oprah winfrey misinformed?
Forgive me Oprah. You are the goddess of daytime tv and someone I respect very much but I think you’ve missed the point on something.
On November 21st, Oprah Winfrey aired her annual Favorite Things episode. It was a very good show (I’ll take one of those cool new black iPods please!), but I got a little miffed at one of her choices – not so much because of the fact it was on the list as for the reason it got on the list.
Oprah describes the Nike Free iD as “Meant to be worn barefoot in order to increase performance by training your foot muscles”.
Oprah got part of that right. Nike is promoting the Free as a foot strengthening tool. The Nike Free is touted as a flexible, minimalist shoe that allows the wearer to approximate how they’d run in bare feet, while at the same time protecting him or her from nature’s elements. My assessment of the shoe is that it will lead to some strengthening of the foot – but so will many other minimalist shoes – shoes that do not falsely claim to be barefoot running’s superior brother. And it’s clear to the barefoot running community that running in the Free will not equal the strengthening effect one would get from going barefoot.
Where I think Oprah is misinformed is that Nike is not peddling this shoe in the sense of wearing it without socks (although you certainly can wear them without socks). According to Nike, the Free is a shoe which mocks (my word – not Nike’s) and even improves the act of running without shoes.
Why has Nike made a product with these kinds of claims? My opinion is that it’s because there is a growing barefoot movement in North America. A movement that’s getting people to question the wisdom of wearing running shoes. A movement that suggests the multi-billion dollar running shoe industry may not always have our best interests in mind. Some research has been done on the subject (more is needed) and, due to the visibility of barefoot runners such as Ken Bob Saxton and Rick Roeber, barefoot running is starting to get noticed.
So Nike, with it’s massive marketing muscle is trying to get ahead of this growing awareness and is putting its might toward convincing the world that running in their new shoes is like running barefoot – only better.
Nice try Nike but I don’t buy it – and I won’t buy this shoe. The Free may be more flexible than your other products, but it is certainly not like, or better than barefoot running so please stop implying that. I looked at your website, read the explanations and found problems with your sales pitch.
Specifically, there is a video clip of a barefoot runner running in the grass, landing largely ahead of his body on his heels. On another part of the site, there is a photo of someone running in the Free and landing on his/her heel.
Whatever part of the foot you think a runner should land on is a-ok with me. However, anyone who has done any running in their bare feet knows you cannot do it by landing on your heels. If you do, it will hurt and if you do it for any considerable length of time, you will get hurt.
I can only assume Nike’s grass running video was of someone who was used to running in shoes and landing on their heels and I wonder why they didn’t show a barefoot runner on a more solid surface. If clips like that had been done, I’m sure Nike’s runner would have quickly learned to run on his mid/forefoot.
Let’s look at the shoe itself to see how it relates to the type of heel landing shown on Nike’s website. Look at this picture:
Look at the size of the heel on that puppy! To be fair to Nike, I think this picture is of an older version of the Free but even the newest versions have a pretty big heel on them. Why? Because the Free does not approximate barefoot running – it does what most other shoes do – it provides a structure that allows the wearer to heel-strike, thereby removing the feedback the wearer needs to adjust their running form to that of a mid/forefoot lander.
That alone is enough to convince me the Nike Free has very little in common with barefoot running.
So, is there anything good about the Nike Free? Yeah but not in relation to barefoot running. The Free will lead to some foot strengthening but, as I said above, not to the extent barefoot running will. Nike’s big win with the Free is that it broke ground with the customizability of the shoe. You can logon to their website and (as Oprah pointed out) customize the color of the uppers, mid-sole and bottoms of the shoes. That, and the fact they have a pretty slick looking overall appearance make them really fashionable. They’d make great hangin’ out/fashion-statement shoes. IMHO, that is how they should have marketed this shoe.
It certainly shouldn’t be promoted as an improvement over barefoot running!
So that’s my beef with you Oprah. What would I do if I were you? I’d do what you do best – I’d do a show about barefoot running! I’d invite Ken Bob Saxton, Rick Roeber and Barefoot Ted to demonstrate and speak with passion. I’d interview some researchers, and I’d talk to some medical experts who do not have a stake in selling shoes or orthodics.
That’s what I’d do.
Technorati Tag: oprah
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by 
Comment by Lamar Cole
Comment by dj
Wednesday November 23, 2005 @
Yeah, what you said…
The thing that killed my interest in the shoe? $80/pair. I can try something that is like running in bare feet, ie taking off my socks and shoes, for exactly $0.