch, or a any product endorsed by a sportman, because I know fully well, that they aren't the creators of these goods, and that they only lend their names for promotional purpose.
Most of the time the product is rubbish as well.

If the public likes to be xploited by "brands", so be it; not me!

Your message is that the public at large is rather stupid and buy anything that wear the names of their favourite idols; it's rather distrurbing.

 

+1

I buy **** because I like it, not because person X advertises it. Even if they do use it, they might use it for a different purpose than I.

 

Sports ARE entertainment. A huge multi-billion dollar entertainment industry. Surely you can see that? If it was not entertainment, there would be no ancillary products for athletes. There would be no cereal and tennis shoe commercials.

Sports and the entertainment business are not mutually exclusive. Anyone entering into the entertainment business and having an expectation that no one will ever want to know more about them is a fool. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, and I personally loathe paparazzi, but it is reality, and I prefer to deal with the real.

 

If that is the case, why don't you put your money where your mouth is, take a lawyer and sue the Schumacher family for retaining information about the state of health of Michael, to which you are fully entitled?

That should be easy for you, you said that you have the "right" to know.
I suppose you mean the legal right, which you claim anyone who bought MS memorabilia in the past acquired at the time of purchase. Maybe you think that buying a MS T-shirt, a hat or a cup meant entering into a contract that gave you the right to know everything about the man for the rest of his life? That's what you implied, and others too.

Let's see if you can manage in court to force the medical corps to release their latest bulletin, or coerce Mrs Schumacher to divulge details of his recovery. That should be an interesting case to follow. I am sitting at the edge of my chair waiting for the result. Not a bit.

Do you see now, how empty your reasonable claim is?

 

I know enough drivers who entered motorsport as a sport and have spurned all the offers to do commercials or endorse products by lending their names, precisely not to be dragged into that environment. Most of them just want to race and not become a marketing toy.

I know a few who can come back home incognito on an economy flight, land in London-Heathrow airport with not one paparazzi in sight to harass them, this the day after winning an important international race. That, to me is CLASS !!

 

And I have top notch security at my home because people have literally shown up at my door asking me to come in and chat with me, or asking me to read their novel. Yet, aside from this forum, you've never heard of me. You don't know what celebrity issues those racers have dealt with, but I assure you that if they have a fan base, there have been inappropriate attempts by fans to get at them. There are crazy people in every niche of society.