NYT: How, and why, ABC spent $30 million on "The Path to 9/11"

[DeepModem Mom]

A Show That Trumpeted History but Led to Confusion
By EDWARD WYATT
Published: September 18, 2006

It’s little wonder that ABC’s mini-series “The Path to 9/11” drew stinging criticism earlier this month for its invented scenes, fabricated dialogue and unsubstantiated accounts of how the Clinton and Bush administrations conducted themselves in the years encompassing the World Trade Center attacks of 1993 and 2001.

A more puzzling question is why ABC spent $30 million on what, since it lacked commercials, amounted to a five-hour public service announcement.

While the two-night docudrama was shown without a sponsor, ABC did not always intend it to be so. As recently as July, ABC was discussing the possibility of running the program with limited commercials from one or two major sponsors.

The network also saw a potential market in schools. It hired Scholastic Inc., the educational publisher, to create a study guide for high school teachers to go along with the mini-series, a move that implied the network saw a future in DVD sales of the mini-series to schools.

In the end, however, Scholastic scrapped its original study guide and no sponsors stepped up to help ABC defray the cost of the program. While the network did sell foreign rights to the show in a few markets, including Britain, Australia and New Zealand, it was left to shoulder nearly all of the cost by itself.

Once it became clear that it would have to go without sponsors, ABC began to promote the mini-series as a public service. That decision left the network open to a weighty question: Is it truly a public service if it alienates a significant part of the audience?...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/18/business/media/18abc.html

[Erika]

1. We haven't watched ABC since its partisan 9/11 debachle

and won't ever again.

[Rockholm]

22. Same here. Funny thing, I DON'T MISS ABC ONE BIT!

Someone will have tell to me what happens on Lost.

[LynneSin]

35. I've blocked ABC along with the following channels

Any Walt Disney Channel
ABC
ABC Family
ESPN (yep, you heard it - blocked the channels. I can get my sports through Comcast Sport)
Lifetime (50% ownership)

Now, it turns out that ABC has partial owner ship in A&E(37%) and E!(40%). Since they are not more than 50% I'll keep them unblocked


And along with these TV channels - I am also boycotting movies from Disney, Miramax (thankfully the Weinstein Bros ditched that company), Touchstone Pictures and Miramax. I won't buy a ticket or even rent any of these movies; however, if HBO happens to show them for free then I'll watch them.

[momzno1]

43. so have we!

those idiots don't realize just how many people they have lost as viewers.

[LeahMira]

47. A boycott only means...

... something when the network and sponsors know that you're not watching. I hope you wrote to the network and to some of the sponsors of its more popular programs to let them know that you're not watching their ads and, if it's the case, not buying products.

[drone]

50. let them self destruct

maybe they will waste money and energy in never never land and they will eventually fade away. I don't pay any attention to the right wing extremist on tv any way. I surf a little on tv-but the good material is here on the internet Of course they may be broadcasting to outer space. I think that is what is happening.

[samsingh]

37. neither have we.

[femrap]

55. Same here! nt

[Ratty]

57. As someone who doesn't typically boycott networks

I find myself consciously skipping past it when channel surfing. 2 to 4 to 5 -- skip -- onto channel 9, etc. The only thing I'll miss will be Desperate Housewives, but I just can't make myself watch ABC anymore. I should figure out how to block it completely. ABC's determination to provide John Stossel with a duplicitous, intellectually dishonest, outright lying through his teeth platform always pissed me off. The Path to 9/11 was the final straw. Before that I figured Stossel was an anomaly of some kind but after Path it became clear it's more than that. Something's going on there. I wish I knew exactly what. With things like Clear Channel and Fox News we know what's going on, who's behind it and why. ABC and Disney I still can't figure out. Can it have anything to do with media ownership and the FCC? I wish somebody would connect the dots for me.

[notadmblnd]

2. that's their story.. and they're sticking to it.

Stephen McPherson, the president of ABC Entertainment, and Anne Sweeney, the president of the Disney-ABC Television Group.

The next question is, how are these two people connected to the fundie nut group that actually made the movie and the bush administration?

[Erika]

3. It had something to do with a fundie group that

was reported here. Sorry, can't remember the details.

[KamaAina]

81. Post #75 below has just one of many links

this has been well documented at DU.

[calimary]

10. True, the story didn't answer the question at all. What remained

unexplained was the background of Stephen McPherson and Anne Sweeney - did they have any partisan affiliations in their past? Were they members of fundie organizations? What did they know, what connections did they have, if any, to "The Film Institute" or "Youth with a Mission"? They can't say they were naive about the blatant nature of the agenda underlying this telecast.

[EFerrari]

4. Boycott Disney.

Say no to politicizing 9/11.

Say no to propaganda.

Boycott Disney. They gave us a big fat target, folks. Let's go! Boycott Disney this holiday season. You CAN send the message.

[LiberalEsto]

29. Buy their stock

then go to a stockholders meeting and demand answers.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

59. Anybody who owns 401k's and mutual funds needs to check them

that's where most of the stock is owned. If you have a mutual fund that might have it in it - call the investment firm or sell it.

[LiberalEsto]

66. Buying one share of stock

buys you a ticket to the shareholders' meeting. It's a tactic we used years ago in NJ when a giant corporation was demolishing established neighborhoods.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

72. It has dropped about $4/share since PT911 was aired n/t

[Kutjara]

5. I love corporate altruism. There's always another motive.

The only reason ABC jumped on the 'public service announcement' bandwagon is because it allows them to take a big tax writeoff. So, in an indirect way, we all paid to be forcefed this shit.

[EFerrari]

6. Bingo! WE paid for this POS. n/t

[ColonelTom]

40. More directly than you know. It was taxpayer funded.

I'd put good money on the likelihood that taxpayer money (in the form of the NSA/CIA "black ops" budget) funded "The Path to 9/11".

I'd also bet that some second-tier management type at ABC - not the CEO - eventually gets axed in response to this alleged financial debacle, just to make it look semi-legit.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

9. Could someone file a 'whistleblower' suit against Disney, to claim

a share of the tax revenues the government would lose if ABC gets a PT911 deduction?

You know, the same kind of "qui tam" lawsuits RFK is filing against voting machine companies for defrauding election boards. See http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3023 .

[treestar]

32. Maybe that can be fought by some sort of public interest lawsuit

the tax law definition of "public service" whatever it is, surely would raise issues about whether or not this really was one.

[AndyTiedye]

7. I Sent Them a Letter Asking Them WHY, But I Think I Know the Answer

[EFerrari]

8. Nice graphic, Andy!

:)

[mod mom]

30. Don't forget to boycott their products as well.

My daughter is not getting the "Highschool Musical" items she wants for her birthday, nor is she allowed to watch the Disney Channel which is now blocked.

Luckily she has grown up with our strong beliefs and understands the reasoning behind the boycott. If I was a stockholder, I would be pissed.

[johnaries]

11. WE WON!

Obviously, RW pundits were looking to use this to their favor. They didn't care if anyone actually watched it or not. In fact, considering the time slot, they were probably counting on most people NOT watching it and then they could say whatever they wanted to about it, because few people actually saw it. Typical Rovian technique.

We were able to completely discredit it before it ever went on the air. Because we were watchful, diligent, and we followed through. And, the first calls came from right here on DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1992136

If we had not sounded the trumpet, the Blame Clinton for 9/11 meme would have been all over the news on 9/12/06. Limbaugh and other RW pundits were preparing for it. In this case, no news is good news. We stopped their attack dead in it's tracks. And by "we" I mean all of my fellow DU'ers. We sounded the trumpet, we put up the alarm.

We won this battle, but the war is not over....

[lisainmilo]

42. Agreed !

:)....

[EFerrari]

79. That was a great catch on your part, johnaries. Thanks!

:)

[me b zola]

12. Doesn't something have to be true to be a public service announcement?

Public service?! :wtf: :argh:

P2911 was a public dis-service!

[hobbit709]

20. Hell no!

Look at all the lies they spread on the antidrug ones.

[jwirr]

62. Public Service implies Educational which implies Truth. This was

NOT any of those things.

[LuckyLib]

89. You're right. This was full blown propaganda. Follow the money.

[threadkillaz]

13. Building a better tomorrow.

[dbt]

14. It seems very simple to me:

The Amerikan TV Networks really must be the Fourth Branch of Government now: The Propaganda Division. How else do you explain the way they were all over Bill (Lawfully Elected) Clinton for eight years and yet they give bu$hler a season pass?

:argh:
dbt
Remember New Orleans

[NVMojo]

15. We haven't watched it either ...sniff ... no more Grey's Anatomy

for me ...no more Dr McDreamy ...

Stupid ABC feckers.

[lectrobyte]

25. They'd kind of jumped the shark on that anyway what with the bomb

inside the guy etc.

[stanwyck]

86. Guess it's Gill Grissom for me

instead of McDreamy. I think CSI is going up against Grey's Anatomy...so I could TiVo one of the shows. But I'm so angry at ABC for airing outright propaganda and vicious lies that I really don't want to support the network.
A "docudrama" about 9-11? With made up scenes? And Clinton is vilified while 7-minute My Pet Goat slacker Bush is lauded?
Bush's anti-terror task force, headed by Cheney DIDN'T MEET ONE TIME BEFORE 9-11.
Guess the "writer" decided to leave that out.
No. ABC insulted our country.
I won't give them one minute of my time.
Too bad for the good folks who work for them.
I hope they find other work while the ABC shows tank.

[zbdent]

16. I say this is what we should do

Watch ABC's top rated shows ... and mark down their sponsors (commercials).

(If you choose not to do that, then have a friend write them down - a TRUSTED friend).

Then, look up all the e-mail addresses of the products and inform them that, due to ABC's involvement with P2911, and their choice to work with ABC, you will no longer buy their products ...

[The Deacon]

90. Several People On Here Are Already Doing That

To ConAgra because of their snarky reply to me when I suggested they might want to re-think their ad policy.
See my journal "Red Kool Aid" for details & links.

[City Lights]

17. We used parental controls to block them from all of our tvs.

Buh-bye _Disney. Buh-bye _ABC. This article tells me we made the right decision. _ABC can go cheney itself.

[Vinca]

18. ABC is dead to me.

[rhett o rick]

28. Hey that's my line. nm

[Vinca]

70. It's also Thom Hartmann's line. nt

[grytpype]

19. Does anyone have a link to why sponsors wouldn't touch it?

Seems odd to me.

[Totally Committed]

21. That article and the POV expressed in it was WAY too benign...

for my taste and belief system, thank you.

Any honest article would have been far more scathing.

TC

[Jackpine Radical]

38. Of course it's benign.

Whitewash is a benign substance.

[nuxvomica]

23. The Times needs to dig deeper

What do we know about the program? It was created by political activists, disparaged by it's star, was pretty much unwatchable dramatically, and cost the network tons of money and goodwill yet it was still shown. Someone on DU saw a connection between this whole affair and the protection of Disney's lucrative fiefdom in Florida. I think that's probably worth investigating.

[NNN0LHI]

39. The NYT is still too busy "digging" into the Clinton marriage

Screw the NYT.

Don

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[papau]

27. this pushed that it was "truth" - it was not - it was as biased as"Loose C

and now we will have schools for the very young - not colleges - that will show this as truth.

We will now have the Bush that responds immediately, the Condi that is on top of things, the Clinton that is too busy with blow jobs and stops all attempts to stop terrorists if the attempt causes a problem politically.

I disagree that it was a "fair attempt to dramatize the official version".

[Major Hogwash]

26. The CEO of ABC should be axed!!

Anybody who is responsible for blowing $30 MILLION on that crap should be working at a different job.

[maseman]

33. $30 million production

No commercials to make up the revenue...and they had crappy ratings. Seems like no matter what ABC/Disney lost in the ordeal. My guess is that they figured that this show would be HUGE in the ratings that they could use to help sell 4th quarter. ABC has been behind in the ratings for awhile now and probably thought it was a sure thing. I think they really miscalculated the whole thing. AHHHH too bad.

[freebrew]

67. $30M is the 'claimed' cost of production...

I am wondering now if this wasn't also a 'smoke-screen' to hide campaign donations. $30M would go a long way to fund the Nov. 06 elections. Even if they scammed a mere 10% off the top, this would be a huge injection of unaccountable $ if it were to find it's way to the GOP coffers.

A little embezzlement is nothing for these crooks.

Just think in terms of 'The Producers' and the plan the original 2 guys(Gene Wilder & Zero Mostel) were cooking up. Especially, since they freely admitted that the audience participation was small. They're up to something big. IMO.

[tomfodw]

31. Bullsh*t piece

Not a mention of the right-wing groups rumored to have financed it, and when it says, "The network ...distributed thousands of copies to journalists, editorial writers, radio and television commentators and others," it fails to note that ABC refused to send copies to DEMOCRATIC commentators, and also refused to send copies to the people libeled in the "fakeumentary," including Bill Clinton, Sandy Berger, and Madeleine Albright (nor did the article point out that the fabrication misspelled her name).

Finally, and oddly for a business piece, it did not mention that ABC is probably going to be sued for billions by American Airlines, which was wrongly (TWICE!) named as the airline that let one of the 9/11 hijackers fly (also, out of the wrongly named airport) to get to where he would hijack one of the 4 airliners.

This piece is basically an apologia for ABC. Shame on the Times.

[PATRICK]

44. Yes, a terrible article

that demonstrates the ongoing huge hole in the news when it comes to RW exploitation and politicking. it dances so wide around the "odd" "confusion" that the entire article vacates itself of purpose more than the movie itself! And the apologia and musings are unnecessary if there is going to be no step toward the truth, the political aspect, the minds of the the producers. This is the kind of shoddy evasion few ignorant bloggers would stoop to not having access to the facts and a telephone hotline to the sources.

The degradation of the press is so complete that they cannot even fathom the nature of the job when it comes to bush world and the Democrats. Blinders, blind spot, truncated or self absorbed personalities, whatever. The NYT as journalism is practically moribund in subservience to some corporate comfort zone.

[glitch]

46. A perfect article

showing exactly why people don't go to the NYT for information anymore.

[DireStrike]

56. I was considering getting a times subscription

Silly me. This pushed me over the edge. I wrote and told them why.

[Javaman]

34. Kill your TV. nt

[JHB]

36. One of the "why"'s:

The Florida State Employees' Fund owns some 7.3 million shares of Disney (controlled by the governor), and the Florida State goventment could cause all sorts of problems for Disney's substantial Florida properties if they got all nasty with zoning and such...

And who's governor of Florida? Brother Jeb.

I doubt it's the whole reason, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if that factor entered into the decision-making process at ABC-Disney.

[yojon]

41. This article doesnt say anything

Presumably Iger is expecting a quid pro quo from the repugs in exchange for airing this dreck. I'll bet it has to do with further media consolidation.

[nebula]

45. The only ABC show worth watching is Lost

And I can get every episode of it (commercial-free and in high resolution) by downloading the bit torrent within minutes of the original broadcast.

So there's really no reason to watch ABC at all.

[Castleman]

51. Same goes for Desperate Housewives

download the torrent, and SCREW ABC and their sponsors, then again, I pay zero attention to advertisers and buy 99% generic products..just 'cause I'm not a lame lemming that follows the herd...

[lyra]

48. "dedicated to a Godly transformation and revolution"

Discover the Secret Right-Wing Network Behind ABC's 9/11 Deception, Max Blumenthal at the Huffington Post, September 8, 2006

"Before The Path to 9/11 entered the production stage, Disney/ABC contracted David Cunningham as the film's director. Cunningham is no ordinary Hollywood journeyman. He is in fact the son of Loren Cunningham, founder of the right-wing evangelical group Youth With A Mission (YWAM). The young Cunningham helped found an auxiliary of his father's group called The Film Institute (TFI), which, according to its mission statement, is "dedicated to a Godly transformation and revolution TO and THROUGH the Film and Televisionindustry." As part of TFI's long-term strategy, Cunningham helped place interns from Youth With A Mission's in film industry jobs "so that they can begin to impact and transform Hollywood from the inside out," according to a YWAM report.

Last June, Cunningham's TFI announced it was producing its first film, mysteriously titled "Untitled History Project."

[ClayZ]

49. We start the alphabet with D now.....

[jeffrey_X]

52. How can you market a fictional story to the education system?

This made no sense from the start.

[Marr]

53. ABC's executives cost their investors money and should be fired.

[pauldp]

54. That's TWO TIMES the budget for the 911 Commission!!

http://www.9-11commission.gov/about/faq.htm#q5
They spent double the Commission budget on that piece of shit.

[mhatrw]

73. Now THAT is an amazing juxtaposition.

Their tax write-off for this "public service" dwarfs the entire amount spent actually investigating the events of 9/11.

[Ezlivin]

82. And in neither case was the truth sought

An honest investigation would see many people from this administration doing hard time.

I'm just saying....

[mistertrickster]

58. The inevitable comparison to Shakespeare--

Mr. Thompson asserted that however that form of entertainment was categorized, it did little teaching about history. “ ‘Richard III’ is one of the greatest plays ever written,” he said, “but it is not very good history.”

Oh, thank you Scholar Thompson . . . what area of English history do you specialize in, the late medieval or the renaissance?

Actually, "Richard III" is true in its essential respects. Richard fought on the side that opposed and overthrew Henry 6. He didn't personally kill his brother Clarence and Henry 6 and his son Edward as the play shows, but he fully supported their death. He DID have his nephews Edward V and Richard killed, which for years the historians denied and are now revising.

To portray a horrible English tyrant as a horrible English tyrant is not dishonest.

"Path to 9-11" is dishonest.

[warrens]

60. How many heads are going to roll over this fuckup?

Whatever else Disney may be, it is very good at counting dollars. This is going to go down as a total screwup, a really bad idea, and an example of terrible management skills. Someone is going to walk the plank for this.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

61. decisions have been made based on relevance & potential public interest

Yeah - public interest to drive voters to vote for the Repubs.

[Patriot_4_Peace]

63. Responce to biased film reaps good results

I am very glad that Scholastic had to stop the production their study guide. I know the schools in the area were I live would more than likly refuse to order the books.

I was wondering... How many people here signed one of the many petitions condemning the film?

[tomreedtoon]

64. But the article doesn't explain WHY it was made!

For example, when ABC made "The Day After," Reagan and the Republicans complained that this commie pinko movie (that showed a very mild version of what a nuclear explosion would do to Americans) was selling out to the Evil Empire.

So, ABC made "Amerika," a miniseries about a totally stupid and implausible Soviet takeover of the United States, with the Soviet overlords blowing up the Capitol dome because the wife of some official did a striptease or something. It was THAT stupid of a movie, but it satisfied the Reaganites.

That piece of trash had a rationale. They were trying to suck up to the existing powers. There was no rationale for "Path to 9/11." Finding out why Disney felt a need to make this stupid movie - unless the White House issued some threats to them - was why I wanted to read it. They didn't deliver.

As usual, the New York Whore Times didn't really do any reporting, just sent a staffer to noodle around without any insight or conclusions.

[FighttheFuture]

65. That's because it's the NYT, a suck rag on its last legs.

Pathetic article, doesn't ask any real questions, and attempts to provide cover to the Reich wing Corporate execs that allowed this turd to smear the country. Also, it cost way more than $30. all those figures don't seem to include revenue lost form Sunday/Monday advertising. Then there's the damage to the brand of ABC and Disney. The article also does not ask or point out that it was heavily financed by the RWinger Scaife, and other front groups. Finally, it was trounced by football with a 17 share vs 11 share, with Fox and CBS have 11 and 10 shares, respectively. This is hardly a "respectable" showing for what the content should have been, and CBS reran an older 9/11 documentary.

The New York Times has fallen very hard, and very far. It hides their real voices of sanity behind their duck-ass firewall while pushing this shit for opinion and news.

Cancel your subscription ans give your money to a good Dem candidate!!

[AZBlue]

68. Disney won't return their calls.

eom

[NewYorkerfromMass]

69. Yes it does

ABC was stuck with a very expensive product that they had to show in some form.
It would have been a complete waste for them not to air it.

[FighttheFuture]

87. Not really. There are many projects that go to the shelf for

years, if forever. Eating $30 million and running some movie with paying ads would have been cheaper. Fixing the mess would have been cheapest!! ABC and Disney damaged themselves. That will cost them in the future, unless they are betting for a total takeover and want to be one of the favored corporations!

[tomreedtoon]

91. I don't agree that fixing it would be cheaper.

The problem is, the director, writer and other creative personnel...probably including the actors...may have final cut or creative control written in their contracts. To change the film to the point where it was airable would involve paying them off or making deals with them.

It really would have been cheaper for them to bury the project, or to use the non-actor portions of the film as "stock footage" for other movies or TV shows. Even use it to illustrate September 11 stories done by ABC News.

It would be cheaper for ABC to run another movie instead. In case you didn't know, the failure of their summer dance competition series "The One" was handled in just that way. The substitutes were long rerun nights of their regular series like "According to Jim" and "George Lopez" and "Desperate Housewives."

That might be one reason for they running the show anyway; having killed one expensive project, killing a second so close to the disaster of "The One" would probably get some high-level execs fired. And as mentioned before, their ability to "fix" might have been limited by the participants's creative control.

But still...the article didn't say why the movie was made in the first place, using that particular attitude. Who approved that mess to begin with, instead of something more balanced, factual and honest? Who decided that a September 11 movie, shown on an anniversary of that painful and unresolved day, was a good idea to begin with?

If I were a stockholder, I'd be asking those questions at the next Disney shareholder meeting. And if the New York Whore Times had anything resembling journalism any more, they might have asked those questions too.

[tomreedtoon]

92. I don't agree that fixing it would be cheaper.

The problem is, the director, writer and other creative personnel...probably including the actors...may have final cut or creative control written in their contracts. To change the film to the point where it was airable would involve paying them off or making deals with them.

It really would have been cheaper for them to bury the project, or to use the non-actor portions of the film as "stock footage" for other movies or TV shows. Even use it to illustrate September 11 stories done by ABC News.

It would be cheaper for ABC to run another movie instead. In case you didn't know, the failure of their summer dance competition series "The One" was handled in just that way. The substitutes were long rerun nights of their regular series like "According to Jim" and "George Lopez" and "Desperate Housewives."

That might be one reason for they running the show anyway; having killed one expensive project, killing a second so close to the disaster of "The One" would probably get some high-level execs fired. And as mentioned before, their ability to "fix" might have been limited by the participants's creative control.

But still...the article didn't say why the movie was made in the first place, using that particular attitude. Who approved that mess to begin with, instead of something more balanced, factual and honest? Who decided that a September 11 movie, shown on an anniversary of that painful and unresolved day, was a good idea to begin with?

If I were a stockholder, I'd be asking those questions at the next Disney shareholder meeting. And if the New York Whore Times had anything resembling journalism any more, they might have asked those questions too.

[KamaAina]

75. Doesn't mention the fundie connection, either

well documented on DU, for instance:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2085948&mesg_id=2085948

The director of ABC's controversial "Path to 9/11" docudrama has ties to an evangelical Christian group whose goals include "transform Hollywood from the inside out," according to research by readers of prominent blogs.

"Path" director David L. Cunningham is also involved in "The Film Institute," an offshoot of the Hawaii-based global evangelical group, Youth With a Mission.

One goal of Cunningham's Film Institute is to "fast-track" students from a digital film program associated with the YWAM organization into positions "within the film industry, not to give them jobs, but so that they can begin to impact and transform Hollywood from the inside out," according to a cached version of page from a YWAM Web site. The original appears to have been moved or deleted.

The digital filmmaking program at YWAM's University of Nations appears to provide Cunningham's institute with its interns. The school's Web site encourages potential students, "If you are serious about allowing the Lord to use either your professional background in film and television, or your God-given desire to learn, don't miss this opportunity. Apply today!"

I just now realized that this is coming out of the "University of the Nations" in Kailua-Kona on the Big Island!! I'd always thought of them, like most of our local religious WRONG, as relatively harmless. Guess not... :scared:

Now why wouldn't the NYT report that? Never mind about the truthiness; someone might've gotten to go to Big Island! :P

[JerseygirlCT]

71. Better: is it a public service if it's a lie? nt

[Uncle Joe]

74. This column should say, "Is is truly a public service if

they lie to the public" alienating has nothing to do with it. However lying to the American People about such a cataclysmic event in an effort to brain wash them is a total abdication of the very essence of public service and borders on treason.

[Radio_Lady]

78. Was it a PSA (public service announcement) or a political statement

funded by one side?

[Uncle Joe]

84. It was a political statement, but the paragraph in the N.Y. Times reads

"Once it became clear that it would have to go without sponsors, ABC began to promote the mini-series as a public service. That decision left the network open to a weighty question: Is it truly a public service if it alienates a significant part of the audience?"

I believe alienation is secondary to just outright lying regarding whether something is a public service. For example a public service program touting the benefits of civil rights to a society could be truthful and yet alienate some racists or bigots. I believe this column would have been better had it been focused on the whether outright falsehoods should be peddled as a public service.

[Supersedeas]

76. a Public Service for Republican Party interests--pure election cycle

politics

[Yukari Yakumo]

77. Me thinks Mr. Iger should've cancelled it...

The $30 mil is only a drop in the bucket compared to what American Airlines is planning to do. Even if AA lawsuit doesn't fly, pulling their ads out will almost certainly cost ABC way more than the $30 mil they spent on this POS.

Where's what's her name? Scholastic really did cave. Completely and fully. According to the article, " said that the company cancelled its contract with ABC and that no money changed hands."

In summary...

They alienate a large chunk the viewing audience (though more were busy watching football).
Lost Scholastic as a sponsor. (And they'll be extremely cautious when dealing with ABC in the future. IF they deal with them anyway.)
Not only possibly lose American Airlines as a sponsor, but potentially face a multi-million dollar lawsuit also.

As the guys from Guinness would say, "BRILLIANT!"

I say we e-mail AA to encourage them to pull their ads and go forward with a lawsuit.

[EFerrari]

80. Welcome to DU! Great idea.

:hi:

[madmusic]

83. The Anschutz Entertainment Group

The rights to all “Narnia” books are held by Denver multi-billionaire and conservative Christian evangelical Philip Anschutz, whose third-generation wealth is in land, oil, railroads and communications, moved into entertainment. In 1999, Fortune magazine compared him to the nineteenth-century tycoon J.P. Morgan, pointing out that both men “struck it rich in a fundamentally different way: they operated across an astounding array of industries, mastering and reshaping entire economic landscapes.” In its September 2, 2002 issue, Fortune named him the nation’s “greediest executive.”

During the 1990s, The Anschutz Corporation created The Anschutz Entertainment Group, a sporting and music entertainment presenter that owns or operates several major entertainment and sporting venues, including Staples Center in Los Angles and The Home Depot Center. In England, they own the Manchester Evening News Arena, and the Millennium Dome which is being redeveloped as a multi-purpose arena. Anschutz Entertainment also owns a number of sports teams, including the Los Angeles Kings hockey team, The Chicago Fire, Los Angeles Galaxy, Houston Dynamo, D.C. United, and the Manchester Monarchs soccer teams, five European Hockey franchises, the Hammarby soccer team in Sweden, as well as interests in the Los Angeles Lakers and Los Angeles Sparks basketball teams.

Anschutz has gotten into financing movies personally, picking “family entertainment” that represent his values. The first was the unsuccessful remake of “Around The World in 80 Days.” He picked up “Narnia” as a way of promoting his personal religious beliefs. While he had the financing to have distributed the movie independently, he chose to make a deal with Disney to distribute it (the way Fox distributed the Star Wars franchise for George Lucas). After losing the right to distribute Pixar’s animated hits, Disney would do anything to keep “Narnia,” since Anschutz now knows enough about the business that he could do the entire thing independently, which could potentially mean the loss of billions for Disney.

When you consider the potential return is upwards of $500 million over the possible life of the “Narnia” franchise, an investment of $40 million to keep the Religious Right saying nice things about Disney (after their attempted boycott of the company for hosting “Gay Day” at Disneyland and Disney World and providing couples benefits to same-sex employee couples) and promoting “Narnia” is a worthwhile investment. A show that takes the myth that Bill Clinton let Osama Bin Laden off because he had let Monica Lewinsky give him blowjobs and makes it popular reality is just the thing James Dobson, Tony Perkins and the rest of the American Taliban want.

http://www.thatsanotherfinemess.com/2006/09/07/the-disneyfication-of-911-2/

[Joey Liberal]

85. ABC is dead to me n/t

[iamahaingttta]

88. I haven't watched ABC since Peter Jennings died...

...and we unplugged the TV set on 9/11/06.

That's it. No more. They can ALL go screw themselves. I don't need their propaganda in my house. I've got a long reading list to get back to...