This past week saw the launch of the NYT’s new documentary, Father, Soldier, Son on Netflix. It is a feature documentary, but the NYT is also supporting it with advertising; an introductory article about the history of the piece; a robust interactive feature story, that is also duplicated in print via a 72 page special section of the newspaper that was delivered over the weekend; plugs in their What’s On TV section; through a movie review by critic Jessica Kiang (with an embedded Netflix trailer/ad, and direct links to tickets for which they get an affiliate fee, which they do with most films); a Times Insider piece, which in print sits just inside the front page, and which also promotes the genesis of the project; and of course through their social media pages, including Facebook during the #stophateforprofit campaign, also with Netflix Originals logos. In other words, the full court press.
As I posted on LinkedIn last week, let's be clear - This is Branded Content. The Brand is the NYT and they are promoting their brand via their journalism and their film criticism and every other resource simultaneously. It is also simultaneously brilliant, well-executed branded entertainment that others should emulate, an ethical conundrum to consider for the future of journalism, and possible the most meta-media occurrence of late (which Noah Cowan pointed out on my post). So what are we to make of the NYT as publisher and brand?
Let’s step back for a second and look at the bigger picture. The NYT is not new to making documentaries. They launched Op-Docs in 2011, and that project has gone on to great acclaim, including two Oscar nominations. I’ve always thought the Op-Docs were misconceived, and should actually be opinion pieces, as the name suggests, which would be more like the Robert Reich Inequality Media videos, or Kogonada’s video essays, but they’ve always been decidedly journalistic (and artistic) in their approach, and to my knowledge, have never featured brands or been promoted I nearly the same fashion as this new initiative.
The NYT also launched the T Brand Studio in 2014 to produce actual branded content. Like many other publishers, this has become an important revenue stream, as many brands moved into such content and traditional advertising cratered. The Times has done an ok job of keeping the branded content efforts distinct from their journalism, but I’ve always loved showing these images to my brand content classes, showing how the NYT has slowly minimized the distinctive branding around their paid content, blurring the lines quite a bit. Note how the branding is reduced between the time of the Dell "sponsored post" and the one from Netflix, which many people tell me they never knew was an ad at all (click on the image to enlarge):
Back in 2016, I consulted with the NYT on the release of their actual first feature doc, Ladies First, about the first female candidates and first women’s vote in Saudi Arabia. We premiered at the Margaret Meade Film Festival in October (sold out), before a quick launch on their website, because they wanted the film to launch in the lead up to Hillary’s win (oops!) in November. I distinctly remember speaking with CEO Mark Thompson about his ambitious plans for expansion into film (including Netflix), as we stood underneath the gigantic dinosaur skeletons from the Museum at the reception. The irony of ur setting was not lost on Mark… which may be part of why I didn’t do much more work for them (why did we pick that room for a reception???). By the way, just yesterday the NYT announced that Meredith Kopit Levien will take over from Mark and become the new CEO in September. She had been COO, but started as...Head of Advertising, and she's been in charge of many of the changes at the NYT as well.
But I was impressed – his vision for the Times as media powerhouse was ambitious. And it remains so. As Axios has reported, the NYT has at least three documentaries premiering this year (not counting Op-Docs); and another 10 scripted TV shows in development. They also mention The Jungle Prince of Delhi, a film based on the Pulitzer winning 1619 Project, and Father, Soldier, Son. But the Times also premiered two docs at Sundance - Some Kind of Heaven, and Time. They’ve also got the NYT Presents (formerly The Weekly) on FX/Hulu. And they’ve retained Anonymous Content, who makes both amazing films and branded content/advertising, to represent its film and television rights. They’re in talks with numerous producers and other talent about multiple films, series and new media (I know many who’ve taken meetings there). The idea is pretty simple – the NYT has many great stories that would make great films (and shows), and why not take that great journalism and story-telling (not all of it is strictly journalism) to bigger audiences?
Coming back to Father, Soldier, Son – this piece was developed over ten years, and started as a piece of journalism (and short film) about the impact of the war in Afghanistan on families. The piece was compelling, mainly because of the main subject Sgt. First Class Brian Eisch and his family, and one of the original two journalists soon coupled with a filmmaker to keep following Eisch’s story. I don’t know when it became clear that this would become a feature film, or a Netflix original. At some point, this great story and journalistic effort became not just a documentary, but the meta-mega-project as laid out in my opening paragraph. And that’s when it also became branded content. Because what the Times is doing is also promoting itself, as much as its journalism. It is signaling that it is not just a newspaper, but a movie studio, and a trusted source for interesting story-telling. As the Wikipedia definition of branded content (or branded entertainment) makes clear: "it is designed to build awareness for a brand by associating it with content that shares its values."
This is not a critique of the film. I have some issues with it, but it’s a tear-jerker and is getting good reviews. It’s a bit perplexing why the NYT would launch this major endeavor with such a white project, and one that is so uncritical of the politics of this US war. It does show a group of people – working-class soldiers – who the Times’s audience seldom gets to see (meaning its affluent audience is disconnected from those who actually serve, a big problem in the US), but let's also face it - wounded warrior stories are also the bread and butter of branded content - a feel good story. That said, it's a good effort, and their future projects seem to include a mix of diverse stories and storytellers, so I'll give them a break here. The film is definitely more observational than most journalism, but I don’t want to go down the documentary vs. journalism rabbit-hole here. Let’s just concede that it is a head-spinning mix of journalism plus documentary plus branded content.
Is it ethical? Well, that line is blurry, too. Writing articles about your own journalism/documentary is both interesting news, and an advertisement for your own brand and product. They did have the sense to bring in an outside critic – I believe Jessica Kiang doesn’t usually write for the Times and is more affiliated with Variety – but they didn’t point this out, or bring attention to this decision, which was clearly made for ethical reasons. We could ask the Times’s own Public Editor, but… they eliminated that position in 2017, which is right around the time the Times started getting more ambitious in its efforts and started blurring these lines more and more.
 This blurry line is always a touchy topic at the Times, and in journalism at large. The NYT staff routinely get on stages and say they won't do branded content outside of the T Brand Studio, but it appears they will do it - only for their brand. And they need to do it. Ad revenue is slumping to historic lows, and the NYT is increasingly relying on subscriptions and new revenue streams. As they make this transition, the publication needs to sell the value of its brand, on multiple other channels. This leads to more subscriptions, and it leads to more alternative revenue streams, to replace advertising. In fact, one could argue that these new revenue streams and business models are crucial to our maintaining a free press in America (and the world), because great journalism is not going to continue to be supported via advertising.
So it’s a necessary good and a necessary evil. The NYT must go down this path, and other publishers need to do the same (and are), but it also brings up many ethical issues. Will the NYT start to privilege stories that can become content for Netflix? Will such efforts include hard-hitting and controversial news/stories (Time, the 1619 Project)? Or just surface-level portraits and character studies, as represented by both Father, Soldier, Son and Some Kind of Heaven? And when you write a news story about, say, Concordia being launched by Laurene Powell Jobs, do you not have an ethical obligation to make sure the reporter mentions that you are co-producing one of the films (Time) in that article? And that Jobs is a major investor in Anonymous Content, who also happens to represent the Times in their film endeavors? And when you write an article about coronavirus in the Villages of Florida, where the “white power” slogan was chanted and retweeted by the President, do you mention your film (Some Kind of Heaven) about said villages in your reporting? Or when that film comes out, do you re-contextualize its superficial look at “quirky” retirees in light of recent events?
You can see that I have more questions than answers. You’d think someone at the Times would be assigned to think about these subjects, and write about them for the public, and that they’d be debated in places like the Columbia Journalism Review. But I can’t find any evidence of that (yet) happening.
I don’t have a final judgement on the Times here. Like I’ve said – it’s both brilliant and necessary, and gives a lot of models to copy and emulate for others. In fact, I'd be positively giddy if my clients could execute branded content across so many divisions as well as the Times has done. But it’s also a very meta- blurry mess of a move, and I think it would be best that we debate it before it becomes the norm.
note: all Father, Soldier, Son photos are from the NYT.
|
|
Film
 Disney has reportedly paused its spending on Facebook Ads - A major FB advertiser finally joins the boycott, albeit quietly at first, with Disney joining the #StopHate campaign. Where's everyone else? As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, very few film companies have joined the #StopHateForProfit boycott of Facebook. I think the only people I influenced were some smaller festivals and the FFA, and Brooks Barnes, who wrote this good piece for the NYT on the ongoing boycott of the boycott by Hollywood. Aside from Disney, Magnolia, Sesame Street and the Coolidge Corner Theater, the whole business remains shameless, but Shame.
A First-Generation Immigrant's Perspective on #BLM - Kweighbaye Kotee, who runs the Bushwick Film Festival penned a moving piece for PopSugar on her experience with racism and the lack of opportunities she found as an immigrant from Liberia- and how she navigated these circumstances to become a successful entrepreneur. But also her thoughts on #BLM and how we move forward. Highly recommended reading.
Only 22% of Consumers Want to See A Movie Indoors, according to MorningConsult and an additional 12% or 34% would do so outdoors. Not looking good for theaters, but yay for drive-ins.
There's a new, Black Owned Pop-Up Drive-In coming to Newark - Gothamist reports, and it's about time that as they say "they are giving Ferris Bueller a day off" by programming more than white repertory films, and showing films by and for Black audiences (not exclusively). Kudos, and wish I could attend. See the full schedule here. There are very few Black owned theaters or Drive-ins, so this is a very positive development.
People are paying over $200 for Festival Tickets in Shanghai: According to China Film Insider, the Shanghai Int. Film Fest sold more than 100,000 tickets, which was a big reduction in seating capacity (!) and enough people wanted to see films that scalpers were getting huge markups for resales of tix. Looks like if you actually handle the virus, people will return to theaters. I feel good about most places doing this, but not the US.
Too Lazy To Cancel Netflix? They'll do it for you: According to Deadline, the company is that nice - can you imagine anyone else doing this? - that they are gonna stop billing people and cancel subscriptions that have been inactive for a long time. And they'll keep your login ready if you want to come back, to make it easier for you.
The Problem with Anti-Racist Movie Lists - Racquel Gates makes a great case in the NYT for the need to expand our appreciation for Black cinema beyond the anti-racist and presumed white audience lens(es). And it's a great list of films and auteurs to get to know, if you don't already.
Disney Analyst Cuts stock on "Longer" Pandemic Hit, Sees Cinemas "Largely Closed" Until Mid- 2021 - Maybe the most sobering, but honest appraisal yet, Cowen's Doug Creutz says "We now expect domestic theaters to be largely closed until mid-2021, in part because we don't think studios will be interested in releasing their largest movies into a capacity-constrained footprint."
How Hulu's self-serve ad tool could open streamings flood gates - We're about to see a more even playing field on for advertisers on Hulu: "Hulu has begun testing a self-serve ad buying tool called Hulu Ad Manager that is aimed at small- and medium-sized businesses and stands to broaden the Disney-owned streaming service’s advertiser base as similar tools have done for Google and Facebook. Not only does Hulu Ad Manager enable advertisers to buy ads without going through Hulu’s sales team, but it also only requires them to spend a minimum of $500 to do so." Filmmakers - that means you can likely advertise your films there, and hey, if this means not having the same three ads playing over and over while watching Killing Eve I'm all for it!
|
|
Branded Content
'Netflix for ears': Hw a new serialized podcast is helping BMW shift into Branded Entertainment - Digiday covers, BMW, one of the first Brands to make branded content with BMW Films, is going into podcasts. How will brand recognition happen? “There won’t be any product placements in the episodes nor will there be any bold marketing messages from the brand,” said a spokeswoman for BMW. Instead, references to BMW will come as “secret hints” that the spokeswoman said only the most die-hard fans will notice.
Imagine and P& G Launch Major Slate Deal: P&G will fund and Imagine will produce a slate of films for major platforms like NatGeo and Netflix, including science fiction type work. This is a big next step for branded content. Variety reports.
|
|
Miscellany:
Mergers are Starting to Happen in Arts: Well, high-end galleries, at least. The NYT reports that Gavin Brown Enterprises will merge with Barbara Gladstone's gallery, showing that even the "blue-chip" arts are being hit hard, but at least they're smart enough to merge - we need to see more of this.
Schell Games' HistoryMaker VR is coming just in time for pandemic distance learning - Kids will be able to perform speeches as historical figures, super fun and interactive way of learning and hopefully a bright sign of innovation that will take hold post Covid.
Even the Best Ai Models are No Match for the Corona Virus - Very simply, an AI is only as good as the data it is fed and will fail when something completely unprecedented occurs.
However, maybe its time to stop forcing AI into conventional careers and allow them to follow their passions - Clients loved this designers work. Turns out, he was an AI. Getting a bit meta here.
Some Sub-Genre News - We Are As Gods launched their new website and a short film. I was honored to do some consulting for the filmmakers and Stripe Press on the film, We Are As Gods, by Jason Sussberg and David Alvarado. The film is about the legendary Stewart Brand - Merry Prankster, Hacker, founder of the Whole Earth Catalog and the Long Now Foundation; and has awesome music by Brian Eno. The film was set to premiere at SXSW and Hot Docs among others, but covid. We're all now figuring out the next steps to find it's home and more on that soon, but in the meantime, they've launched a beautiful new website,
And Using material that they excluded from the film, they produced a video for Revive & Restore about their effort to use a synthetic biotech alternative to horseshoe crab blood. The blood is used by big pharma to test for biotoxins in vaccines. In order to test billions of vaccines to halt the novel coronavirus, Revive & Restore is lobbying regulatory agencies and pharma to use the synthetic en lieu of harvesting a majestic wild species, which is devastating a threatened ecosystem. Check out the short film, and the website has the trailer. Can't wait to send out more updates soon.
|
|
|
Like This Newsletter? Subscribe & Past Issues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
