If I Were Disney CEO Part 36 - FX

FX is an American basic cable and satellite television channel created by 20th Century Fox Television to provide a foray into large-scale interactive television.  While the channel originally centered on original live programming and rebroadcasts of classic television, the network quickly developed into a home for hard hitting original scripted programming with mature themes and content, as well as high-quality writing, directing, and acting.  A basic cable channel following the model fo premium cable channels like HBO, Showtime, and Starz.  FX also carries rebroadcasts of theatrical films and broadcast-network sitcoms, and has spun out two sister channels in FXX, focusing on comedic programming, and FXM, or FX Movies.  FX is a leader in adults 25-54, and male viewers in particular.

FX was acquired by the Disney company as part of its acquisition of 20th Century Fox, and with the acquisition, Disney can use this channel to round out its portfolio.  If the Disney channels speak to children and families and ABC represents the general public, FX is then the channel for the discerning adult viewer.  It is the sophisticate brand, the Criterion collection if you will.

And it's that space that drives my recommendations for the channel.

Primary Goals for the Division:

• Focus on Quality - If FX is going to stake its brand on filling a niche similar to AMC or HBO, the programs have to be quality offerings.  The last thing Disney needs is another channel filled with fluff or to return to the perceived cheapquel era.  
• Be Daring - This is something FX is already doing with programming ranging from niche comedy to historical dramas, but it should be continued and a trademark of the brand.  The current tag line is Fearless and the channel should reflect it, with programming across genres, across formats, and across ratings.
• Don't Be Afraid of All Ages Programming - I know FX has traditionally relied on programming that pushed the edges of television ratings.  However, focusing solely on this aspect would have the network over look programming like the new Twilight Zone revamp, Downtown Abbey, etc.  The focus should be on quality, compelling storytelling, regardless of rating.
• FX Feeds Hulu, Feeds FX - FX is probably the channel within Disney's stable that has the most to gain from the majority ownership of Hulu.  The obvious benefit is FX programming going directly to Hulu, but the reverse would also seem to be beneficial.  Why not air 11.22.63 on FX, now that it has had a full run on Hulu?  Or the Man in the High Castle?  This is a variation of the old movie release strategy previously discussed in the ABC post, but it still applies here.  Content should be able to move from streaming to basic cable in order to reach the broadest audiences.
• Hello Defenders - FX is a natural home for Marvel's edgier Defenders content, previously aired on Netflix.  The material could easily fit within the ratings restrictions, would be a natural later prime time program, and would boost brand recognition of the two.  Once the cooling period has ended, this is where future Defenders programming should air.
• Consider Rebranding to Searchlight - I'm all for consistency in branding.  Disney has Disney movies, Disney+ streaming, and Disney Channels.  The same would be apparent under ESPN and National Geographic.  While FX is related to Fox, it is separate enough to be confused with the "New Fox" that remains.  Just as I would recommend Disney rebrand the film divisions as 20th Century Pictures and Searchlight Pictures, rebranding FX as Searchlight TV would signal the commitment to quality and niche fair, while removing the connection to Fox.
• Reconsider FXX and FXM - The market may be there for these channels, but I'm wary of over-extension in Disney's offerings.  These may be two prime candidates for paring down.

FX can be a wonderful and important addition to the Disney family, if it is fully utilized.  I believe the goals above will help in that regard.

Next in the series, ESPN.

Olivia De Havilland "Feud" Closed

And so it seems that Olivia de Havilland's feud with the Ryan Murphy produced FX television series Feud will come to an end.  The 102 year old actress (!) had sued FX, Fox 21 TV, and produced Ryan Murphy for the use of her name and persona in the "Feud: Bette and Joan" miniseries, claiming in particular that Catherine Zeta Jone's portrayal painted her as a gossip who spoke casually and disparagingly of friends and acquaintances like Davis, Crawford, Frank Sinatra, and her sister Joan Fontaine.    De Havilland took particular umbrage with the show de Havilland character's use of the word "bitch" twice to describe Joan Fontaine.  De Havilland's attorney argued that no record exists of de Havilland ever using that word, much less in regard to her sister.

De Havilland originally filed suit in Los Angeles, which was allowed to proceed by the Los Angeles judge. A California appellate court reversed that decision back in March 2018 and the California Supreme Court previously declined to take up the case.  Today the United States Supreme Court has decided not to take up the suit.

The MPAA is celebrating the news, stating that they are "pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the De Havilland v. FX Networks case" and that this is "great news for filmmakers and other creators, whose First Amendment right to tell stories that depict real people and events was resoundingly reaffirmed by the Court of Appeals, and for audiences everywhere who enjoy a good biopic, documentary, docudrama, or work of historical fiction."

De Havilland's attorneys in turn state the "California Court of Appeal has turned the First Amendment upside down and without doubt more harm to individuals and public deception will result.  One day someone else who is wronged for the sake of Hollywood profits will have the courage to stand on the shoulders of Miss de Havilland and fight for the right to defend a good name and legacy against intentional, unconsented exploitation and falsehoods." (emphasis mine)

I'm going to have to side with Miss de Havilland here.  The First Amendment does not extend to protecting falsehood.  Historical dramas have enough issues with addressing inaccuracies with long dead figures.  At least in those instances, there are more gaps to fill in people's character and mannerisms.  The danger of portraying a living figure is that they can point out the specific inaccuracies and blatant misrepresentations that are presented.

I really think the creators of the series may have forgotten Miss de Havilland is still alive.  She has lived in relative quiet seclusion in Paris since her retirement.  They never reached out to her for permission to use her likeness nor did they reach out for any background information that would inform or corroborate their take.  And while the feud between Olivia de Havilland and Joan Fontaine may be legendary in its own right, that does not make the portrayal in Feud accurate.

The California Court of Appeals had determined that a person does not "own history" regardless of stature, nor "does she or he have the legal right to control, dictate, approve, disapprove, or veto the creator's portrayal of actual people."

Maybe not, but we at least used to make certain that the portrayal had truth in it.