Drudge: It's The Beginning Of A Second Media Century

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Welcome back to the show. I'm Joe Scarborough. A news flash: Matt Drudge in the "Drudge Report" is reporting tonight that CBS is going to be pulling "The Reagans." They will yank it, not show it and are going to be giving it to Showtime to show. With us right now, the man who broke the story, just like all the other stories that he's broken over the past five, six, seven years. We've got Matt Drudge of the "Drudge Report" on the line.

Matt, you have done it again. What do you know about this story on "The Reagans"?

MATT DRUDGE, "DRUDGE REPORT": They've replaced it with a story on the Bushes. Author Kitty Kelly has sold it to CBS. No, just kidding. A tremendous night. It's the beginning of a second media century, Joe, where it's much more of a people-driven media. And I say that not lightly. It was the Internet, it was talk radio, it was cable that put pressure on CBS, and heretofore, there's never been this kind of pressure applied to one of the big titans, one of the big three. And the pressure went all the way to the top of a super company called Viacom, and the chairman earlier today is my information said, "Listen, let's just get it on cable. Let's do it on Showtime. Let's show it uncut. Everybody will watch." So the word is that CBS will pass on it. It will not air on free television, but the full glory of "The Reagans" will air on Showtime.

SCARBOROUGH: Matt Drudge, you have driven this story for weeks. You, of course, were the one that got the script, the "I am the antichrist" quote from the script, Streisand drawing a distance from "The Reagans." It's remarkable the inside information that you have had. Why have you been driving the story so much? Why do you think this is such an important story right now?

DRUDGE: It is because to me, it was a defining moment when a script became available. The "New York Times," in all fairness, was the first one to go out ahead of it. Now, over the summer, I warned my radio audience over the Premier Radio Networks, "Watch out. This is coming. It's nasty, it's vicious. They're filming it now." They wouldn't even film this in the United States. That's how hot this thing was. They had to go up to Canada. Or maybe it was the cost cutting for production value. But to me, it was such a clear misrepresentation of reality that you've got to be careful, especially with a man suffering from severe Alzheimer's who's not able to defend himself.

Joe, I challenged Moonves to say: "Why don't you put Nancy Reagan on the air? Why don't you let her say this is trash, and this is hurtful, and her husband can't defend himself? And they wouldn't do it. So to have them in retreat, again, is a great win for a new media of all stripes.

SCARBOROUGH: Well, you know, it's interesting, you were talking about warning your radio audience, and I, you know, I listened to it that Sunday night and every Sunday night afterwards, and we were flooded with e-mails once you started breaking the news. Merv Griffin told us about it, said it was coming. But yet you touched on something, I think, that's even bigger than the story tonight. And that is that this is the new media striking back at Viacom, a multinational media conglomeration, and your reports, talk radio, alternative media, forcing Viacom to back down. That's in a sense even bigger than the impeachment story that you started breaking in 1998, isn't it?

DRUDGE: I don't know. I'll leave that to others to decide. But again, this goes straight to the heart of an issue that who owns the air waves and, if people have a right to criticize, to talk about things while they're in production is a whole new way of thinking. It used to be you would consume the product, and then you would get outraged, and you wouldn't have an outlet. And your previous guest, Bernie Goldberg, demonstrated that so well in his two new book -- in his new book and his previous book, that there was nowhere else to go. You had to deal with it. But we are living in a new media environment where people can send e-mails. There are a lot of different ways now to communicate. And again, this is a clear example where people rose up, because it was hurtful and vicious on a beloved American character. Now, Tom Shales of the "Washington Post" thought this was too soon and tacky. Liz Smith, the great liberal gossip columnist in the spirit of Winchell and Hedda said this is tacky and not good. So even the left was uncomfortable. It was only the ardent ones -- the Streisands -- who were digging in and saying this must air!

SCARBOROUGH: What's been your response from your Sunday night audience and Drudge radio? What's been the response to all those -- the millions who come to the "Drudge Report" every day, to your breaking stories on "The Reagans"? Have you been overwhelmed with the anti-CBS response you've gotten since you started driving this story?

DRUDGE: It is mixed. We are -- there are many people in this country, rightfully so, who are not pro boycott and who are uncomfortable with censorship. And to their solace, it is going to air uncut in Showtime, and they wouldn't have seen it uncut on CBS, as "Newsweek" reported. They'd already taken a machete to it. The AIDS line had been cut. Moonves was ordering more cuts as late as this weekend, the CBS chairman. So they will see it in its full glory, so to say that it will never air is wrong and false. But for it to air on a beloved CBS, which just celebrated its 75th anniversary last night in the spirit of "Lucy" and Jackie Gleason, and all the great quality of CBS, this just didn't fit. And this is not what they ordered. They ordered a love story, and it ended up just being a political hit job. Again, quoting Reagan in one bizarre scene, "I am the anti-Christ." I mean, David Geffen could not have scripted this one better.

SCARBOROUGH: I tell you, when you posted that last week, "I am the anti-Christ," I think that may have been the turning point in this entire debate. And I saw the CBS 75th anniversary last night, a remarkable show about a remarkable network with a very proud history. And you're right, it doesn't fit. Got to ask you one final question, Matt. How do you do it? How do you have the sources that you have at "Newsweek," at CBS, at the "New York Times"? How do you break these stories week in and week out?

DRUDGE: It's an army of concerned citizens who are frustrated that main press will not print and go with things. Back in the Lewinsky era last century, or the Kathleen Willeys, or the Brodericks, and it's just an endless series of spiked, suppressed stories. And this was a script that was too hot. And, you know, CBS kept its fingers crossed that no one would expose the details, and it would air and divide a country, which, you know, it didn't get to that point. And I'll just say this, Joe, the notion that Streisand was so intimately involved in this, I think, will be a future story and a defeat on leftest politics disguised as art, because when you start talking about a beloved American president -- and if they went and did a Clinton story, there would be just as much outrage, but I think we're safe to say Les Moonves is not ordering the Clinton saga in any version at this hour.

SCARBOROUGH: All right, thank you so much, Matt Drudge. We are going to have a lot more on this tomorrow night. We certainly hope you'll come back and tell us more. It is a remarkable story, a remarkable media story about what the alternative media can do. Thank you so much, Matt Drudge.

SCARBOROUGH: The "Drudge Report" is reporting tonight that "The Reagans," the mini-series, has been pulled. And as I asked Matt Drudge before, I personally think this is going to be a bigger media story than even Matt Drudge breaking impeachment back in 1998.

Inquiring minds would like to know who might be the Showtime sponsors of such a "political hit job," just so a few letters can be written to companies to express opinions regarding the purchase of products by those that want to sponsor such rubbish.

Showtime would not have sponsors would it? Movie channels most often run entire movies and only plug their own shows instead of products.

Now, if everyone cancelled their Showtime subscriptions or threatened their local cable companies with some sort of retribution for Showtime airing this Streisand-motivated, libelous, insipid hate piece; we might see some action.

If those of us who do not subscribe to Showtime all of a sudden subscribed and then in one fell swoop cancelled our subscriptions, this too would be a wake up call.

If we all cancelled our subscriptions tomorrow, resubscribed, the day after, cancelled the day after that, resubscribed the day after that, etc, etc, etc; we could drive them completely nuts at both the cable companies and Showtime and more importantly Viacom.

CBS: 'REAGAN' FILM WAS BIASED

**Exclusive**

CBS head Les Moonves made the ultimate decision to pull THE REAGANS off the November schedule after concluding the film was "biased" against the former president, top sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

"It just doesn't work," Moonves told staffers in a bold move of conscience. "Listen, we are not afraid of controversy, we'd go out there if it came in at 50-50, pro and con, but it simply isn't working. It's biased."

Moonves, a self-described liberal Democrat, on Tuesday took full responsibility for canceling the movie, sources tell DRUDGE. "He made up his own mind after seeing it," a top source said.

Meanwhile, REAGANS producers are feeling great disillusionment with CBS and the entire series of events, it has been learned.

"We got a call from a midlevel flunky at CBS telling us to get it ready for SHOWTIME," reveals a source close to the production team of Craig Zadan and Neil Meron.

Developing...

Just poking around the Internet on the names Craig Zadan and Neil Meron.

Craig was executive producer for 2002's "Chicago" and "Martin and Lewis," 1984's "Footloose," and the Judy Garland movie based on Lorna Luft's book in 2001. (Judy Davis played Garland then, and plays Nancy in this current Reagan debacle.) He's done other movies and TV projects. He's been nominated but never won an Emmy.

He's currently producing the Footloose 2004 remake, and Farenheit 451, scheduled for 2005.

On cursory glance, Neil Meron's name doesn't appear anywhere that Zadan's name doesn't.

The two of them are scheduled to receive an award along with Barbra Streisand, on March 6th next year, 2004. The gents will be honored with the org's "corporate award for their work on projects which positively portray gay and lesbian characters." More Craig Zadan News

Cast photo from the "CHARLES STROUSE SONGBOOK" evening at the Cinegrill in Hollywood. From left, Jo Anne Worley, Susan Watson, Robert Mammana, Carol Lawrence, Jason Graae, Lee Lessack (back), Charles Strouse, Bonnie Franklin, Lisa Richard, Patrick Gandy (back), Andrew Meeks, Jeffrey Polk, Scott Orlin, Craig Zadan.

No idea if the above photo is the same Craig Zadan or not.

Thanks, lainie!

I'm really proud of Matt. Folks often dismiss him as a lightweight, but he has an uncanny knack for finding those gems that push the buttons of conservatives that galvanize them into action. And it's all to seldom we get to see tangible wins like this one-- even for something as ham-handed as CBS trying to foist a hit-piece about the Reagans on the American public!

Once again, he's at the forefront of covering news that the news tries to bury. I hope Matt is with us for a long time and keeps digging at all those phonies and empty suits in Hollywood and DC.

A Sad Day for Artistic Freedom
...Barbra Streisand
Posted on November 4, 2003

I am deeply disappointed that CBS, the network that in 1964 gave me complete artistic control in creating television specials, now caved in to right wing Republican pressure to cancel the network broadcast of the movie The Reagans. (And I say MOVIE - because this is NOT a documentary - it's a television drama.) The movie will now be aired on Showtime, where the difference in viewership is in the millions.

One can only imagine the kind of pressure that would compel CBS to take such an extraordinary action. This was an organized Republican spin machine at work. Remember the Dixie Chicks controversy? It wasn't the larger general public that called in to radio stations and burned CDs, it was a small group of right wing activists. In fact, now the band is more popular than ever, with a sold out summer tour.

I don't believe Democrats often, if ever, try to muscle the First Amendment like this. For example, in 1983, no one stopped NBC from airing Kennedy, a biopic that portrayed President Kennedy and other members of his family and administration as deeply flawed, even though the movie could have potentially been hurtful to Jackie Kennedy, who was still alive to see it, as well as to her children.

This is censorship, pure and simple. Well, maybe not all that pure. Censorship never is. Due to their experience with the restrictive English government, the framers of our constitution specifically included a ban on prior restraint in the First Amendment, which is an attempt to stop information from getting out there before the public has a chance to see it at all - exactly what is going on in this case. Of course, CBS as a company has the legal right to make decisions about what they do and do not air. However, these important decisions should be based on artistic integrity rather than an attempt to appease a small group of vocal dissidents. Indeed, today marks a sad day for artistic freedom - one of the most important elements of an open and democratic society.

http://barbrastreisand.com/statements.html

Barbra Streisand quote, March 24, 2003:

"I have been arguing that point for many years now, that artists have just as much of a right to speak out as every other citizen. In 1995, I gave a speech at Harvard called the artist as citizen. I made the point then and many times since that artists are citizens first and artists second. We have opinions and ideas, just like anybody else. The difference is that we are given more visibility from which to speak - so we have to be informed and we have to be responsible, but it doesn't mean we have to be quiet."

Addind to this thread, blog (heh), here are links to more pummeling that CBS has received lately from the VRWC, this time from homeschoolers:

CBS Evening News did a two-part hit piece:
A Dark Side To Homeschooling, part 1, 10/13/2003
Home Schooling Nightmares, part 2, 10/14/2003

A few of the responses:
CBS warns of homeschooling's 'dark side' Joseph Farah, 10/15/2003
The Dark Side of CBS, Joseph Farah, 10/16/2003
CBS Needs Education on Homeschooling, Marc Morano, 10/16/2003
CBS: Continually Biased Shows, Kyle Williams, 10/18/2003
Sponsor Pulls Ad from CBS News After Homeschoolers' Complaints, Marc Morano, 10/21/2003
A Defense of Home Schooling, Hans Zeiger, 10/21/2003
The Dark Side to CBS, HSLDA, 10/23/2003
Washington Times editorial, 10/24/2003
CONGRESS Sends Letter to CBS, 10/27/2003

And it goes on and on. And that's nothing compared to every homeschooling network/mailing list that I'm on, and that I've heard of. And these people know how to write letters. (and so do their kids)

p.s. homeschool's dark side (parody site)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.