As we get closer to American Idol's self-proclaimed "historic" two-night Idol Gives Back charity event, I feel myself becoming more and more annoyed by all the hype. I'm so tired of hearing Ryan promote the star-studded event, as if FOX and Idol are single-handedly going to wipe out poverty, disease, and famine -- and all with a song in their pure, unadulterated hearts.What's really bizarre about this upcoming over-hyped event is how much glowingly-positive buzz it has created. After all, this is American Idol we're talking about. The talent show seems to thrive not only on profit, but also on controversy.
Yet, where are all the naysayers and doubters? Where are the snarky bloggers? There is a small controversy about the charitable organizations that will benefit from this event. But other than that, I seem to be the only blogger in the universe cynical enough to think that this event sounds just a tad bit exploitive and self-serving.
I have to ask (because the entertainment journalists all seem too ga-ga over this event to do so): Is this for real or is FOX merely trying to boost their usually sagging late-April ratings and suck even more revenue out of its advertisers?
It seems to me that by attaching themselves to this charity event, American Idol has finally found a way to become untouchable. After all, no one wants to say anything bad about such a monstrous fundraising drive that will raise millions of dollars for poverty-stricken young people in Africa and America. Mark Shriver, head of US. operations for Save the Children (one of the recipients of the donations from the show and the focus of the Pro-Life controversy) gushed, "You have the biggest show on television making a real effort to change the world."
Yes, indeed, that's some good PR going on. Nice to see that journalists are eating this up and helping with the hype. But then again, who am I to question an event that even Bono has given his blessing to? Still, just because the outcome is honorable, and the parties involved have good intentions, that doesn't mean that the event itself is being held for purely unselfish, altruistic reasons.
It's called public relations, people. Corporate giants need to "give back" because it humanizes them, neutralizes their greedy image, and buys them good publicity. And it gives them tax write-offs, too. Of course, it's also the RIGHT thing to do. And there's probably even a bunch of people naive enough to believe that's the main reason these things are done. I've worked for non-profits and in public relations, so I'm not one of them. Heck, even Oprah doesn't go to Africa and build schools unless she can squeeze a TV special and some extra-special publicity out of it, securing her own saintly image.
I also think it's odd how much they've hyped this star-studded event, while doling out very few details about how much they hope to raise during this event. Having worked for the United Way, I know that charities generally set fundraising goals. Plus, the details we've gotten have been vague and sketchy. We've been told that Idol's sponsors (Ford, AT&T, Coca-Cola, and News Corp.) are donating a percentage based on number of calls. What exactly does that mean? They know Idol receives anywhere from 33 to 38 million votes. Shouldn't they come up with a formula based on estimated calls before, rather than after, the actual event? Or are they afraid they might over-hype the event and receive twice as many phone calls as expected?
The Philanthropy Journal contacted FOX, and they couldn't get clarification on any of the fundraising details. On their blog, the Philanthropy Journal criticized this lack of information and suggested Idol could maximize its fundraising by "treating its viewers like donors, cultivating them and engaging them with substantive information instead of shallow hype."
(EDITED TO UPDATE: On Tuesday night, Ryan finally explained that News Corp will donate 10 cents for every call received [up to a maximimum of 50 million calls] for a total of $5 million dollars.)
It goes without saying that raising money for impoverished families in America and Africa is a noble cause. And yes, it's fantastic to see celebrities show-up in support of such an effort. It's also amazing that the top-rated show on TV is going to dedicate an entire two-hour episode to raising awareness about these issues. But what would be even more amazing is if the network supporting such an event -- didn't have anything to gain by supporting it.
Will FOX profit from Idol Gives Back? It certainly will gain the "goodwill" and admiration of even the most cynical-minded critics for its efforts. However, with all the money they've made on Idol, they also could have simply given a hefty corporate donation -- without bringing all of this attention to themselves. After all, according to Advertising Age magazine, the show's franchise is worth approximately $2.5 billion, with $500 million coming in just from TV advertising each year. They clearly have the means to "give back."
Therefore, if they really just wanted to "give something back," they could have done so without creating a monstrous event that cast them in a self-congratulatory glowing light. Instead of asking for money from the public, they could have asked FOX and News Corp to dip into their corporate wallets a little deeper. Having worked in non-profits, I know that when donors truly gives from their hearts, there is no need for attention, publicity, or weeks of on-air patting themselves on the back. Yet, each week, Idol says, "Look at how generous we are -- aren't we wonderful?" Seriously, am I the only one who finds this self-serving?
Which still doesn't answer the question: Will FOX actually make money on this programming extravaganza? News Corp (the parent company of FOX) already generously pledged $5 million to the charity event. Is News Corp putting its money where its mouth is? Or is this just a token pledge? And worse, are they expecting to raise advertising revenue that far exceeds this pledge?
On September 21, 2001, the four major networks (ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX) came together to televise the star-studded 9-11 telethon, America: A Tribute to Heroes, organized by none other than George Clooney. All of the talent donated their time to that event which was televised uninterrupted and WITHOUT commercials. In 2005, NBC stepped up to host a two-hour celebrity telethon, Tsunami Aid: A Concert of Hope. This event was also televised without commercials. Also, in 2005, six networks (ABC, NBC, CBS. FOX, UPN, and WB) all simultaneously televised the Katrina telethon, Shelter from the Storm: A Concert for the Gulf Coast. Once again, the one-hour fundraising event was run commercial-free. I'm assuming these events were televised without commercials because the networks didn't want to "cash in" on these tragedies.
From what I can tell, FOX IS televising Idol Gives Back WITH commercials. And I'm only assuming this because I haven't heard declarations of anything otherwise. Considering the fact that American Idol currently pulls in the highest advertising rates, this is not a small detail worth glossing over.
Idol reportedly nabs as much as $700,000 per 30 second spot from its top sponsors. During last year's finale, it pulled in $1.3 million per spot. In comparison, Bones pulls in below average rates around $115,000 per 30 second spot. As you can see, by bumping Bones for the evening and offering two-hours of star-studded Idol entertainment, FOX is able to rake in a lot more advertising bucks. We're talking millions of dollars here. At $700,000 a pop, they only have to run 10 commercials and they make $7 million. Run 20 commercials, and they're making $14 million. Even in 2005, Idol's two-hour finale brought in over $40 million in TV advertising. With that in mind, News Corp's $5 million doesn't seem all that generous, does it?
Which is why this whole charity event rubs me the wrong way. Can't you see where I might find it a bit exploitive to use poverty-stricken children to attract A-List celebrities so you can hype a two-hour block of highly-desirable programming (which costs you very little to produce)? Especially, when this programming, which costs you little, generates huge advertising revenue and also boosts your ratings for another week. And as an extra bonus you have journalists around the world making declarations about your show "changing the world" and "saving the children?"
Interestingly enough, the biggest controversy surrounding the 9-11 and Tsunami telethons was instigated by FOX News' Bill O'Reilly. In 2005, O'Reilly said, "We want the telethon to be a big success, and we applaud the time and generosity of George Clooney and the other stars . . . But with power comes responsibility. And we expect all the telethon people to understand that." I agree with this statement, and I assume FOX does too. Of course, I'm not surprised that O'Reilly doesn't feel the need to personally scrutinize a celebrity-driven event hosted by FOX.
Perhaps I'm being overly-cynical, and FOX will break even on the night or even generously donate ALL of the advertising revenue generated by the event. I'm open to the possibility that I may be wrong and FOX is running the entire event WITHOUT commercials. I've tried my best to find the facts, but FOX publicity hasn't exactly made any of this clear. Outside of the on-air hype, we've received few details. I've emailed and left voicemails for FOX, and haven't received any immediate response. So I'm left with my questions.
One thing is clear -- FOX and American Idol are going to raise a lot of money this week. And this is a good thing. It certainly is about time the money-making juggernaut "gave something back." But I think it's worth asking what's in it for them? And I'm wondering why I'm the only one even asking.
The TV Squad Podcast: Linda Purl talks about The Office, we talk spoilers, and more
Ask TV Squad: Ghost Whisperer and more!
The TV Squad Podcast: Bill Scheft of The Late Show, Cake Boss, Mad Men and more
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
4-24-2007 @ 12:27PM
Frank said...
How cynical. So various celebrities come together, along with the number 1 TV show in America, to help raise awareness and funds to provide relief for underprivileged people and you feel the overwhelming need to bash it. AI doesn't NEED to do this, the volunteers don't NEED to do this. Yes, yes, there's always more that people can do, but you can say that for any charitable organization/drive.
The massive hype and exposure that they are trying to generate should theoretically lead to more donors and more awareness. Sure, it's simple if they wanted to keep it quiet and say ok, we, American Idol, will donate xxxxx dollars to this...but in order to raise awareness and drive public donations, then, clearly, you'd want to send the message as often as possible.
I believe that the end result from the AI drive will lead to better standards of living for the people they are trying to help and that's many steps in the right direction.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 12:42PM
Where did my stars go? said...
In the end we will hear about how many millions were collected, but I would be really interested in how many dollars actually end up in the hands of people that need it. I bet 95% of the money raised ends up going to "administrative costs" rather than the cause intended.
Raise awareness? Is there anyone left in the US that isn't aware that the continent of Africa has too many starving people and an AIDS epidemic?
I think this is just a way for these celebrities to make themselves feel good about "contributing to a cause" and not have to do anything like actually touch a sick child or unload a truck of food.
Liz asks: "Will FOX profit from 'Idol Gives Back' telecast?" Come on now. That is like asking: Is the Pope Catholic?
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 12:54PM
Max said...
Jsut being able to show pictures of cynical Simon with children draped over him is payoff enough.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:25PM
const said...
There's been a lot of bad postings on TV Squad in the past, but this rambling diatribe takes the cake.
It's a charity event. Get over it. If you have a bias against FOX, well that's your problem, get over it.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:26PM
1iPete said...
I fully expect AI to announce twice the phone lines or a double voting period to "increase the charity" while also garnering the ability to trumpet a massively huge vote (50 to 70M) thus demonstrating again AI's singular power in the current TV world and our pop society.
Yes, it is easy to cast a cynical eye on Fox/AI and their motives, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt since some good is better than no good in this situation. I haven't voted a single time this season, but will vote a number of times tonight due to their cause regardless if it also continues to fuel AI & Fox.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:30PM
JD said...
You're just BITCHING because it's FOX doing this. If ANY OTHER NETWORK was doing this you'd be sucking it for all it's worth.
Guess we know who you are now. Hell we did before just from your hyphenated last name.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:33PM
Darren said...
Of course they are going to profit over it! They don't care about anything except rigging their own competition!
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:38PM
Mel said...
And uhh, what have you done recently for your favorite charity? I'm looking at you Arnold.
Even if FOX does profit, there'll still be millions generated for the charities, millions that wouldn't have existed otherwise.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:49PM
chew said...
Cynical? Him? Maybe a little.
Naive? You? Definitely.
If you think that FOX is not going to profit from this, you are outside your mind. $5M from News Corp. is pocket change. I don't have a problem with FOX giving money to Charity or holding an event to do so. I will watch it. It's good entertainment.
But if you promote this show like they have, gaining goodwill and viewership and making millions from advertising, without GIVING MORE THAN YOU MAKE--yes, I have a problem with that. You are exploiting the cause for profit.
It will be interesting to see what FOX does.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:49PM
Michelle said...
Jeez. I guess the way I look at it is that, yeah, they probably will profit from it, they aren't a non-for-profit organization. And, they are getting good publicity, using the AMAZING PR/Publicity team they have to look good and do something good at the same time. Like someone said above, most "celebrities" do this, be generous but also profit.
But, they would have profited from tonight and tomorrow's show anyway, at least this way someone else is also benefitting.
I mean, this will probably be one of the most successful fundraisers. AI has a power that no one else can even come close to. So, maybe the reason it seems no one else is asking the question is that, yah, duh, they are profitting. But they are doing something better than many charities banded together can't do.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 1:51PM
Porchland said...
"Corporate giants need to "give back" because it humanizes them, neutralizes their greedy image, and buys them good publicity."
Although charitable contributions by individuals are tax deductible, charitable contributions by corporations are NOT.
Didn't they teach you that at Smith or Wellesley or where ever you came from?
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 2:14PM
Televinita said...
THANK YOU!! This is exactly what I have been saying since the first night they mentioned this, and I can't believe that not even Television Without Pity has found a way to snark about it.
The Idol franchise is worth billions; they're capable of donating all on their own, as are viewers and corporations, but they have been touting this event like they're being generous enough to allow us and various corporate sponsors to donate under their name. It would impress me so much more if they just wrote checks and mentioned it after the fact. Besides, any time I see celebrities wandering through Africa with sweet-faced cherubs, I feel soured - the fact that they're doing this with a camera crew screams "PR" to me, even if said celebs truly believe in their cause. They shouldn't need people to document them every step of the way.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 2:57PM
jeana katz said...
Hey Liz! I agree with you 100%. AI is indeed self-serving in everyway. The footage of simon cowell and ryan seacrest doing their bit in Africa was gratuitous, lacking any real depth, humility and integrity. Yeah, I might cut them some slack if: the program was going to be commercial-free. Maybe a a more descriptive amount (dollar goal) made by AI would be helpful but of course they choose to be vague and mysterious. Overall, AI and FOX are into self-promotion anyway they can get it!
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 3:16PM
grumpyoldman said...
Let's see tonight if they claim the show is "live". It was actually taped Monday night. I'm not going to spoil....but it looks like Jordin is on track to take this thing.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 4:03PM
db said...
hi everyone,
of course they are doing it for publicity- publicity for AI and FOX and at the same time the poor, starving kids in Africa. hey, millions of people do watch the show every week and if something good can come out of it then so be it. FOX makes money regardless. they obviously make more money during a big bash like tonight and the finale but money is something they always have!! as a viewer, i have nothing to lose but watch my favorite show, vote and then have a concert with celebritys on board- how bad can that be? but what is starting to annoy the heck out of me is how the entire show lately seems to be one, big promotion for anyone and anything that can get themselves or their product on there. i have no problem with shrek but what the heck does shrek have to do with AI? the answer is nothing but they manage to create some tie in with the show so that everyone benefits- the shrek producers had publicity for the movie taht is coming out in may? june? and the kids had a fun time watching it before the general public and imitating the characters voices. oh and AI needed SOMETHING to fill up the hr results show so i guess everyone wins. except the viewers who have to watch the wonderful hr long show to see the 5 seconds they actually care about. all i can say is that i hope to g-d that FOX pays the contestants on there a decent amount weekly with the amount of revenue that they recieve through promotions and advertising!!! my heart breaks for some of them when i hear what they wish the can do with the money that they would get if they would win AI or get a record deal. remember these are normal, hardworking people for the most part- not CELEBRITIES, many came from nothing and hope to never go back there. most of them are so talented that it would be a shame for them to disappear back into the woodwork. anyway, lets band together and make the most of what our votes can do for those kids in africa and america that so desperately need help-regardless of where the help may come from generally greedy corperate america. kudos to those companies for their donations. yes it looks good on their part but it also DOES good. for the common good- lets just keep our fingers on the redial button..... G-D BLESS.......Debbie
Reply
4-25-2007 @ 4:59PM
whawha said...
Of course it's self-serving...it's just another example of publicity cloaked as philanthropy.
Take the whole Red campign Bono and a bunch of other celebs were pushing. The manufacturers got another revenue stream simply by putting red dye in the plastics-forming process, spending the same amount in advertising and benefiting from new, cause-oriented people buying Red products. (The resulting donations from Red purchases went to buy AIDS drugs in Africa. )
BUT...the same amount of money would have purchased TONS and TONS more condoms (and educational efforts) to help prevent the spread of AIDS. But that rubs Catholics, like Bono, the wrong way, because condom use isn't condoned by the church. So instead of getting at the root of the problem, you get some cool commercials and a red Razr phone. feh.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 5:54PM
CaliberSRT4 said...
I am so tired of hearing about helping Africa or other countries (except ones with actual problems...the tsunami). America needs to focus on America's problems first before they go anywhere else. We have people here that are in poverty or with aids or whatever. But I agree with the article...AI is probably doing it for the hype, if they weren't, they would have done it without telling everyone, or causing a big deal. Luckily I have night classes so I don't have to watch.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 7:17PM
hessian said...
It's hard to be cynical about this show given its airdate. If FOX were turuly interested in miling this stunt for ratings and cash, they would have scheduled it NEXT WEEK, when local stations would have received credit for the audience in their May ratings books.
As it stands, it will serve as a huge promotional platform for upcoming FOX shows, but I think you have to give FOX and Freemantle a little credit.
Reply
4-24-2007 @ 11:24PM
Andy-jaya said...
The only thing I am cynical about is WHY any of the money needs to go to Africa at all?
Is America not a good cause on its own to raise money for? Are the Americans who keep American Idol afloat not worth the time and energy to help them?
America has a lot of problems (homeless, jobless, hungry, no money for schools, a government who doesn't care about us, etc.).
Charity starts at HOME! Why has America been named the nanny of the world???
Reply
4-25-2007 @ 12:22AM
CaliberSRT4 said...
Thank you Andy-jaya!
Reply