December 15, 2004

FOLLOW THE MONEY:

Dems to Hollywood: The End (Scot Lehigh, December 15, 2004, Boston Globe)

AS DISPIRITED Democrats mull various routes back to relevance, here's a quick and easy first step: Say goodbye to Hollywood.

The attitudes and behavior of the film-industry elite are out of sync with much of the country, and linking the party with the West Coast glitterati makes national Democrats suspect with too many voters.

One need look no further than a recent New York Times survey to see the disconnect. Fully 70 percent of those polled said they were at least somewhat concerned that TV, movies, and popular music are lowering moral standards.

Beyond that, the self-absorption of Hollywood stars and producers makes them off-putting campaign props who too often distract from a candidate's intended message.


The bigger question here is whether Hollywood will continue to ignore the American people and the early results suggest not. Here's Survivor producer Mark Burnett on his decision not to show a lesbian kiss on an episode that aired shortly after the election:
I'd be an idiot not to notice both the way the country voted and the backlash from the FCC that came off of Janet Jackson's [Super Bowl debacle]. I wanted to protect my franchise and didn't think it was right to show both lesbian kisses at 8 o'clock. I can't be any more honest than that, can I?

Only an idiot would target the 30% of consumers instead of the 70%.

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 15, 2004 9:24 AM
Comments

Why would Hollywood change ? The 30 % they still have in the US and some 300 million depraved Europeans are more than enough to sell their garbage profitably.

Posted by: Peter at December 15, 2004 10:27 AM

Studio heads aren't ideologues but tools of stockholders.

Posted by: oj at December 15, 2004 10:32 AM

If you have 30% who would walk over ground glass to buy your stuff instead of 70% who have lives, why wouldn't you market to the 30%? It works for Star Trek.

Posted by: Bart at December 15, 2004 10:50 AM

Note that you've cited a franchise that has died for the second, or third, time.

Posted by: oj at December 15, 2004 11:05 AM

Appealing to 30% is fine for movie and TV audiences, doesn't work so well for national elections.

Posted by: at December 15, 2004 11:39 AM

There ought to be some sort of formula, given how money-obsessed so many in Hollywood are, that can show how 30 percent of the population can be a greater lure than 70 percent of the population, with the X variable being the disdain and possible payback from within the entertainment community anyone deciding to market to the 70 percent has to endure.

I would guess that for a considerable amount of people within the community, unless they were sure their movie/TV show was a guareteed smash, the gamble to do something like that and lose your status/access within Hollywood is just too much of a risk to take.

Posted by: John at December 15, 2004 12:04 PM

I am willing to bet that a lesbian kiss would get more than 30%, even among republicans.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 16, 2004 10:51 AM

Robert,

If it were between Teri Hatcher and Nicolette Sheridan, not between Janet Reno and Donna Shalala.

Posted by: Bart at December 17, 2004 6:16 PM
« CIVIL WAR, DEPRESSION, THE '70S....: | Main | THE PARTY THAT SORE LOSERMAN MADE: »