At the risk of reiterating my point, most of the articles I've read have made the same mistake (and so much for The New Yorker's fact-checking, which I find to be weak at best): "Well, WBD owns all those movies; there should be no financial issues in showing them, so what's the big deal?," and implying that, if the channel were somehow sold or spun off, the titles (the bulk of which are the Warner Bros., MGM, and RKO libraries) would come with them.
The problem with that reasoning is that TCM owns next to nothing: they have their interstitials and some commissions, but that's about it. Everything -- including the films that WBD owns -- needs to be licensed and paid for. Add to that the fact that most of TCM's revenue comes from cable fees, and that those are dropping as people cut their respective cords -- and that's not much of a business model. Sure, the channel currently turns a modest profit, but that's not likely to continue indefinitely. Even spinning it off would be problematic, as FilmStruck wasn't able to make it, and that's the closest analogy. Zaslav's dream of having celebrities talk about movies that influenced them would seem to have limited interest or variety. It's a good thing that Charlie is back -- he's really the heart and soul of TCM -- but he's got a skeleton crew (there are currently two people running the festival -- programming and booking films, guests, and venues, not to mention all the associated logistics) and -- despite Zaslav's apparent love for the channel -- limited corporate support. Also, Scott McGee, the #2 guy after Charlie, Tweeted that it was Ben Mankiewicz who was responsible for putting the phone call from Scorsese and company, rather than a spontaneous gesture by the directors, so despite their undoubted love for the channel, I don't know how much long-term effort they'll be able to out into curation. (If this is true and, coming from Scott, I'm sure it is, it's the first good thing Ben's done for the channel, as far as I'm concerned.) Right now, the channel is programmed through August (I was surprised to learn how late things are nailed down), so we won't see any tangible results and after-effects until September at the earliest, but (as much as the prospect pains me) I can't see how the channel and Festival fare for more than a year or so. I would think the Cruise will be dead after November. --Dave Sikula On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 5:36:17 PM UTC-7 Bob Jersey wrote: > Richard Brody in the New Yorker suggested that the channel be spun off > into a nonprofit entity... and got what-for on Twitter, including from > Sikula... > https://twitter.com/NewYorker/status/1673779938694950915 > > https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/turner-classic-movies-is-a-national-treasure > (links) > B > > Paul Murray, June 28th: > > Zaslav was warned that he'd be ticking off the wrong people, but didn't > like being told how to run his business. Then Spielberg, Scorsese and PT > Anderson got involved. > > The channel's longtime programmer is now back. > > > https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/zaslav-reverses-tcm-changes-1235525256/ > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/10d894c5-f51d-4e0c-87a8-e73c96fc0258n%40googlegroups.com.
