Who will make the most money? Includes various book discussion

[tlcya]

I have no idea who will make the most money off of this baby, I only know that not a penny of it will come from me, to anyone involved in the case, not a witness, an investigator, an attorney, juror or family member will ever see one cent from me.

 

[KarmaGet'em]

Casey Anthony
NBC Finds Clever Way Around Paying for Interview

http://www.tmz.com/2011/10/24/casey-anthony-jose-baez-book-deal-nbc-today-show-producer-interview/#.TqVUTnKJSzE
and
http://wqyk.radio.com/2011/10/24/nbc-producer-trying-to-get-casey-anthony-a-book-deal/

The honchos at NBC -- the C stands for crafty -- think they figured out a way to snag an interview with Casey Anthony without paying a red cent, and make her a wealthy woman at the same time.

We've learned an NBC news producer has reached out to people in the literary world, trying to score a book deal for Anthony. The producer has contacted literary agents and others, telling them if he scored a book deal for Casey, she'd give the network a 1-hour, primetime special ... portions of which would also run on "Today."

The producer makes it clear -- NBC couldn't pay a cent for the interview. But he is gung-ho about the book deal, even representing that Casey wants up front money.

Jose Baez, Casey's lawyer, tells TMZ ... he has full knowledge of the producer's efforts, but says, "I'm not involved in that process. I did not entice him to do it."

Baez was quick to add, "Casey is not ready to do an interview."

We tried multiple times to get a comment from NBC -- so far, no luck.

 

[LambChop]

Do you ever wonder why these big media companies just don't get it?? jmo

 

[Hope4More]

Oh, NBC gets it- their It, which is dollars, period.

That corporation can't lose with this deal. It'll do an interview which will get good ratings…or not. Either way actual dollars aren't coming out of their pocket, and they're clearly betting on money flowing in.

OCA gets it too. Her It is also dollars, period. It doesn't matter to her whether anyone believes anything she says or does not say in a book or in an interview, nor does it matter how many peeps watch the interview or buy her book. She'll still get money she hasn't earned, her favorite flavor of dollars.

The only mildly curious thing about this alleged deal is what exactly a publisher would get out of it, since they are the ones who would be putting up the dollars to publish. Since no publisher could be assured of breaking even, much less raking in dollars, only one explanation comes to mind- -a quid pro quo.

My best guess of such an arrangement is that NBC "pays" a publisher in the form of free on-air marketing/advertising for that publisher's products, to the tune of whatever it will cost the publisher to do the book, including whatever blood money is paid to OCA.

Lots of potential dollars in that deal for any publisher, as here's what media outlets NBC owns:

NBC, Universal Studios, NBCUniversal Television Group, NBC News, USA Network, Syfy, Chiller, G4, CNBC, MSNBC, NBC.com, MSNBC.com, iVillage, PictureBox Movies, Bravo, qubo, Telemundo Television Studios, The Weather Channel, ShopNBC, Hulu, A&E Television Networks

 

[LinTX]

Hope4More, read that article and was puzzling over the same question re: publishers - why would they be interested now when none wanted to touch her before? Your quid pro quo theory is very interesting and certainly possible, yet the publisher would still be worried about the backlash on FCA's book, wouldn't they? I guess they could recover the $ loss on this book with the promotion via NBC of other books, but times are hard in the publishing world, and their reputation would certainly take a hit. I'm guessing they're talking about Jim Lichtenstein and Matt Lauer?

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Oh, NBC gets it- their It, which is dollars, period.

That corporation can't lose with this deal. It'll do an interview which will get good ratings…or not. Either way actual dollars aren't coming out of their pocket, and they're clearly betting on money flowing in.

OCA gets it too. Her It is also dollars, period. It doesn't matter to her whether anyone believes anything she says or does not say in a book or in an interview, nor does it matter how many peeps watch the interview or buy her book. She'll still get money she hasn't earned, her favorite flavor of dollars.

The only mildly curious thing about this alleged deal is what exactly a publisher would get out of it, since they are the ones who would be putting up the dollars to publish. Since no publisher could be assured of breaking even, much less raking in dollars, only one explanation comes to mind- -a quid pro quo.

My best guess of such an arrangement is that NBC "pays" a publisher in the form of free on-air marketing/advertising for that publisher's products, to the tune of whatever it will cost the publisher to do the book, including whatever blood money is paid to OCA.

Lots of potential dollars in that deal for any publisher, as here's what media outlets NBC owns:

NBC, Universal Studios, NBCUniversal Television Group, NBC News, USA Network, Syfy, Chiller, G4, CNBC, MSNBC, NBC.com, MSNBC.com, iVillage, PictureBox Movies, Bravo, qubo, Telemundo Television Studios, The Weather Channel, ShopNBC, Hulu, A&E Television Networks

If NBC is trying to work this type of deal, you can almost be certain that CBS and ABC are pitching a similar type of deal, and I totally agree with you that from their standpoint, its all about the money. This case has been somewhat of a holy grail for the media, in all its shapes and forms, and the bottom line for the media has always been about the money.

 

[LambChop]

Then there is something seriously wrong with us as a nation who would put up with this type of support of a woman who lies about the death of her child and then expects to make a million off of it. What type of message does NBC think they are sending to people who think they will do a "copycat" crime and expect to get away with it? I just think it is morally wrong to make money off of a child that you were the main suspect in connection with her death. jmo

 

[logicalgirl]

Casey Anthony
NBC Finds Clever Way Around Paying for Interview

http://www.tmz.com/2011/10/24/casey-anthony-jose-baez-book-deal-nbc-today-show-producer-interview/#.TqVUTnKJSzE
and
http://wqyk.radio.com/2011/10/24/nbc-producer-trying-to-get-casey-anthony-a-book-deal/

KarmaGet'em - thanks for posting this - there are no words to describe my disgust at yet another display at corporate greed. And to think Baez has taken the trouble to publicly state he "knows" about it but isn't "part" of it.

Have you not figured out Mr. Baez that we know you speak the truth as often as your client OCA does? In other words - why say anything at all since no one believes a word you say. How many times just since she has been released have you been proven to be a liar? It's nonsense.

 

[LinTX]

OK, still thinking about this and have come up with another theory. Maybe it's TMZ that 'gets it'? Putting this story out there, after seeing all the recent twitter talk about Lichtenstein/Mauer stuff maybe they're just posting what will bring them traffic? Many believe TMZ paid for those Ohio pics, and if so that sure paid off for them.

 

[zippitydoda]

As already pointed out - FCA is a ratings flop...She's easily beat out by people who buy crap from abandoned storage lockers, a family who hunts pigs and ancient aliens. Numbers don't lie, and it appears that FCA is not quite the draw they thought she'd be. At this point, maybe NBC got their interview by offering FCA a case of hot peanuts, a $25 dollar Starbucks card, and few Slim Jims.

http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratin...s-special-lands-on-top-663512/cable_20111019/

select cable nielsen ratings (national numbers for wednesday, october 19, 2011). Here are the highlights of 26 ad-sustained programs that aired in primetime on the cable networks last night, courtesy of TravisYanan:

Storage Wars (9:30) (4.250 million viewers, #1; adults 18-49: 1.7, #1)
American Horror Story (2.586 million viewers, #2; adults 18-49: 1.5, #2)
Psych (2.477 million viewers, #3; adults 18-49: 1.0, #T4)
Pretty Little Liars (2.470 million viewers, #4; adults 18-49: 1.0, #T4)
South Park (2.430 million viewers, #5; adults 18-49: 1.4, #3)
American Hoggers (10:00) (2.104 million viewers, #6; adults 18-49: 0.7, #T9)
American Hoggers (10:30) (1.807 million viewers, #7; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
MythBusters (1.806 million viewers, #8; adults 18-49: 0.8, #T7)
The Ultimate Fighter (10:00) (1.649 million viewers, #9; adults 18-49: 1.0, #T4)
Ghost Hunters (1.548 million viewers, #10; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Brad Meltzer's Decoded (1.525 million viewers, #11; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Ancient Aliens (1.461 million viewers, #12; adults 18-49: 0.5, #T16)
The Real World (1.296 million viewers, #13; adults 18-49: 0.8, #T7)
Operation Repo (9:30) (1.244 million viewers, #14; adults 18-49: 0.4, #T18)
Extreme Couponing (10:00) (1.206 million viewers, #15; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Penn & Teller Tell a Lie (1.185 million viewers, #16; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Nick Swardson's Pretend Time (1.183 million viewers, #17; adults 18-49: 0.7, #T9)
Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files (1.160 million viewers, #18; adults 18-49: 0.5, #T16)
Top Chef: Just Desserts (1.033 million viewers, #19; adults 18-49: 0.4, #T18)
Bear Swamp Recovery (10:00) (0.980 million viewers, #20; adults 18-49: 0.4, #T18)
E! True Hollywood Story: Casey Anthony (0.680 million viewers, #21; adults 18-49: 0.3, #T21)
Work of Art (0.636 million viewers, #22; adults 18-49: 0.3, #T21)
Fort Boyard - Ultimate Challenge (0.331 million viewers, #23; adults 18-49: 0.0, #T25)
Too Fat for 15: Fighting Back (0.191 million viewers, #24; adults 18-49: 0.1, #T23)
Inside the NFL (0.161 million viewers, #25; adults 18-49: 0.1, #T23)
Inside NASCAR (0.034 million viewers, #26; adults 18-49: 0.0, #T25)

Source: Nielsen Media Research

 

[logicalgirl]

As already pointed out - FCA is a ratings flop...She's easily beat out by people who buy crap from abandoned storage lockers, a family who hunts pigs and acient aliens. Looks like FCA is not quite the draw JB thought she'd be. Maybe NBC got their interview by offering FCA a case of hot peanuts, a $25 dollar starbucks card, and few slim jims.

http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratin...s-special-lands-on-top-663512/cable_20111019/

select cable nielsen ratings (national numbers for wednesday, october 19, 2011). Here are the highlights of 26 ad-sustained programs that aired in primetime on the cable networks last night, courtesy of TravisYanan:

Storage Wars (9:30) (4.250 million viewers, #1; adults 18-49: 1.7, #1)
American Horror Story (2.586 million viewers, #2; adults 18-49: 1.5, #2)
Psych (2.477 million viewers, #3; adults 18-49: 1.0, #T4)
Pretty Little Liars (2.470 million viewers, #4; adults 18-49: 1.0, #T4)
South Park (2.430 million viewers, #5; adults 18-49: 1.4, #3)
American Hoggers (10:00) (2.104 million viewers, #6; adults 18-49: 0.7, #T9)
American Hoggers (10:30) (1.807 million viewers, #7; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
MythBusters (1.806 million viewers, #8; adults 18-49: 0.8, #T7)
The Ultimate Fighter (10:00) (1.649 million viewers, #9; adults 18-49: 1.0, #T4)
Ghost Hunters (1.548 million viewers, #10; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Brad Meltzer's Decoded (1.525 million viewers, #11; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Ancient Aliens (1.461 million viewers, #12; adults 18-49: 0.5, #T16)
The Real World (1.296 million viewers, #13; adults 18-49: 0.8, #T7)
Operation Repo (9:30) (1.244 million viewers, #14; adults 18-49: 0.4, #T18)
Extreme Couponing (10:00) (1.206 million viewers, #15; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Penn & Teller Tell a Lie (1.185 million viewers, #16; adults 18-49: 0.6, #T11)
Nick Swardson's Pretend Time (1.183 million viewers, #17; adults 18-49: 0.7, #T9)
Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files (1.160 million viewers, #18; adults 18-49: 0.5, #T16)
Top Chef: Just Desserts (1.033 million viewers, #19; adults 18-49: 0.4, #T18)
Bear Swamp Recovery (10:00) (0.980 million viewers, #20; adults 18-49: 0.4, #T18)
E! True Hollywood Story: Casey Anthony (0.680 million viewers, #21; adults 18-49: 0.3, #T21)
Work of Art (0.636 million viewers, #22; adults 18-49: 0.3, #T21)
Fort Boyard - Ultimate Challenge (0.331 million viewers, #23; adults 18-49: 0.0, #T25)
Too Fat for 15: Fighting Back (0.191 million viewers, #24; adults 18-49: 0.1, #T23)
Inside the NFL (0.161 million viewers, #25; adults 18-49: 0.1, #T23)
Inside NASCAR (0.034 million viewers, #26; adults 18-49: 0.0, #T25)

Source: Nielsen Media Research

Zippitydoda - first let me applaud you for taking the time to post all that technical information.
I doubt it was your intention, but you gave me a big bellylaugh when I looked at the progams that we chosen well before the True Hollywood Story.

If that doesn't send a powerful message - I don't know what will!

If I think about OCA actually appearing for an interview - I'd have to ask myself whether when it came right down to it - would I actually watch it? :waitasec:

I might have some mild curiosity about how her physical appearance has changed - but could she actually say any thing at all that would tweak my interest? Nope.

I admitted to watching Extreme Couponing that night :blushing: - and I'm positive I'd make that choice all over again (if my channels offered nothing better):floorlaugh:

 

[logicalgirl]

OK, still thinking about this and have come up with another theory. Maybe it's TMZ that 'gets it'? Putting this story out there, after seeing all the recent twitter talk about Lichtenstein/Mauer stuff maybe they're just posting what will bring them traffic? Many believe TMZ paid for those Ohio pics, and if so that sure paid off for them.

Agree LinTx - I was also wondering if this was a combo of TMZ and Baez trolling to keep or to attempt to keep OCA's name in the news until they can actually get an interview for her. I think they think there will be a time when the "public" will be "over it" and ready for an interview from her.

Laughing at Baez's portrayal or picture he's trying to imply that - OCA isn't ready for an interview yet - poor suffering in grief little waif that she is! :furious:

 

[Hope4More]

LG- I thought it was kinda interesting that Baez said he wasn't part of it, actually. I don't believe him for a second either, but he seems to be wary of having the public identify him with this latest OCA sleaze deal, and that's a retreat from his previous full-throttled defense of OCA's "right" in these matters. A small victory, to be sure, but a victory still.

Chops- of course its immoral. But, remember the standard corporate excuses for this type of sleaze :

1. We're just giving the public what it wants.
2. We're not in the business of deciding moral issues for the public, we're just putting the information out there and letting them decide for themselves.
3. We're a business with a corporate responsibility to provide value (read dollars) for our shareholders.

LinX- From reading media's tea leaves over the past month I'd guess that a conclusion has been reached that the public's anger over the verdict has subsided enough to chance going forward with OCA products.

Also, IMO, a successful boycott against a book publisher is way more difficult to pull off than one against a corporate television network. Networks rely on advertisers for their profits and advertisers are notoriously conservative about risk, as well as fearful of any possibility of having their brands tainted by controversy. Book publishers don't have the same kind of restraints.

DevilA- we agree! :great: NBC honchos- and those from other networks-are probably smarting (and salivating) over how much HLN and others raked in from OCA coverage...

 

[Hope4More]

I think TMZ is the official trial-balloon floater for JB and OCA.

As in, not so much that they're trying to keep up public interest, but that they're "leaking" stuff out to test how strong the winds are, and thus whether or not its time to go for the bucks.

 

[logicalgirl]

LG- I thought it was kinda interesting that Baez said he wasn't part of it, actually. I don't believe him for a second either, but he seems to be wary of having the public identify him with this latest OCA sleaze deal, and that's a retreat from his previous full-throttled defense of OCA's "right" in these matters. A small victory, to be sure, but a victory still.

Chops- of course its immoral. But, remember the standard corporate excuses for this type of sleaze :

1. We're just giving the public what it wants.
2. We're not in the business of deciding moral issues for the public, we're just putting the information out there and letting them decide for themselves.
3. We're a business with a corporate responsibility to provide value (read dollars) for our shareholders.

LinX- From reading media's tea leaves over the past month I'd guess that a conclusion has been reached that the public's anger over the verdict has subsided enough to chance going forward with OCA products.

Also, IMO, a successful boycott against a book publisher is way more difficult to pull off than one against a corporate television network. Networks rely on advertisers for their profits and advertisers are notoriously conservative about risk, as well as fearful of any possibility of having their brands tainted by controversy. Book publishers don't have the same kind of restraints.

DevilA- we agree! :great: NBC honchos- and those from other networks-are probably smarting (and salivating) over how much HLN and others raked in from OCA coverage...

Good observation - and maybe Bagwah stepping back in horror at the thought of Baez hugging and kissing her goodbye gave him a tip in the direction of how he is actually perceived among professionals out there...

 

[Chilly Willy]

Hope4More, read that article and was puzzling over the same question re: publishers - why would they be interested now when none wanted to touch her before? Your quid pro quo theory is very interesting and certainly possible, yet the publisher would still be worried about the backlash on FCA's book, wouldn't they? I guess they could recover the $ loss on this book with the promotion via NBC of other books, but times are hard in the publishing world, and their reputation would certainly take a hit. I'm guessing they're talking about Jim Lichtenstein and Matt Lauer?

It seems to me this would be a stupid deal for any publisher. Casey's first public interview will be the big money maker. After that, she has very little value.

 

[logicalgirl]

It seems to me this would be a stupid deal for any publisher. Casey's first public interview will be the big money maker. After that, she has very little value.

Agree Chilly Willy and we've read her jailhouse letters and some of her myspace - can you imagine what a book of her "experiences" would be like -shudder ...

 

[kaki]

It seems to me this would be a stupid deal for any publisher. Casey's first public interview will be the big money maker. After that, she has very little value.

I wonder if the average viewer would really be that interested in an interview from her? I have been watching the case since day one, watched every day of the trial... but I still have not attempted to view her E true hollywood story. If I'm not in the least interested in hearing defense "spin" .. and a whitewashed version of the story.. who would be?

Now if we had Jeff Ashton, LDB, Judge Stricklan, Yuri...... tell their version.. now THAT would be interesting. I do have a mild interest in watching how she will spin her story now.. and how silly she will look on her big interview.. but other than that..... YAWN...:waitasec:

 

[Hope4More]

Zippitydoda- FYI, here's some more context for the E -debacle's Nielson ratings:


1. There are approx. 116 million television-watching households in the US.

2. On Oct 19, in the E-story time-slot, approx. 3,650,000 peeps were peeping ON CABLE, which is where the E story was placed.

The ratings thus do not include the millions of folks who watched other-than-cable in that time-slot that night.

3. Of the 3.65 million peeps peeping that night, a paltry 680 thousand tuned into the E-story at all. BTW, the ratings do not capture the number of peeps who watched for a few minutes then reached for the clicker (or ran for the shower), they just say who tuned in at all.

4. Most important to the profiteers, of the 680 thousand who tuned it at all, only 300 thousand were between the ages of 18-49, the audience advertisers are most interested in because they are prime consumers.

300,000. That's it. Ridiculously measly by any measure, but especially so to those who measure the world solely by how many dollars it can produce for them.

 

[cityslick]

Then there is something seriously wrong with us as a nation who would put up with this type of support of a woman who lies about the death of her child and then expects to make a million off of it. What type of message does NBC think they are sending to people who think they will do a "copycat" crime and expect to get away with it? I just think it is morally wrong to make money off of a child that you were the main suspect in connection with her death. jmo

Greta Van Susterien interviewed OJ on FoX news, this shouldn't be surprising. The TV industry is not in the business of morals, it's in the business of making money. If it was in the business of morals there would be a whole lot of dead air on tv right now.

Blame society. They obviously watch this stuff to justify the networks putting it on the air.