Author Topic: GSN Schedule Makeover (Read 19015 times)

clemon79 · « **Reply #45 on:** June 16, 2006, 09:29:25 AM »

[quote name=\'GSCrank\' post=\'121538\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 12:00 AM\']
A celebrity who appeared on a show can veto it for the rest of their life, and beyond via their estate, if they want to. Hence why the Rayburn BTB '85 episodes will never see the light of day.
[/quote]
And would you now like to tell us your source for this information? 'Cuz the only way I could see it happening is if the host or celebrity had it written into their appearance contract, and I can't see any producer with an ounce of sense in their head agreeing to that, when there are plenty of other celebrities and hosts out there without a primadonna attitude that a producer can hire that won't hamstring them in that way.

I suspect, of course, that you are full of crap.

uncamark · « **Reply #46 on:** June 16, 2006, 02:21:05 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'121567\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 08:29 AM\']
[quote name=\'GSCrank\' post=\'121538\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 12:00 AM\']
A celebrity who appeared on a show can veto it for the rest of their life, and beyond via their estate, if they want to. Hence why the Rayburn BTB '85 episodes will never see the light of day.
[/quote]
And would you now like to tell us your source for this information? 'Cuz the only way I could see it happening is if the host or celebrity had it written into their appearance contract, and I can't see any producer with an ounce of sense in their head agreeing to that, when there are plenty of other celebrities and hosts out there without a primadonna attitude that a producer can hire that won't hamstring them in that way.

I suspect, of course, that you are full of crap.
[/quote]

And there hasn't even been an attempt to clear "BTB '85" for repeat use, AFAIK.

It is pretty certain that MGP did reclear all of their shows for GSN, since the words "cable television" weren't in the original contracts for most of the talent. I'm still assuming that Henry's contract for "NYSI" would've said something that MGP had the right to sell the program and show his image for "any manner of television transmission in common use now and in the future" without Henry's permission as long as residuals were paid to the talent, it being 1989, but they went to everyone and he said "no"--and MGP respected his wishes when they probably didn't need to. The mark of a class operation.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #47 on:** June 16, 2006, 02:22:46 PM »

[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'121592\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 01:21 PM\']
And there hasn't even been an attempt to clear "BTB '85" for repeat use, AFAIK.
[/quote]
Well, didn't CBN show the series...but only the Farago episodes?

That would shed a little light on the subject, perhaps...

uncamark · « **Reply #48 on:** June 16, 2006, 02:28:40 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'121594\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 01:22 PM\']
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'121592\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 01:21 PM\']
And there hasn't even been an attempt to clear "BTB '85" for repeat use, AFAIK.
[/quote]
Well, didn't CBN show the series...but only the Farago episodes?

That would shed a little light on the subject, perhaps...
[/quote]

Perhaps--the fact that it came right off of syndication to cable and wasn't 25-to-40 years after the fact could still be a factor.

I also suspect that the ownership of that version of "BTB" is up in the air--and the fact that the show's unpopularity will never see it repeated again ever makes it pretty sure that the problem won't even be approached at any time soon.

(And I suspect that if Michael Davies or Harry Friedman wants to revive the "BTB '76" format for Sony, they would probably have to call it something else, since Sony doesn't own the "BTB" title--just like Fremantle would have to call "Scrabble" something else, unless they ponied up another license fee to Hasbro.)

clemon79 · « **Reply #49 on:** June 16, 2006, 04:00:20 PM »

[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'121592\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 11:21 AM\']
but they went to everyone and he said "no"--and MGP respected his wishes when they probably didn't need to. The mark of a class operation.
[/quote]
That's quite possible, but respecting their wishes is a lot different than suggesting that the talent can "veto it for the rest of their life...if they want to."

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #50 on:** June 16, 2006, 04:13:36 PM »

Quote

It is pretty certain that MGP did reclear all of their shows for GSN, since the words "cable television" weren't in the original contracts for most of the talent. I'm still assuming that Henry's contract for "NYSI" would've said something that MGP had the right to sell the program and show his image for "any manner of television transmission in common use now and in the future" without Henry's permission as long as residuals were paid to the talent, it being 1989, but they went to everyone and he said "no"--and MGP respected his wishes when they probably didn't need to. The mark of a class operation.

Actually, "veto it for the rest of their life...if they want to" is closer to the truth. According to a letter I got from David Schwartz in 1996 (back when people at GSN actually gave detailed answers), he stated that every celebrity appearance after 1973 must be cleared. Therefore, based on that statement, any celebrity *could* state that they don't want those episodes aired again. A classic example would be the Newharts appearances on Tattletales - although it's been speculated that it might have been Ginny that refused to sign the waiver, since Bob's appearances on Hollywood Squares from the mid-70s have been aired.

I'm not sure why 1973 is the key year, that wasn't explained in the David's answer, but the same thing would likely hold true for music clearances, which explain why the '70s Treasure Hunt has never aired regularly on GSN and music from the late '70s Newlywed Game was altered.

clemon79 · « **Reply #51 on:** June 16, 2006, 04:22:03 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'121612\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 01:13 PM\']
Therefore, based on that statement, any celebrity *could* state that they don't want those episodes aired again.
[/quote]

Quote

A classic example would be the Newharts appearances on Tattletales - although it's been speculated that it might have been Ginny that refused to sign the waiver, since Bob's appearances on Hollywood Squares from the mid-70s have been aired.

And legally, I'm sure that MGP could tell them to FOAD and clear it to air anyhow if they like.

The point is that in the strict terms of the law, there is nothing protecting the talent here. This is a policy that MGP seems to be enforcing out of courtesy as a term of their agreement with GSN, and your Tattletales / Hollywood Squares example just seems to back that up.

zachhoran · « **Reply #52 on:** June 16, 2006, 07:42:26 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'121594\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 02:22 PM\']
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'121592\' date=\'Jun 16 2006, 01:21 PM\']
And there hasn't even been an attempt to clear "BTB '85" for repeat use, AFAIK.
[/quote]
Well, didn't CBN show the series...but only the Farago episodes?

That would shed a little light on the subject, perhaps...
[/quote]

It was only the Farago episodes shown, though CBN only aired BtB85 for four months(9/1/86-12/26/86). If Rayburn were to have cleared his appearances for that show to air on CBN back then(and my guess is he didn't), CBN pulled the plug on the show before they could swing back around to his episodes. An ad for the CBN afternoon lineup of TTD(Wink 1984-85) and BtB85 as seen in the January 1987 episode of TV Game $how Magazine showed a pic of a Rayburn episode (with Rayburn and the contestants seen in the distance)with a couple breaking the bank.