250 likes | 443 Views
Spider-man. $115m opening weekend $40m + day Expectation: $75 to $80m Raising the bar for everyone? Jump starts the summer. Why did it do so well?. Why more than Harry Potter ($90m)? Shorter film, so shown more per day Older audience, post-midnight Tickets prices (kids v. adults)
E N D
Spider-man • $115m opening weekend • $40m + day • Expectation: $75 to $80m • Raising the bar for everyone? • Jump starts the summer
Why did it do so well? Why more than Harry Potter ($90m)? • Shorter film, so shown more per day • Older audience, post-midnight • Tickets prices (kids v. adults) • Huge megaplexes – with as many as 6 screens for one movie (7500 screens)
Popularity due to weak competition (little to detract from it, screens open) • Attraction to all ages • Superb marketing campaign
What’s Ahead? Star Wars Ep. 2: Attack of the Clones • Opening May 16 – Thursday. • Lucas on number of screens Spider-Man 2 • Columbia announces: Opens May 7, 2004
What’s ahead? • More comic book character movies • The Hulk (Universal) • Daredevil (Fox) • Superman? • Batman? • Wonder Woman?
Race and television • Networks tend to ignore people of color • IF people of color appear: more likely on cable • Network shows: frequently segregated • Advertisers fear: whites will ignore integrated or black-themed shows • Reality: Cosby, Fresh Prince, Jeffersons, etc.
Race and television • Pressure on black writers to add whites, but not on whites to add blacks • Other races obvious invisible
Race and television • Why? 1 . Economics: Fragmentation of audience 2. Narrowcasting 3. Target marketing toward upscale whites 4. Very limited targeting of African Americans: UPN, BET 5. TV overly cautious?
Bill Cosby: TV Isn’t Us “there are no characters anyone could imagine graduating from college, working beside them in a steel mill or doing anything that might make for a better nation…African-Americans, like everyone else, are just as civil, as bitter, as correct, as evil, as ignorant and full of compassion..”
First Amendment • Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech or of the press
Airwaves limited (first technology, now economics) • Broadcasters must serve the public interest, convenience and necessity
Shaping News Content Media and the law
Government Censorship • Limits on governmental control: First Amendment • Congress shall make no law abridging….freedom of speech or press • Presumption against governmental control
Vietnam • Few limits on press • No pre-publication review (unlike earlier wars) • Government relies on public relations, appeals to patriotism, propaganda
Post Vietnam • Military blames press for Vietnam • Vow by military: reduce press access, reduce information, • Grenada 1983. Secrecy. “Sanitized” war. • Sidle Commission: Protect military secrecy but accommodate press; press pools • Panama: how well does this work?
Persian Gulf War • Press pools • Close military observation • Pre publication review by field censors • Military goals • Source control • Result? • Debate
Libel • Limits on what media can publish • Damage to reputation – how people will treat you • Cannot libel the dead -- why? • Defenses: truth, public interest
Media fears about libel • Time • Money • Huge damagers possible • Losing at trial, winning only on appeal
Public People and Libel • Wide latitude to press • New York Times v. Sullivan. 1964 – civil rights issues • Debate on public issues • Public officials should expect scrutiny; can rebut • Error inevitable in public debate • Actual malice rule
Who are public officials? • Elected • Substantial responsibility
Public figures and libel • All purpose public figures • Limited public figures (voluntarily attempt to influence resolution of issues)
Other libel issues Public Proceedings • Participants: absolute privilege • Press report on public proceedings: qualified privilege Public Performance: inviting comment
Privacy • Is it really private? • Publicity about private facts: public interest • Limits on private facts: sensational and morbid prying for its own sake
Obscenity • Average person, applying contemporary community standards, finds the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest • Content patently offensive/ sexual content • No serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value
Pornography not the same as obscenity. • Variable obscenity