Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Hobbit film-makers ban journalist from covering premier
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Moahunter
Rohan


Nov 21 2012, 5:24am

Post #1 of 98 (2227 views)
Shortcut
Hobbit film-makers ban journalist from covering premier Can't Post

http://www.radionz.co.nz/...om-covering-premiere


(This post was edited by Ataahua on Nov 21 2012, 7:56am)


Starling
Half-elven


Nov 21 2012, 5:59am

Post #2 of 98 (1201 views)
Shortcut
Scratches head [In reply to] Can't Post

I was under the impression I lived in a country where there is such a thing as free speech, and workplaces doing the decision making about the allocation of tasks to their own staff. Unbelievable.


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Nov 21 2012, 6:10am

Post #3 of 98 (1138 views)
Shortcut
Very odd. [In reply to] Can't Post

So it was the Roadshow rep who said the invitation had been revoked....isn't Roadshow connected with WB? I wonder if this is WB strongarming those who wrote against their actions during the strike. Unsure

Silverlode






Starling
Half-elven


Nov 21 2012, 6:15am

Post #4 of 98 (1135 views)
Shortcut
I'm so angry [In reply to] Can't Post

Never, in all my time here, have I felt it necessary to use this: Mad Until now.


ElendilTheShort
Gondor


Nov 21 2012, 7:20am

Post #5 of 98 (1026 views)
Shortcut
They are entitled to invite who they want as guests at their expense if it is a press junket. [In reply to] Can't Post

It is impossible to make informed comment without all the facts and a full history of this reporters work relating to the production. On the surface it does not reflect well on the studio and smacks of bad sportsmanship, but who knows, this reporter could have been negatively biased towards the production.


(This post was edited by ElendilTheShort on Nov 21 2012, 7:21am)


Danielos
Rohan

Nov 21 2012, 7:54am

Post #6 of 98 (995 views)
Shortcut
I almost would like to boycott this spectacle now! [In reply to] Can't Post

No wonder everything seems so easy-going and merry about this production when all we get are commercials and reports from fawning yes-journalists.

Incredible! This stinks like a pile of dead horses!


Starling
Half-elven


Nov 21 2012, 7:57am

Post #7 of 98 (963 views)
Shortcut
I consider Radio New Zealand National [In reply to] Can't Post

to be the most reliable and credible news source in NZ.
They are my main source of news information. I am familiar with this reporter's work, and I have never heard anything I would consider to be biased.


DanielLB
Immortal


Nov 21 2012, 7:59am

Post #8 of 98 (986 views)
Shortcut
Odd decision [In reply to] Can't Post

But then again, who does want a negative story?! Wink

There has to be more to it than "she writes too many negative stories", surely?

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 21 2012, 9:22am

Post #9 of 98 (907 views)
Shortcut
Personal animosity? [In reply to] Can't Post

I expect most of the NZ media people know each other.

Anyway, arguments about "free speech" are meaningless when it comes to who you choose to invite to your party.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


Starling
Half-elven


Nov 21 2012, 9:47am

Post #10 of 98 (855 views)
Shortcut
Well, [In reply to] Can't Post

Radio New Zealand are refusing to send another journalist as a replacement.
I am proud of them for taking a stand.
Yes, it's an invitation to an event, but I feel very strongly that they are trying to manage and control what people say in order to gain favourable coverage. And that disgusts me.


Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 21 2012, 9:56am

Post #11 of 98 (842 views)
Shortcut
On the contrary [In reply to] Can't Post

They are more likely to get negative coverage by NOT inviting someone, and I'm sure they are well aware of that.

Ergo, the reason for not inviting this person has nothing to do with positive/negative coverage.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


Fŕfnir
Rohan


Nov 21 2012, 10:02am

Post #12 of 98 (880 views)
Shortcut
Well, it's different to silence a negative opinion of someone who saw the movie [In reply to] Can't Post

and to not invite someone who you already know will be negative. She probably wasn't neutral about the movie, wich is kind of your duty when your journalist before you see it.
But a negative opinion wouldn't have kill them, they should not have done it. And I'm sure they don't do that to exaggeratedly positive people.


Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 21 2012, 10:18am

Post #13 of 98 (845 views)
Shortcut
Exactly. [In reply to] Can't Post

She will still write here negative review, so the reasons for not inviting her must be something other. Probably something they can't talk about for legal reasons,

A Far Dragon is the best kind...

(This post was edited by Ataahua on Nov 21 2012, 7:26pm)


Danielos
Rohan

Nov 21 2012, 10:26am

Post #14 of 98 (830 views)
Shortcut
Taking the sides [In reply to] Can't Post

She seemed a pretty reasonable person in the radio clip. I think they saw her as a potential "party pooper" for being skeptically minded instead of the usual fanboys/fangirls. But I would expect most people on TORN to defend PJ & crew, since they are too much fans to be objective.


dormouse
Half-elven


Nov 21 2012, 10:41am

Post #15 of 98 (847 views)
Shortcut
That's hardly fair [In reply to] Can't Post

You see someone in a radio clip and you think she's 'pretty reasonable'. And anyone who disagrees is blinded by their admiration for Peter Jackson. Well, she's not likely to present in any other way, is she? A radio clip is hardly grounds to base a judgement on either way.

Whoever decided to bar her has their reasons. Without knowing what those are, no one is in a position to say whether they were right or wrong. Seems to me it's an unusual and rather extreme thing to do; as they haven't issued a blanket ban on anyone who might be critical, it would appear that their objection relates to this person specifically and therefore to something she has done or said in the past.

Was it fair? I don't know. But I do know that there are always two sides to anything, and without knowing the details, taking sides is not a good idea.


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Nov 21 2012, 11:16am

Post #16 of 98 (800 views)
Shortcut
She already didn't handle herself well in that clip, i don't like her. ;) [In reply to] Can't Post

"claims of animal abuse by Peter" - no, it was a farm the production company contracted to hold the animals. Peter Jackson might not even have been personally involved in choosing the farm.


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Nov 21 2012, 11:16am

Post #17 of 98 (787 views)
Shortcut
Well.... [In reply to] Can't Post

The production crew doesn't set up these promotional press junkets; the studio and distributors do, as they're responsible for all PR for the films (even PJ's production vlogs have to get their ok before they're uploaded). "PJ and crew" fulfill the promotional portion of their agreement by showing up to be interviewed by all the reporters invited. If the "uninvitation" had come from 3foot7 or Wingnut, or any of PJ's companies, that would be a totally different matter. But this came from Roadshow, the Warner Brothers distributor for AUS and NZ.

The confusion comes in because the phrase "the filmmakers" was used and people assume that can only mean PJ - the studio comes under that heading too, as it is the entity which is making the film (bankrolling and contracting with a production company to do the work). I think this is Warner Brothers' PR department's call, for whatever reason they objected to this reporter and apparently some others.

Silverlode






Xanaseb
Tol Eressea


Nov 21 2012, 12:38pm

Post #18 of 98 (723 views)
Shortcut
goodness, why so much scandalous hubub recently a week before the premier?... ... funny timing I say. // [In reply to] Can't Post

 

--I'm a victim of Bifurcation--
__________________________________________

Join us over at Barliman's chat all day, any day!
__________________________________________


Demosthenes
Sr. Staff


Nov 21 2012, 1:14pm

Post #19 of 98 (796 views)
Shortcut
Jackson spokesman says it's not them... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To


Despite numerous calls Roadshow hasn't responded to 3 News to confirm they've taken away Ms Norman's red carpet pass and why, but in a statement a spokesman for Sir Peter said:

“What we don't have - and have never had - is any form of media blacklist. That's not who we are or how we operate.”

http://www.3news.co.nz/Journo-banned-from-Hobbit-premiere---Radio-NZ/tabid/1748/articleID/277604/Default.aspx

TheOneRing.net Senior Staff
IRC Admin and Hall of Fire moderator


Antalasse
The Shire


Nov 21 2012, 1:29pm

Post #20 of 98 (690 views)
Shortcut
Yes, I was also wondering [In reply to] Can't Post

Is it normal for such a big-budget film to have that much negative press build-up before the premiere?

...in every wood in every spring there is a different green...(c)


Magpie
Immortal


Nov 21 2012, 1:40pm

Post #21 of 98 (697 views)
Shortcut
well.... this is kind of what I meant with the phrase 'opportune time' [In reply to] Can't Post

I think timing it like this gets more coverage for the person making the claims. Although, the second incident in this matter isn't a case of that. It happened recently.

But the other thing is, news sources are more likely to run stories that are on topics that are hot and these are stories that aren't rehashes of 'there's a movie coming out in a few weeks set in a fantasy land by an English author'

This stuff could be happening all the time but news sources don't feel they are interesting enough to their readers to carry.


LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery
TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide


Antalasse
The Shire


Nov 21 2012, 1:54pm

Post #22 of 98 (677 views)
Shortcut
Get something controversial or you won't be noticed? [In reply to] Can't Post

In my country the press only covered The Hobbit production as long as there was some kind of scandal - real or imagined. Frown

...in every wood in every spring there is a different green...(c)


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Nov 21 2012, 2:21pm

Post #23 of 98 (674 views)
Shortcut
So that's why I wasn't invited to the premiere. [In reply to] Can't Post

Tongue

Welcome to the real world. It all started with "embedded journalists." Anyone care to deny they don't massage the news now?

To play this sort of game with NZ's national broadcaster goes beyond disrespectful. It is a snub to the entire country. (But why not? didn't they change laws affecting human rights for this thing already?)

Is WB a world super power for bleep sakes? Un-bleeping-believable! I am sickened that I ever supported any aspect of this thing. And Peter can deny all he wants. His credibility has been on shaky ground since 2010 and this isn't helping one lick.

Mad


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Nov 21 2012, 2:22pm)


Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 21 2012, 2:38pm

Post #24 of 98 (768 views)
Shortcut
But don't you see, your allegations make no sense! [In reply to] Can't Post

If you don't invite someone for free food and drink, they are more likely to give you negative coverage. So the outcome would be exactly the opposite to what you claim.

How about Radio NZ bans all it's journalists from attending any kind of media junket, on the grounds that been given free food and drink could bias their coverage?

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


easterlingchief1
Rivendell


Nov 21 2012, 3:09pm

Post #25 of 98 (615 views)
Shortcut
This isn't a violation of free speech [In reply to] Can't Post

Studios and Production companies have the right to show their films to whomever in the press they choose to. Regardless of where you stand o nthe creator-or-audience-ownership debate, in a court of law, THEY are the ones who own the films, and they get to decide who gets to see it first. This is a corporation trying to promote its latest product, not that same corporate behemoth forcing a change on NZ's constitution.

That being said, I do think this is a little unscrupulous. I live in LA and the studios do this all the time. For press-screening link this, they're trying to get the best buzz that they can. Journalists get turned away and banned from press screenings all the time (see Fox's ban on Drew "Moriarty" Mcweeny of AintItCoolNews.com and Hitfix as an example), and that's largely excuse they've said something that could potentially hurt the box office returns.

The bigger question for me is did Peter JAckson have anything to do with this? She says "filmmakers," but that term has been used pretty liberally by the international press to refer from anything to PJ, the writers, the people at Weta, to the studio execs. Taking into account how the studio system works and PJ's statement from his publicist, I'm going to assume the decision o ban Ms. Norman came from Warners here in LA. They have a presence in Oceania, so it's not unlikely the marketing and PR teams had knowledge of her "coverage" of the Hobbit.

Regardless who made the call, it is a little messed up that the studio is throwing it's weight around in NZ like this. They abuse their power all the time here in the States (they're a private company so they can get away with stuff like this). It's not surprising that they're taking advantage of a country and populace with laxer labor laws and a less cynical view than the type they're used to working with.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.