Program scripts from week of January 13, 2014
My name is Jay Phillippi and I've spent my life in and around the media. TV, radio, the movies and more. I love them, and I hate them and I always have an opinion. Call this the View from the Phlipside.
Never Sell Short
I think this just might be the funniest media story I’ve heard in a long time. It’s all about selling yourself short and then paying for it in the long run. There’s also an interesting commentary here on predicting the future.
If you’re a sports fan you may have already heard this one. Once upon a time there were two brothers, Ozzie and Daniel Silna. The Brothers Silna owned a team in the old American Basketball Association or ABA. The ABA was a big league rival to the better known NBA. After just 9 years of fun but not particularly successful play the ABA agreed to merge with the NBA. One team was such a financial disaster that they were allowed to fold, one was bought off to fold and four others (the New Jersey Nets, the Denver Nuggets, the Indiana Pacers and the San Antonio Spurs) were allowed to merge. That only left the Silna’s team, the Spirits of St. Louis out in the cold. The Silnas wanted to merge but the league didn’t want them. They also rejected a buyout offer like the other team and settled for the most amazing windfall deal of all time.
The NBA agreed to pay one seventh of the TV rights for the four remaining ABA teams to the Silnas, wait for it, in perpetuity. That lawyer talk for forever.
In 1976 that wasn’t that big a deal. Their first check was for just over a half a million dollars. Since then the NBA has become huge. The Silnas have earned around 300 million dollars and to be honest the NBA has been trying to get out of this deal for years. Who can blame them?
After years of negotiations it appears that the Silnas will agree to be bought out. Rumors say the settlement will be around an additional five hundred million dollars. Not bad for essentially doing nothing.
And all of this happened because the NBA (and to be honest, probably the Silnas too) didn’t know what they were negotiating over.
Have you ever noticed that often when someone sells off a company or product they will keep a very small share? Did you ever wonder why? Because there’s always the chance that it could become the next big thing. And who wouldn’t want a piece of that?
Who wouldn’t want to be the next Daniel and Ozzie Silna?
So I’m a little perplexed by the decision at ABC. They have just announced that if you want to see the latest episodes of their shows (think “Grey’s Anatomy”, “Modern Family”, “Once Upon A Time”, “Scandal” or “Castle”) you had best a customer on the ABC approved provider list. Those are the service providers that have signed a TV Everywhere deal with ABC. What that means is that if you get your service from Time-Warner Cable, Dish or Direct TV you will be blacked out for at least a week before you can see those show.
I always wonder about these kinds of decisions. It’s not like I’m likely to leave my provider over an issue like this.
In fact it’s not likely anyone will leave their providers over this issue. You know why? Let’s jump back for a moment.
When I mentioned TV Everywhere before, be honest, did you have any idea what that was? Don’t feel bad if the answer was no. According to a recent survey something like 82% of Americans have no idea what it is.
So here’s that customer has to want it moment. If you have no idea what it is how much leverage does ABC really have? For all intents and purposes the answer is “Zero”.
Instead why not make a big deal out of letting those folks have access to TV Everywhere for, say, a month. Then once they’ve come to enjoy it remind them that their provider still needs to make a deal.
Now you have leverage.
Because now you have something I want.
Beyonce
When I left commercial radio almost 14 years ago (yeah, it’s been that long) I pretty much gave up listening to current popular music. There are still some times when something newer pops up and grabs my attention but by and large the current Top 40 is a blank for me.
Then you get something like the current flap surrounding Beyonce and I have to pay attention again. The problem is I don’t know what to do with it all.
Beyonce’s new song “XO” features a clip from NASA’s mission control immediately following the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986. In a classic non-apology the singer claims that the songwriters used the clip as a tribute to the 7 astronauts who died. It’s there to make sure that the shuttle crew, quoting now, “...will never be forgotten.”
The only problem is that the song isn’t about them. It’s not about brave people putting their lives on the line for the greater good or to advance science. The song is about a failed romance.
Artistic decisions are hard. You have to be willing to take a risk and we as the audience need to be open to exposure to what comes from that risk taking. Done well it is an amazing event and can broaden our understanding of the world.
Or it can be a cheap grandstand stunt. I’m afraid I put this song in that category.
I will admit to not being able to enter this discussion wholly objectively. I grew up in the heyday of the space program. Mercury, Gemini, Apollo. John Glenn, Neil Armstrong. The tragedy of Apollo 1 and the victory of “One small step for man...”
There are places you just shouldn’t go. I know that plenty of folks in the arts world will be uncomfortable with that concept. I accept that.
There are ways to pay tribute to great losses. Then there are just ways to push an emotional button for no good purpose other than cheap publicity.
Real people died that day. Real people with real families. Real people trying to do something dangerous and important.
A lot more important than just one more pop song about a screwed up love life.
In a lot of ways I don’t miss all that pop music in my life.
Call that the View From the Phlipside
No comments:
Post a Comment