Blogging Legitimacy, TONY, Adam Rapp, And The Kitchen Sink

Okay... I'm getting wary of continuing this discussion of bloggers' ethics, bloggers' nights, free tickets and the like, but there's a number of things going on that I feel a need to respond to.

First, is the Time Out NY article that singles this blog out for praise:

You know that clever theater blog you bookmarked, the one with inside dope on the edgiest shows and artists? Be careful—it might be a PR tool. Marketing departments have offered drama bloggers free seats to write about hipster-skewing plays such as Pig Farm and Dying City. Mind you, theaters don’t demand positive write-ups; they just want the cool-kid buzz. Blogs to trust: George Hunka’s Superfluities, Isaac Butler’s Parabasis and Jaime’s Surplus.

Here's the problem with this article. I'm the architect of the Pig Farm bloggers' night. As far as I know the whole practice that TONY is trying to expose in this piece was at least partially my idea in the first place. So let me explain and defend the practice a little bit:

The idea behind bloggers nights is that the bloggers approach the shows, not the other way around. As far as I know, all three of the big bloggers nights that I know of (for The Internationalist, Dying City and Pig Farm) originated with bloggers (Dying City's bloggers night was organized by Mark Armstrong, the other two by me). The deal is we get free tickets and in exchange promise to write about the show.

Anyone who has read the bloggers' night coverage can tell you that the free tickets in no way guarantee a good review. All three of the above shows got mixed reactions from bloggers. All entries were linked to at whichever blog was organizing the thing, good or bad, so that readers could have a diversity of opinions.

Because that's the whole point. We're trying to diversify the opinion-making marketplace, and thus cut down on the monolithic power of The New York Times and, to a lesser extent, Time Out.

Most theatre bloggers are theatre artists. Because of this, most theatre bloggers don't have a lot of money to spend on tickets. That's why we ask for free tickets.

In my opinion, there is nothing ethically shaky about giving a blogger free tickets to see a show. Companies give out free tickets to people for all sorts of reasons. One of them is that they are hoping the people who see the show will somehow spread word of mouth about it, be they press, bloggers, or members of Audience Extras.

Frankly, I find it odd that people think a free ticket is all it would take to buy us off. I get free tickets to shows all the time. Sometimes 'cause I'm a blogger, sometimes not.

I understand that, theoretically, this could be a really corrupt(ing) thing, but I think the evidence shows that in general, participants in bloggers nights and people who've gotten free tickets to shows have behaved admirably and honestly. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

Clearly, however, there's some point I'm missing, because every time the subject comes up we get accused of somehow being shady. So let me just ask... what am I missing here? I'd really appreciate someone explaining this one to me.

Comments

[MattJ]

Yeah I'm glad you posted this because I was not mentioned in that TONY thing but tried to write an in depth response to Dying City and The Internationalist. But I am by no means some sort of marketing tool. In fact, those examples that TONY mentiones... none of the people that wrote about them were "PR tools." That's just false information. So I'm glad you cleared that up.

I think one of the best things about these blogs is that we don't have to read them with a predisposed cynicism just because it is "the internet." If we approach them as readers with an open mind and a casual demeanor we'll find better how they can best be experienced.

[Mac]

I was going to write that this whole thing is absurd, that blogs don't remotely get enough people out to plays to make even the slightest bit of difference. But actually, I guess, that's the very thing people like you and Mr. Excitement are trying to change.

We need more time to see if there's an ethical issue here. The same big media reviewers keep getting free tix no matter how many bad reviews they write, which is appropriate. I suppose it's possible that theater companies might try to screen or cherry-pick bloggers who tend toward positive reviews, like they might allow Isaac's bloggers night for "Luxembourg In The Age Of Custard" as long as he doesn't invite the notorious blogger Grumpy McHateseverything.

Until something like that happens, as long as bloggers disclose they got free tix in a review, I think readers are grownup enough to handle it.

[Doug]

I couldn't agree more. Here's a link to my reactions to the 'Time Out' cover story.
http://www.thalattatheatre.blogspot.com/

[Joshua James]

I don't believe you're missing anything . . . I think TONY may have missed a few things (and quite a few other blogs, as well, not to mention Martin Denton's website and blog) . . .

And though I mostly don't take advantage of free tix (PIG FARM was the only time I have, and one of the primary reasons I accepted was simply to meet a lot of other theatre bloggers) I don't see any ethical problem for accepting them. Actors, directors, writers, all get offered free tix . . . I did before I had a blog and probably will after . . . ticketing agencies get free tix, with the hopes they're push the show, but there's no guarantee they will . . .

I appreciate what you're doing . . . I remember back in 99 when all anyone spoke of was AINT IT COOL NEWS, which took movie reviewing out of the hands of MSM and into the hands of fanboy geeks, and the power it had and still does . . .

It stands to reason the same thing could happen with theatre, at some point . . .

[herxanthikles]

Even if a critic/blogger behaves ethically doesn't mean that I trust them or their reviews. The critics I like have built their trust with me through hundreds of reviews, and if they are new on the scene, I can usually tell with one or two reviews whether I like their writing, their taste, and whether they seem to have their head together. If a critic is spineless enough to skew their review positive just because they got a free ticket, odds are I've long ago stopped reading them.

Also, who says that a free ticket makes for a positive review? A free ticket means I haven't placed a value on the experience and therefore I'm not invested in its being good or bad. If I've paid money for a ticket, I will try harder to like the play just because I would like to think my money was well spent. I've always thought that was behind the routine standing ovations on Broadway: the audience is not applauding the performers but themselves for having spent $100 per seat.

[adam]

um, don't people who review plays get tickets? why wouldn't they? and maybe we are trying to not necessarily write reviews but I mean, come on. And seriously, I get already more free tickets than I can use, often to things i actually want to see. fuck this shit, I'm joining the military.

[James]

I think Joshua's right: you're not missing anything. Based on the quote you presented, the article (or at least the thesis you presented) is based on a half-baked opinion and a bit of shoddy research.

And people getting pissy about the free tickets eludes me. I'f I'm asked or expected to write about a show, I expect I don't have to pay $70-$100 to do so (especially since we don't get paid for our blogging reviews, there's no reason for us to have to pay to review).

[MattJ]

Totally, James.

[Moxie the Maven]

Thanks so much, Isaac, for being such an eloquent voice of reason in this madness. I feel that the stuff from Time Out is an incredible put-down, especially shocking when David Cote is himself a prominent blogger. We aren't the only ones the issue insults - it's assertion that chorus girls are ugly, sondheim doesn't write his own songs (or write as much of them as we think), etc. are offensive and bizarre. The issue devoted to theater seems intent on slamming many hard-working creative contributors of the theater world. What's the deal? I, like you, wonder what memo I didn't get.

[Alison Croggon]

TN thinks NY needs to lighten up...! What's wrong with free tix? I couldn't afford to go to the theatre without them and I wouldn't have a review blog.

Btw, David's post is, to say the least, a little ambiguous - but was he referring to these blogs when he was talking about PR tools? I know publishers sometimes demand that authors start blogs to publicise their books, not realising of course that blogs are more than ad spaces and a blog devoted to self promotion is a blog that nobody reads. Are there other theatre blogs that do the same thing?

[nick]

Isaac and Mark had to “sell” the idea of Bloggers Night. And the three productions “bought” this new species of Theatre Talk, essentially for its PR value. There is certainly nothing unethical in this. But it would be disingenuous to claim that the PR product, bought and sold, was not at the core of this transaction and agreement. As such Bloggers Night belongs to this PR market at least as much as the reviews in The Times and TONY do. The only difference being that bloggers get paid considerably less per word for their opinions than reviewers.

[Mark]

The blogging community chooses the shows we want to highlight for bloggers nights. Think every theater in town wouldn't want a coordinated assault of posts about their latest new play? But we choose what we call attention to--and what we don't. In setting up these arrangments, we're creating and pursuing our own agenda, not reacting to offers of swag.

[Col]

I have to say, and I will probably go to hell for this, but I am laughing a little bit in disbelief about Edge's reputation management. It seems to me like Carolyn Cantor has never gotten a bad review before. I almost wish she hadn't felt the need to market to her base.

Either PH's ticket sales dropped off to zero, which would be bizarre considering how small that tiny upstairs theater is at Playwrights Horizons is and how much of their audience is subscribers... or she was not willing to let that awful-tasting review float out there without a redress. My guess is the latter. Hey, bad reviews suck, but having been in multiple horribly-reviewed shows, I've learned, for better and worse, that people do go on to have swell theater careers. I'm sure she and her company will be totally fine, as will Adam, who is so disciplined and prolific a writer. Thank God Playwrights Horizons actually did a crazy play. Good for them. I hope the viciousness of the review doesn't sour them on using that upstairs space for experimentation.