O.J. special was NOT cancelled because of its horrific nature

[kay1864]

At least not directly. As with anything else in Teevee land, it's all about RATINGS and $$$. From Broadcasting and Cable:

Major advertisers appear unlikely to want to be associated with the special, which could subject them to sponsor boycotts by angry viewers.

If the special airs commercial-free, Nielsen would not count it, erasing any ratings spike Fox would get to improve its performance this November.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=article&articleid=CA6393289

Fox could not afford the ratings loss (none of their new shows are catching on), nor the loss of advertisers. Has nothing to do with their shocked sensibilities <snort>

[Egalitariat]

1. That doesn't explain cancelling the book too

Did they explain that?

[kay1864]

4. B&C addresses only TV, not publishing

My guess is that Fox didn't want a boycott of its programs. Or Judith Regan didn't want to publish the book without the free publicity.

[SoCalDem]

6. And the publishing house is owned by the same parent company

It's all just a big ad-fest for their "products".. They promote their "authors" on their shows, and the "authors" provide "seat fillers" for the lame tv shows..

[dicknbush]

2. Exactlly right.

Now if Oj would just crawl back into his hole in the ground we can all get back to normal life.

Thansk you very much

[Fridays Child]

3. If only Murdoch would find that helping to perpetuate a bloody war for oil...

...is equally "ill-considered."

[warrens]

5. Suddenly, it's ALL going wrong for the Nazi Party

Must be like being on the Russian Front.

[StarTurtle]

7. Are you suggesting that Fox is motivated by venal concerns?

I'm shocked, shocked! </sarcasm>

:rofl:

[kay1864]

9. My bad, I definitely should have put...

"Not for the faint of heart" in the subject title :+

[ShockediSay]

8. Betcha Murdoch put it up 'cause he owns the publisher of the book

Great argument against cross media ownership

That and the Iraq war

[Oeditpus Rex]

10. The Faux affiliate in San Francisco

had already announced it'd show PSAs in place of commercials during the broadcast, so I'd assume sales for it were quite low and/or met with much resistance.

[AZBlue]

11. Actually, I hate to defend them in anyway, but Fox and HarperCollins didn't know until we did.

Judith Regan didn't tell anyone about the book or the special until two weeks ago. They were caught by surprise as well.

I'm not saying that the negative press didn't have anything to do with their pulling it - it did and thank goodness they listened to the public this time. But, the fault of this matter really lies with Regan and I do hope she's fired for it.

[Sydnie]

12. Plus, it was due to air at the end of sweeps

which sets the rates for next year. Wouldn't do to shoot yourself in the foot for the coming year just to grab some headlines (although negative ones) for this sweeps period.

[bklyncowgirl]

13. Hit 'em in the pocketbook--that's where they'll feel it the most.

A truly ill considered venture all around. I hope they lost a bundle.

[Goat or Panic]

14. Commercial Free?

In the grand tradition of other quality work like "Path to 9/11" Great company to be in.

[librechik]

15. dare I suggest that somebody told Fox/Judith Regan a lawsuit was imminent?

not that I know anything. Just that if i were the Goldmans or the Browns, it would be an option I would SERIOUSLY consider. And I'd make sure to wipe out any profits they might ever get in perpetuity.

Bastards.