Oprah…Noprah
Oprah -- Apparantly reacting to a request for credit
Over the last week TLE has been fortunate enough to get some mainstream media attention appearing on the CBS Early Show, CNN and Extra to talk about the O.J. Simpson verdict and our exclusive interview. We were more than happy to help out. That is, until we ran into Oprah.
Here’s what happened. An Oprah underling calls to say they would like to use our O.J. interview on their Friday “Live” topical program. I said “sure,” prepared the material and shipped it off. I then wrote to the Oprah legal department to confirm we would be getting the proper on screen credit for the material we were providing for free to the daytime Queen. A very standard, accepted practice in the biz. Here’s the reply:
“Unfortunately, we can’t give .com credit. (It’s our standing policy not to provide any web addresses in our credits.)
Hmmm. Let’s see. We provide you with exclusive material you will effectively use as your own, because nobody reads the end credits on your show or any anybody else’s, and you won’t actually credit us since we are a dot com entity. Hey, who wouldn’t rush to make that deal? Are you kidding me?
I sent Oprah legal a nice note suggesting our TLE policy was not to give away exclusive material without proper attribution. I also asked,
“What’s the harm in identifying the media outlet, even if it’s a dot com? And BTW, dot com media outlets are no different than ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNCB, FOX or any other local or national outlet. Oh, right. In this case there is a difference because although the big guys all tried to get the interview only up and coming TLE made it happen.”
A day later I got the shocking news that the Oprah show “was going a different direction.” That’s corporate weasle speak for “You got us. We were going to use your interview as our own and bury your credit so you received absolutely no value in return.” (The October 10, 2008 program did include a segment on the O.J. Simpson verdict.)
I’m not sure what is more pathetic; the corporate Oprah machine that makes a practice of steam-rolling folks into submission so she can fill her show with the work product of others…or the likelihood that waaay too many people actually cave in to this bullying boloney so they can say, “We were on Oprah.”
Oprah, isn’t having all the money enough?
MJB
I AM WITH YOU. I AM SO TIRED OF THE OPRAH MACHINE PREACHING TO US WHO TO VOTE FOR, WHAT TO EAT, WHAT NOT TO WEAR, HER FAVORITE THINGS, ON AND ON AND ON AGAIN. WISH SHE WOULD RETIRE AND GIVE IT A REST. BESIDES, DOESN’T SHE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY YET?!? AS YOU MAY HAVE LEARNED FROM THIS EXPERIENCE, OPRAH IS THE ONLY ONE THAT GETS CREDIT FOR EVERYTHING!@#$
Comment by ANNE EVANS — October 14, 2008 @ 8:31 pm
Yikes!
Comment by Denise — October 15, 2008 @ 6:48 am
Thanks for sharing that Michel. It’s eye opening to get these tidbits of information not generally known to the public. It also makes me angry to think that we are not necessarily getting all the news due to corporate red tape.
Carry on Michel…
Minnesota
Comment by Mary Swanson — October 15, 2008 @ 8:56 am
I am not surprised at all. She is a money machine, however let’s move on and start a new trial. You are doing great, Michal…….
Comment by Donald — October 15, 2008 @ 9:57 am
I knew I liked you for a reason! You calls ‘em as you sees ‘em! I gave up watching Oprah years ago–all I could see was a rich, black woman with a huge ego telling us all how unenlightened we are. Perhaps if I were rich, I would be “enlightened” like her;)
Comment by kim olsen — October 17, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
Michel, Michel, Michel….. to paraphrase what’s-his-name. I am shocked and dismayed that you, an attorney, freely and willingly provided your property for use by another without having a signed contractual understanding FIRST.
Personally, I think the very LEAST Oprah could do would be to have you on her show to discuss what you’re doing with this activity. Right???
I’m disappointed about Spector and still feel the drop in viewers during Spector One was more due to the drop in quality of coverage, e.g., dropping live coverage before the trial day was over, than in lack of interest in the trial. West Coast trials deserve the same level (length) of coverage as East Coast trials.
Comment by Pat — October 25, 2008 @ 3:59 pm