MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Variety Insider Takes A Bat Out And Swings For The Inside Baseball Fences

This came from “Vic,” clearly an anonymous poster… whose tag, I have to assume, is short for “victim.”
I am about 97% sure I know who the author is… but I’m sure not telling.
I cannot vouch for the accuracy of most of the facts or the presumptions of intent assigned to some of the people called out by name. As in all things, perspective matters a lot. But it is a clear position of the feeling of one Variety insider. And that perspective deserves to be heard, in my editorial opinion… even if it is excessively angry and accusatory… and even if it is not.
I have added paragraph breaks for reader sanity.
========
I agree with you today about Todd McCarthy — maybe he doesn’t fit the model going forward, but that’s not how you part with a man who has done so much for the Variety brand.
Unfortunately, that’s just kind of the fucked-up way Variety managers handle layoffs. They seem to get off on the process, although I’m sure they’ll be very offended at the suggestion. We’re talking about an organization in which the personnel director, Mark Torres (aka “The Executioner”) has a VP title and is listed high on the masthead.
It’s like clockwork to them now. Every couple of months, Torres will swagger into Tim Gray’s office, along with Kirsten Wilder and/or former Peter Bart assistant Krystal Hunt (carrying a yellow notepad to write down names and dates and such), and they’ll have what looks like a fun, cordial meeting behind closed glass doors. Occasionally, Neil Stiles or Steve Gaydos will pop in — everyone looks like they’re having fun. They’ll repeat this very visible process several times over the course of a month, just in case the staff isn’t sufficiently terrified.
A few weeks later, they’ll blind-side everyone with the news. No proposed buyouts, no warnings, your number is just up — probably because Tim secretly doesn’t like you, or maybe you pissed off Gaydos, or you have a content position Stiles doesn’t value, or who knows.
They process you quickly now. After a morning of terror, in which upper-level employees get axed, lower-end victims are summoned into a room with the other less fortunate of the round, and Gray and Torres calmly give you the news (in case you haven’t already figured it out). Then they read you your rights (severance and such) individually — sometimes playfully bickering as they go — and away you go.
Anne Thompson was given two weeks to pack up her things during the January 2009 round — she took all 14 days to get lost. I’m told now that you’ve got to leave by noon.
A few hours later, Gray will attempt to calm the staff with a memo, telling everyone that they really didn’t need the just-dispersed parts and that the paper is still profitable. He said it in January 2009. Repeated it in April 2009. Said the same thing last week. Gaydos, Wilder, et. al. all get promotions.
Occasionally, an outgoing employee will be honored with a mock Variety front page full of staff-written parodies. But that just serves to make the rank-and-file folks who are just thrown out on their ass feel even worse.
It’s interesting that Variety has many more editors than reporters now. In fact, the trade almost has more folks with publisher-level titles — Stiles, Brian Gott and Linda Buckley Bruno — as reporters. Sure, there’s a good reason people are getting let go — money’s tight, and Gott’s main job acumen (cashing checks) isn’t as easy to pull off as it used to be. But instead of a big, sweeping, professionally handled layoffs, you get terrifying incremental blood loss. And you rarely understand the reason behind the decisions.
For example, designer Danielle Grimes carried the features department on her back for years. She was canned Monday. But Gaydos has two editors in that same department who focus on post-production issues, who probably work half as much.
Often, it’s very obvious that economic conditions are merely an excuse for firing people they don’t like. Former executive editor Michael Speier knows the entertainment business cold, but he was a bit of a polarizing figure in the newsroom, a Peter Bart guy, and Gray — who often called him and fellow editor Kathy Lyford “crazy” behind their backs — used “layoffs” to replace both of them with the more affable but less knowledgeable Leo Wolinsky.
No, Gray wasn’t looking to re-organize Variety to compete against all those barbarian blogs he so disdains — he merely wanted someone he likes working with. Which brings us to the chilling conclusion that we all kind of know: all of this isn’t really going anywhere. Guys like Gray and Gaydos hung their hats for two decades on their abilities to manage up when it came to Peter Bart. But they got tired of that, and grew to resent the man. Now the keys are theirs, and their using Stiles editorial bloodlust to reshape the place to their liking — at least to some degree.
Stiles, meanwhile, is what everybody thought he might be when he came in — a hatchet man, charged with cleaning the place out, cramming it into a new building with a flashy red sign… so that the bloodless European owners could sell the business. None of this seems congruent with any plan to evolve a 100-year-old entertainment journalism brand into the digital age.

Be Sociable, Share!

3 Responses to “Variety Insider Takes A Bat Out And Swings For The Inside Baseball Fences”

  1. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Take away the marketing-speak and you will find this is a purge, not unlike those in the USSR.
    The same process was carried out when the New Times neocons from Phoenix seized control of Village Voice Media. Only one good thing came of all the chaos that resulted — the Voice is no longer available in print in my area.

  2. Bob Violence says:

    Take away the marketing-speak and you will find this is a purge, not unlike those in the USSR.

    another home run from Chucky in Jersey, keep up the good work

  3. christian says:

    Was it a Stalinist purge?

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon