by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright June 11, 2001
All Rights Reserved.

eeling off the mask, Sony executives experienced a Maalox minute, publicly humiliated for allowing an advertising hoax fabricating a string of bogus movie reviews. “This year’s hottest star,” said David Manning the fictional reviewer for The Ridgefield Press, referring to Heath Ledger in “A Knight’s Tale”—the Australian-born teenage heartthrob whose popularity is no joke. “Another winner,” touted Manning for “The Animal,” starring funnyman Rob Schneider, before Newsweek uncovered that Manning was an admitted creation of Columbia Pictures’s advertising department, just trying to do its job of hyping films. Like the Emulex scandal that shook Wall Street to the core, Sony’s recent admission raises disturbing questions about Hollywood’s marketing strategies. While Hollywood publicity stunts are less risky than Wall St.’s, ordinary people still count on credible reviews to make informed decisions. Sony’s charade casts doubt on the entire industry and invites intriguing questions about deceptive advertising.

       Facing some tricky damage control, Sony responded quickly trying to put the incident to rest. “It was an incredibly foolish decision, and we’re horrified,” said Sony spokeswoman Susan Tick. Showing that the studio won’t stand for this type of fraud, “We are looking into it and will take appropriate action,” suggesting, perhaps, that heads would roll. Sounding incredulous, “I have run two studios over two decades, and I have to say this is a first for me,” said Joe Roth, whose Revolution Studios produced “The Animal” for Columbia. While this seems like a first, savvy execs shouldn’t be overly shocked considering the sort of shenanigans all too common in Hollywood. Exaggerations, name-dropping, and outright fabrications go with the territory. Why should it be any different in studios’ advertising departments? Most newspapers are replete with “glowing” reviews from clandestine news junkets, whose services are bought and paid for by Hollywood studios. Though Sony went over the top, most one-line reviews serve the purpose of hyping movies. Like expert witnesses, many film reviewers are hired guns whose sole purpose is augmenting box office receipts.

       Acting holier than thou, “It’s terrible. Sony has to apologize and pull the ads,” said Dick Cook, chairman of the Walt Disney Motion Picture Group. “That certainly does cross the line. We would never, never, ever do that,” denouncing Columbia as going beyond the pale. Showering reviewers with gifts, paying for lavish meals and hotels, and actually telling them precisely what they want in marketing blurbs, falls within the limits of ethical marketing. Forget about the fact that “real” reviewers are working for shadowy organizations, essentially owned and operated by major studios, conveniently excusing legit execs from acknowledging their role in bogus marketing. While it’s easy to blame the one that gets caught, it’s difficult to acknowledge that too many reviewers lack objectivity and dupe moviegoers. Now under investigation by the Connecticut attorney general, Sony’s trying to make all the rights moves, including disciplining the responsible parties. Like rolling through stop signs, Sony’s only real misfortune was getting caught.

       Announcing that Sony is “sanctioning the two advertising executives: one for his actions and the other for actions that occurred within the department he supervises,” the studio proved it blows as much smoke as its advertising department and paid reviewers. Showing that it’s taken corrective steps, “a new system of checks and balances involving both publicity and advertising departments . . . to ensure accuracy of quotes contained in future advertising campaigns and to prevent this from happening again,” Sony continued its clever damage control. Only suspending the employees, Sony proved that they don’t take fraud too seriously. None of the studio’s statements make any reference to the ongoing practice of using press junkets for predigested “glowing” reviews. Accuracy of quotes says nothing about reviewers whose opinions are quoted correctly but still dictated by studio advertising departments. While most condemn outright fraud, studios need to take a stand against the industry-wide practice of paying off reviewers.

       Whether it’s consumer reports, Wall St. analysts or Hollywood film critics, the public has a right to know that authoritative reviews fairly and accurately report the facts. When food makers specify the contents of products, the public’s health depends on accurate information. Even prestigious institutions like the United State Department of Agriculture or Food and Drug Administration, whose food and drugs affect the health and safety of consumers, must accurately report product information or wind up in court. While movie reviews aren’t life threatening, the public still has the same expectation of accuracy. No corporation has the right to deliberately deceive consumers for their own financial gain. Movie studios should go further than simply stating they won’t engage in glaring fraud. Like other industries, they must come clean with disclosures, and, at the very least, post disclaimers that warn consumers about the factual basis of claims. Manipulation—whether calculated or part of an accepted industry practice—must be disclosed to give consumers the best option to make informed choices. Giving misleading reviews can’t be tolerated in any industry.

       Columbia pictures went overboard when they invented David Manning and The Ridgefield Press. While a lot rides on every film, studios aren’t at liberty to engage in fraud to ensure a healthy return on their investments. Sony didn’t go far enough in disciplining its advertising executives responsible for giving the studio and industry a black eye. Even buying and paying for accurately quoted reviews that lack objectivity can’t be considered an acceptable practice. With the Security and Exchange Commission investigating bogus analyst reports duping investors into buying risky Internet stocks, it’s high time that the movie industry police its own practices. Sure, there’s less at stake, but truth in advertising and accurate reporting are at the heart of a free society and market economy. Propaganda—whether in Hollywood or Wall St.—should be clearly identified by carefully worded disclaimers like, “The following reviews were created for marketing purposes.” Consumers are at least alerted to the fact that they must carefully weigh accuracy and take things with a grain of salt. While it's good of studios to denounce fraud, there’s no excuse for walking a fine line.

About the Author

John M. Curtis is editor of OnlineColumnist.com and columnist for the Los Angeles Daily Journal. He’s director of a Los Angeles think tank specializing in political consulting and strategic public relations. He’s the author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2012 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.