Click here to begin.
As you must know, web site administrators (me in this case) have the ability to see where our visitors come from, and, if they found our site through a search engine, what was the exact phrasing of the search. We cannot identify you. All we can do is see the city your computer was located when you made the search, and the Internet service provider used.
Having said all that, I am finding an amusing but small selection of users who have arrived here by roundabout means. Here are some recent visitors:
Having said all that, I am finding an amusing but small selection of users who have arrived here by roundabout means. Here are some recent visitors:
- A man in Marietta, Georgia who Googled "heres my naked wife"
- The clever fellow in Surprise, Arizona who searched for "shrink my wife"
- "my ex wife naked" is the subject of a search from the City of London, London
- Most disturbing is the person in Norway, I won't say exactly where (pedophiliacs are best identified to Interpol), who searches almost daily for "naked 15 year old pictures". Unless he wants to see undoctored photos that are 15 years old.
I know you've heard of Chaz Palmentieri. But you haven't heard of Chez Pazienza, which means "at Pazienza's place" in French. Chez Pazienza is a person with a delightful Fratalian name, and until a few days ago he considered himself a broadcast journalist and was most recently employed by CNN as a producer.
This fellow has published, in The Huffington Post, an account of his career culminating in his firing on-the-spot by CNN executives. He believes he has been wronged, and badly, and argues that his dismissal was unjust, and warranted an Internet tantrum: a tirade that accomplishes nothing but serve to embarrass him.
I will say that Pazienza would have been a good rewrite man if he hadn't self-destructed as an employee, because he did a great job of studying the prologue to "Naked Launch" and copying my writing style to tell his tale.
You needn't bother reading his complaint. Here's the story: he says he was a naughty funster in college journalism, and then did a brilliant bit of work, or really good at the worst, at CNN, and then got thrown out of the building. He had been writing a blog on the side and expressing apparently liberal opinion. That's not a good thing for an objective journalist.
Because my good friend David Hauslaib at Jossip.com has expressed his hope that Chez (pronounced shay or with the Hebrew guttural che sound or cha as in chew) will become the next Dan Cooper, I am moved to comment on the flap.
Pazienza will not become the next Dan Cooper. He was cavalier about the requirements of the people who paid for his food. He deliberately ignored his employer's conditions of employment. I would have fired him on the spot as well.
No employee of any news organization who works on the news coverage side, as opposed to on a newspaper's editorial page or whatever similar walled-off opinion department exists any more, has any business writing opinion on the side. Let alone write anything, especially opinion, without the knowledge of his primary employer. It is irresponsible to work in a news organization without full knowledge of its standards and practices. Chez Pazienza crossed the line, was fired on the spot, and should have been fired on the spot. Pazienza is a cry-baby who deserved to be sent home without dinner.
This fellow has published, in The Huffington Post, an account of his career culminating in his firing on-the-spot by CNN executives. He believes he has been wronged, and badly, and argues that his dismissal was unjust, and warranted an Internet tantrum: a tirade that accomplishes nothing but serve to embarrass him.
I will say that Pazienza would have been a good rewrite man if he hadn't self-destructed as an employee, because he did a great job of studying the prologue to "Naked Launch" and copying my writing style to tell his tale.
You needn't bother reading his complaint. Here's the story: he says he was a naughty funster in college journalism, and then did a brilliant bit of work, or really good at the worst, at CNN, and then got thrown out of the building. He had been writing a blog on the side and expressing apparently liberal opinion. That's not a good thing for an objective journalist.
Because my good friend David Hauslaib at Jossip.com has expressed his hope that Chez (pronounced shay or with the Hebrew guttural che sound or cha as in chew) will become the next Dan Cooper, I am moved to comment on the flap.
Pazienza will not become the next Dan Cooper. He was cavalier about the requirements of the people who paid for his food. He deliberately ignored his employer's conditions of employment. I would have fired him on the spot as well.
No employee of any news organization who works on the news coverage side, as opposed to on a newspaper's editorial page or whatever similar walled-off opinion department exists any more, has any business writing opinion on the side. Let alone write anything, especially opinion, without the knowledge of his primary employer. It is irresponsible to work in a news organization without full knowledge of its standards and practices. Chez Pazienza crossed the line, was fired on the spot, and should have been fired on the spot. Pazienza is a cry-baby who deserved to be sent home without dinner.
Can you imagine going after a
therapist with a meat cleaver? I can. I mean I wouldn't do it, but I
can imagine it. In Manhattan the other day there was a brutal, gory,
icky murder of a shrink by some guy under circumstances not yet known.
He sliced her up with two knives and a cleaver. Of course, the crack NYPD, when they get off pizza and donut time, will
round somebody up, maybe even the guy who did it, discover or fake some
evidence, and then appear before a grand jury where they may or may not
tell the truth. Meanwhile, the media will long before have assured the
public that Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly
are on top of the whole thing and heaven knows nothing like it will
ever happen again, and probably it didn't even happen at all.
Anyway, this story really resonated for me. This therapist had her office in Manhattan in the East 70's. That's the Upper East Side. I lived in a better part of the Upper East Side much of my life. Not too many meat cleaver murders there. I mean, who has a meat cleaver? A butcher! Was this a guy from one of the great, $75 a chicken Madison Avenue butcher shops? Like Lobel's or Schatzie's? Nah. I know these guys. Schatzie's too busy playing the horses to kill anybody, and those guys at Lobel's just weigh money and take it to the bank in armored Mercedes.
This isn't the point anyway. Here's the point:
In the prologue to my book Naked Launch, which I hope you are enjoying here at www.caos.us, I mention that following the time of the launch of the Fox News Channel I produced another series, and developed a chaste crush on a hot little blond who worked on the show. I wrote that my wife Gina had got wind of it and was in a frosty mood.
Here's a detail I didn't mention that came back to me reading of this shrink butchering job:
At the time, both Gina, my wife, and I were in therapy, separately, with two social workers. Both were in those fabulous East 70's. Gina's social worker's name was Hedda Rudoff.
Gina told me one day that she was talking to Rudoff about my infatuation with this blond, and Gina told me she asked Rudoff to call my therapist and ask her if it was true -- had I been talking about this same blond in my sessions.
You know Rudoff refused, of course, right? That would be totally unethical! Can you imagine a social worker, licensed, in practice for years, doing something so despicable?
You know where I'm going you clever rascal!
In fact, Gina told me that Rudoff had, in fact, called my therapist, and did indeed ask the question. And my therapist, if you can believe this, actually confirmed it to Rudoff, and Rudoff then told my wife that indeed I was palpitating and drooling over a blond woman at work.
Oooh. I was pissed. Wouldn't you be? No? I think you would. I went and saw my shrink and asked her if this was true. And you know what? She admitted it. She told me that her words to Rudoff were "there is a blond woman in the picture". But that was all! She hadn't said anything else! So it was OK!
That was the last second I ever saw that therapist, as you can imagine. But Gina kept seeing Rudoff. And I never killed her with a meat cleaver! Rudoff is still alive and walking around and "treating" people.
Go sue me, Hedda, come on, let's go.
I feel better now that I've told you. That's what counts, don't you agree?
Anyway, this story really resonated for me. This therapist had her office in Manhattan in the East 70's. That's the Upper East Side. I lived in a better part of the Upper East Side much of my life. Not too many meat cleaver murders there. I mean, who has a meat cleaver? A butcher! Was this a guy from one of the great, $75 a chicken Madison Avenue butcher shops? Like Lobel's or Schatzie's? Nah. I know these guys. Schatzie's too busy playing the horses to kill anybody, and those guys at Lobel's just weigh money and take it to the bank in armored Mercedes.
This isn't the point anyway. Here's the point:
In the prologue to my book Naked Launch, which I hope you are enjoying here at www.caos.us, I mention that following the time of the launch of the Fox News Channel I produced another series, and developed a chaste crush on a hot little blond who worked on the show. I wrote that my wife Gina had got wind of it and was in a frosty mood.
Here's a detail I didn't mention that came back to me reading of this shrink butchering job:
At the time, both Gina, my wife, and I were in therapy, separately, with two social workers. Both were in those fabulous East 70's. Gina's social worker's name was Hedda Rudoff.
Gina told me one day that she was talking to Rudoff about my infatuation with this blond, and Gina told me she asked Rudoff to call my therapist and ask her if it was true -- had I been talking about this same blond in my sessions.
You know Rudoff refused, of course, right? That would be totally unethical! Can you imagine a social worker, licensed, in practice for years, doing something so despicable?
You know where I'm going you clever rascal!
In fact, Gina told me that Rudoff had, in fact, called my therapist, and did indeed ask the question. And my therapist, if you can believe this, actually confirmed it to Rudoff, and Rudoff then told my wife that indeed I was palpitating and drooling over a blond woman at work.
Oooh. I was pissed. Wouldn't you be? No? I think you would. I went and saw my shrink and asked her if this was true. And you know what? She admitted it. She told me that her words to Rudoff were "there is a blond woman in the picture". But that was all! She hadn't said anything else! So it was OK!
That was the last second I ever saw that therapist, as you can imagine. But Gina kept seeing Rudoff. And I never killed her with a meat cleaver! Rudoff is still alive and walking around and "treating" people.
Go sue me, Hedda, come on, let's go.
I feel better now that I've told you. That's what counts, don't you agree?
I don't know about you, but I like to think about the good old days. As a New Yorker, I remember buying ice cream every afternoon after school from the Good Humor man. His name was Uncle Dan. He drove a freezer truck down our block every day. Nobody was ever scared that Uncle Dan or any other Good Humor man might harm one of the small children clutching coins in their palms to buy a pop.
On the other hand, when I was in the fourth grade, I had a teacher, Miss Something, who became very agitated and rip snorting mad when one of us in her class displayed poor penmanship. My penmanship at that stage wasn't what it might have been. It was kind of jerky. I really tried hard to shape my letters like the ones on the sign above the blackboard, but perhaps my bow tie was constricting my blood flow and my brain couldn't get my hand to write a shapely bit of alphabet. Certainly not remotely as good as the girls, who made big round letters with little hearts dotting the i's. Miss Something, every day, would stride over to me, put her hands tightly on my shoulders, and vigorously shake me as punishment for my bad penmanship. Those were not good days.
Roger Ailes likes to remember the good old days too. Unfortunately for the historical record, Roger seems to have a case of selective amnesia about the launch of the Fox News Channel. Maybe that's because those days weren't good days for him at all. Maybe they were bad days, because he was scared out of his mind that he couldn't deliver what he had promised to Rupert Murdoch. He sure was angry a lot: pretty much every day. Well, good news! He's forgotten all that.
Here's an excerpt from a memo Ailes wrote to his staff Friday, February 8, 2008:
On the other hand, when I was in the fourth grade, I had a teacher, Miss Something, who became very agitated and rip snorting mad when one of us in her class displayed poor penmanship. My penmanship at that stage wasn't what it might have been. It was kind of jerky. I really tried hard to shape my letters like the ones on the sign above the blackboard, but perhaps my bow tie was constricting my blood flow and my brain couldn't get my hand to write a shapely bit of alphabet. Certainly not remotely as good as the girls, who made big round letters with little hearts dotting the i's. Miss Something, every day, would stride over to me, put her hands tightly on my shoulders, and vigorously shake me as punishment for my bad penmanship. Those were not good days.
Roger Ailes likes to remember the good old days too. Unfortunately for the historical record, Roger seems to have a case of selective amnesia about the launch of the Fox News Channel. Maybe that's because those days weren't good days for him at all. Maybe they were bad days, because he was scared out of his mind that he couldn't deliver what he had promised to Rupert Murdoch. He sure was angry a lot: pretty much every day. Well, good news! He's forgotten all that.
Here's an excerpt from a memo Ailes wrote to his staff Friday, February 8, 2008:
On February 6, 1996, exactly twelve years ago this week I walked into this building for the first time as a new employee of News Corporation to build a cable news channel for Rupert Murdoch. At that time we had no employees, no studios, no control rooms, no executives, no staff, no news gathering capabilities, no equipment, no programs, no stars, no male or female divas, no international operations and no perks. Also, according to the press, absolutely no prospects of success. We had to take on GE, NBC, Microsoft, and Time Warner simultaneously with fewer resources and we had just six months to create and launch the channel. Many good people joined me here, some of whom are still here today and others joined a successful channel as we grew. Many of you have made great contributions toward our success. I thank you all and Mr. Murdoch thanks you.
Roger Ailes thinks the day he walked into the building for the first time "we had no employees, no studios, no control rooms, no executives,
no staff, no news gathering capabilities, no equipment, no programs, no
stars, no male or female divas, no international operations and no
perks."
Incorrect.
Continue reading Naked Launch: Aside 2 - Roger Ailes contracts selective amnesia..
We've all met big fat guys with double chins, literally round, but with dainty feet. These guys are graceful. You have a neighbor like this, maybe an uncle. At a wedding, they hit the dance floor and tip toe around with shiny little shoes so you'd think they were hippos doing a ballet in Walt Disney's "Fantasia". The guys I've met like this are always mild-mannered, as though the slightest assertive sentence might be taken the wrong way because of their sheer girth.
Roger Ailes is one of these gliding globes, except there's nothing mild-mannered about him. He got the tough guy gene, and he likes to throw his weight around. With Fox News anchor John Gibson’s current mockery of the death of actor Heath Ledger built on a foundation of anti-homosexual prejudice, people are wondering where this sort of insensitivity can possibly come from. The answer is Roger Ailes, Mr. Tough Guy.
When he got to Fox News, there wasn’t a ballroom for Roger the gliding globe to waltz around in, but there was what I called The Crystal Palace. It wasn’t a palace, really, it was just an office, but it was a big one with a row of massive floor-to-ceiling windows, and a bunch of years earlier, it had been the office of über-mogul Barry Diller.
When publisher-TV host Judith Regan introduced Roger Ailes to Rupert Murdoch, and Roger won Rupert’s tentative approval to launch a cable news channel, Ailes greatly admired The Crystal Palace, and understood that sitting under Rupert Murdoch was a good place to dwell and to create a network as had Diller in the days long before.
Standing on Sixth Avenue in Manhattan, between 47th and 48th Streets, looking at the building called 1211 Avenue of the Americas (better known to New Yorkers as Sixth Avenue, because that’s what it is), I thought it to be a very nondescript skyscraper occupying the entire block. The building was set back from the sidewalk. Facing it, on the left, a curious outgrowth of the building extended to the street, only as high as the building’s lobby. This was an office of Charles Schwab, a discount stock brokerage. To balance the weirdness of the Schwab blob, on the right
was a large, elevated concrete planter holding six London Plane trees, all of them looking very unhappy. There were benches on the planter as well, but few people occupied them. The London Planes had the ability to see the future: they knew their fate.
This unlikely building was the United States headquarters of News Corporation. On the building’s second floor, clearly visible through the London Planes, through the row of massive windows, was The Crystal Palace. From the street, looking at the building, and also from the 48th Street side, passersby could see directly into The Crystal Palace, and once settled in, to Roger Ailes at work. Roger liked the vast dimensions of The Crystal Palace, the glass Diller table, and the ocean liner desk he ordered for himself. But Roger feared the fragility, the potential danger, of the glass windows. And so it came to pass that Roger Ailes summoned me to The Crystal Palace, and told me “I want all these windows replaced with bomb-proof glass”.
“Of course”, I said, and promptly called Rudy Nazath, the architect who was my collaborator on the design of the entire Fox News editorial and production facility in the building.
Rudy told me “There is no such thing as bomb-proof glass. I don’t even think there’s protective plastic or glass that can prevent an assault rifle if it’s fired up close. We can get the heaviest grade bullet-proof glass available, but what do you need it for?” I didn’t know.
So I asked Roger. “Roger, do you mind if I ask why the glass should be bomb-proof?”
Roger Ailes is one of these gliding globes, except there's nothing mild-mannered about him. He got the tough guy gene, and he likes to throw his weight around. With Fox News anchor John Gibson’s current mockery of the death of actor Heath Ledger built on a foundation of anti-homosexual prejudice, people are wondering where this sort of insensitivity can possibly come from. The answer is Roger Ailes, Mr. Tough Guy.
When he got to Fox News, there wasn’t a ballroom for Roger the gliding globe to waltz around in, but there was what I called The Crystal Palace. It wasn’t a palace, really, it was just an office, but it was a big one with a row of massive floor-to-ceiling windows, and a bunch of years earlier, it had been the office of über-mogul Barry Diller.
When publisher-TV host Judith Regan introduced Roger Ailes to Rupert Murdoch, and Roger won Rupert’s tentative approval to launch a cable news channel, Ailes greatly admired The Crystal Palace, and understood that sitting under Rupert Murdoch was a good place to dwell and to create a network as had Diller in the days long before.
Standing on Sixth Avenue in Manhattan, between 47th and 48th Streets, looking at the building called 1211 Avenue of the Americas (better known to New Yorkers as Sixth Avenue, because that’s what it is), I thought it to be a very nondescript skyscraper occupying the entire block. The building was set back from the sidewalk. Facing it, on the left, a curious outgrowth of the building extended to the street, only as high as the building’s lobby. This was an office of Charles Schwab, a discount stock brokerage. To balance the weirdness of the Schwab blob, on the right
was a large, elevated concrete planter holding six London Plane trees, all of them looking very unhappy. There were benches on the planter as well, but few people occupied them. The London Planes had the ability to see the future: they knew their fate. This unlikely building was the United States headquarters of News Corporation. On the building’s second floor, clearly visible through the London Planes, through the row of massive windows, was The Crystal Palace. From the street, looking at the building, and also from the 48th Street side, passersby could see directly into The Crystal Palace, and once settled in, to Roger Ailes at work. Roger liked the vast dimensions of The Crystal Palace, the glass Diller table, and the ocean liner desk he ordered for himself. But Roger feared the fragility, the potential danger, of the glass windows. And so it came to pass that Roger Ailes summoned me to The Crystal Palace, and told me “I want all these windows replaced with bomb-proof glass”.
“Of course”, I said, and promptly called Rudy Nazath, the architect who was my collaborator on the design of the entire Fox News editorial and production facility in the building.
Rudy told me “There is no such thing as bomb-proof glass. I don’t even think there’s protective plastic or glass that can prevent an assault rifle if it’s fired up close. We can get the heaviest grade bullet-proof glass available, but what do you need it for?” I didn’t know.
So I asked Roger. “Roger, do you mind if I ask why the glass should be bomb-proof?”
It's the same old joke. The media executives forget what their parents taught them. They call a meeting with their accountants, recruiters and lawyers, put their pair of lace-up shoes on the table, and say "What are these stringy things? How do I make the shoes stay on my feet"?
The accountants then discuss lace mechanics. The recruiters talk about lacemanship in the shoe space. And the lawyers promise to notify content providers that Velcro closures must be used in place of shoe laces in all media worldwide and in perpetuity.
And the shoe laces remain untied. I know, I'm talking about men. If the executives were women, instead of shoe laces they'd be trying to figure out how to squeeze their toes into their Blahniks, to the same effect. Barefoot CEOs.
When I recently guested on Jay Marvin's radio talk show in Denver to chat about the prologue of "Naked Launch", Jay asked a very important question:
"Why didn't CNN react when Fox came on the air with an obviously conservative news channel? Why didn't they do anything?"
It brought to mind a cover story I was invited to write back in 2003 for a magazine distributed to 7,000 entertainment industry bigwigs. The magazine was called "Insights". It was a joint publication of PricewaterhouseCoopers, the headhunting firm Korn/Ferry International, and the law firm Lord, Bissell & Brook.
On July 14, 2003, I received a phone call from Jody Simon, an entertainment attorney of my
acquaintance, with whom I had been collegially friendly for some two years. An agent had put us together (of course); we had never done business. Simon had just moved to LBB from another firm, and had been assigned to the editorial board of "Insights". I was told that "Insights" was distributed free to the most important chairmen, CEO's and CFO's in the entertainment industry. At an editorial board meeting with representatives from the three firms, a discussion took place about who could be asked to write (free) articles for an upcoming issue on "Corporate Leadership and Governance in the Entertainment Space".
Simon had recently read an interview with me in a trade publication, and he was sufficiently impressed to suggest to the editorial board that I write an article. The interview Simon had read, I was told, was circulated to all the board members, and they were all impressed and agreed that they very much wanted me to write for "Insights".
Thus the July 14th call, during which Simon flattered and cajoled me to write an article for no pay. I had launched a new business in early June, and saw this as an opportunity for excellent exposure, so I requested a meeting with the magazine editor to discuss what I might write about and the terms of my agreeing to write the article.
The editor of "Insights" was an LBB intellectual property lawyer, Dennis Loomis. I met with him for something like two hours. I threw out lots of possible article topics, and we had an enjoyable discussion. Loomis repeatedly said he was having a great time: "I have never met with a writer before they wrote an article! I don't know any journalists! This is great!"
At the end of the discussion, I asked him, given everything we had discussed, what topic grabbed him as the one I should write about. He was decisive. He was very excited about my writing about Roger Ailes' leadership strategy, and the tactics he used not only in creating the Fox News Channel, but in rocketing past CNN and MSNBC in the ratings, and creating a climate where his competitors would self-destruct while he used positioning strategy, psychological operations and disinformation in the brilliant manner that I had impressed on Loomis as a new leadership paradigm in the entertainment industry. Loomis said it was to be the cover story.
Here's the article as written, followed by more about shoe laces and Blahniks with spike heels:
The accountants then discuss lace mechanics. The recruiters talk about lacemanship in the shoe space. And the lawyers promise to notify content providers that Velcro closures must be used in place of shoe laces in all media worldwide and in perpetuity.
And the shoe laces remain untied. I know, I'm talking about men. If the executives were women, instead of shoe laces they'd be trying to figure out how to squeeze their toes into their Blahniks, to the same effect. Barefoot CEOs.
When I recently guested on Jay Marvin's radio talk show in Denver to chat about the prologue of "Naked Launch", Jay asked a very important question:
"Why didn't CNN react when Fox came on the air with an obviously conservative news channel? Why didn't they do anything?"
It brought to mind a cover story I was invited to write back in 2003 for a magazine distributed to 7,000 entertainment industry bigwigs. The magazine was called "Insights". It was a joint publication of PricewaterhouseCoopers, the headhunting firm Korn/Ferry International, and the law firm Lord, Bissell & Brook.
On July 14, 2003, I received a phone call from Jody Simon, an entertainment attorney of my
acquaintance, with whom I had been collegially friendly for some two years. An agent had put us together (of course); we had never done business. Simon had just moved to LBB from another firm, and had been assigned to the editorial board of "Insights". I was told that "Insights" was distributed free to the most important chairmen, CEO's and CFO's in the entertainment industry. At an editorial board meeting with representatives from the three firms, a discussion took place about who could be asked to write (free) articles for an upcoming issue on "Corporate Leadership and Governance in the Entertainment Space". Simon had recently read an interview with me in a trade publication, and he was sufficiently impressed to suggest to the editorial board that I write an article. The interview Simon had read, I was told, was circulated to all the board members, and they were all impressed and agreed that they very much wanted me to write for "Insights".
Thus the July 14th call, during which Simon flattered and cajoled me to write an article for no pay. I had launched a new business in early June, and saw this as an opportunity for excellent exposure, so I requested a meeting with the magazine editor to discuss what I might write about and the terms of my agreeing to write the article.
The editor of "Insights" was an LBB intellectual property lawyer, Dennis Loomis. I met with him for something like two hours. I threw out lots of possible article topics, and we had an enjoyable discussion. Loomis repeatedly said he was having a great time: "I have never met with a writer before they wrote an article! I don't know any journalists! This is great!"At the end of the discussion, I asked him, given everything we had discussed, what topic grabbed him as the one I should write about. He was decisive. He was very excited about my writing about Roger Ailes' leadership strategy, and the tactics he used not only in creating the Fox News Channel, but in rocketing past CNN and MSNBC in the ratings, and creating a climate where his competitors would self-destruct while he used positioning strategy, psychological operations and disinformation in the brilliant manner that I had impressed on Loomis as a new leadership paradigm in the entertainment industry. Loomis said it was to be the cover story.
Here's the article as written, followed by more about shoe laces and Blahniks with spike heels:
POSITIONING TRUMPS CONTENT
By Dan Cooper
By Dan Cooper
The conference room was tiny, and five of us could barely squeeze around the table. Roger Ailes was a dominating presence. "I just want to plant the flag", he said. This was the first meeting of the Fox News Channel launch team, of which I was a member. We set about writing the business plan. "Plant the flag", I thought. I pictured astronauts on the lonely lunar surface, planting the American flag in a barren landscape -- one that one day might become a thriving colony. In only a matter of weeks, I came to see that Ailes was going to lead us to the planting of a towering flag above a triumphant scene of battle -- that the better image would be the Iwo Jima memorial, although we wouldn't be the ones suffering casualties.
I hope in this article to turn the standard industry analysis of the success of Fox News on its head, and in doing so to show you a leadership paradigm for key sectors of the entertainment industry that's not only worth your consideration, but points a new direction for this new age of marketing creative product.
The reasons for the extraordinary success of Fox News are completely misunderstood. The meltdown of the competition, beyond merely being overtaken in the ratings, is unprecedented.
Let's examine the commonly held view of the birth of the Fox News Channel. Rupert Murdoch had been yearning to launch a news channel, one with a conservative attitude. Whether Murdoch wanted overt slant, adding a conservative voice to a balanced mix, or any of several other choices, we'll never know. Most pre-Ailes insiders believed he wanted a news channel, period, and given his predilection for influencing public opinion on any given continent, the news channel might in some way give voice to the Republican party. More than one attempt was made to put together a proposal for the news channel. None got beyond the planning stage. But when Murdoch met Ailes, he found what Ken Auletta described as "a kindred spirit".
Auletta spent months with Ailes for "The New Yorker", and Auletta understood that Ailes and all the Murdochs love a good fight ("Brings the blood up", then-Mrs. Murdoch spunkily told me one day during the News Corp.-Time Warner battle to get Fox News on basic cable in Manhattan). Auletta understood Ailes' skills as a political strategist. But Ailes' leadership paradigm is built not simply on scrappiness and politics. It's built on marketing strategy, positioning strategy and military strategy. It's built on creating content after the strategy is in place and that is shaped to deliver on the strategy, and to waging war against the competition in a battle that never ends. I urge you to focus on this approach. Whether you lead a movie studio, head entertainment for a TV network, or lead in any supercharged battleground in the entertainment space, Ailes has, for 7 years, been field testing in secret, and he's developed a weapon of corporate destruction you can add to your arsenal.
Using the Ailes leadership model requires attitudinal change, and some org chart changes as well. But the new leadership models for the next few years are all going to require corporate structural change, and new approaches to handling creative product, from conception to consumer.
Here's the snap: Ailes did not create a cable channel based on programming or personalities. He didn't begin by sitting in his office with his crew saying, "OK, we've got O'Reilly and Hannity in prime time, what are we going to do the rest of the day, and who's going to do it?" Nor did he do anything so simple as create a conservative news channel. After all, Fox News could have been branded as a conservative news channel. If the common wisdom were true, that would be enough to position Fox News in its niche and build its audience. But Ailes didn't do that. In truth, that wouldn't be enough to accomplish what Fox News has become.
I hope in this article to turn the standard industry analysis of the success of Fox News on its head, and in doing so to show you a leadership paradigm for key sectors of the entertainment industry that's not only worth your consideration, but points a new direction for this new age of marketing creative product.
The reasons for the extraordinary success of Fox News are completely misunderstood. The meltdown of the competition, beyond merely being overtaken in the ratings, is unprecedented.
Let's examine the commonly held view of the birth of the Fox News Channel. Rupert Murdoch had been yearning to launch a news channel, one with a conservative attitude. Whether Murdoch wanted overt slant, adding a conservative voice to a balanced mix, or any of several other choices, we'll never know. Most pre-Ailes insiders believed he wanted a news channel, period, and given his predilection for influencing public opinion on any given continent, the news channel might in some way give voice to the Republican party. More than one attempt was made to put together a proposal for the news channel. None got beyond the planning stage. But when Murdoch met Ailes, he found what Ken Auletta described as "a kindred spirit".
Auletta spent months with Ailes for "The New Yorker", and Auletta understood that Ailes and all the Murdochs love a good fight ("Brings the blood up", then-Mrs. Murdoch spunkily told me one day during the News Corp.-Time Warner battle to get Fox News on basic cable in Manhattan). Auletta understood Ailes' skills as a political strategist. But Ailes' leadership paradigm is built not simply on scrappiness and politics. It's built on marketing strategy, positioning strategy and military strategy. It's built on creating content after the strategy is in place and that is shaped to deliver on the strategy, and to waging war against the competition in a battle that never ends. I urge you to focus on this approach. Whether you lead a movie studio, head entertainment for a TV network, or lead in any supercharged battleground in the entertainment space, Ailes has, for 7 years, been field testing in secret, and he's developed a weapon of corporate destruction you can add to your arsenal.Using the Ailes leadership model requires attitudinal change, and some org chart changes as well. But the new leadership models for the next few years are all going to require corporate structural change, and new approaches to handling creative product, from conception to consumer.
Here's the snap: Ailes did not create a cable channel based on programming or personalities. He didn't begin by sitting in his office with his crew saying, "OK, we've got O'Reilly and Hannity in prime time, what are we going to do the rest of the day, and who's going to do it?" Nor did he do anything so simple as create a conservative news channel. After all, Fox News could have been branded as a conservative news channel. If the common wisdom were true, that would be enough to position Fox News in its niche and build its audience. But Ailes didn't do that. In truth, that wouldn't be enough to accomplish what Fox News has become.
Rupert Murdoch hired Roger Ailes to brainwash America into thinking right-wing ideology is actually the political center. And he did. And, I'm ashamed to tell you, I helped him.
I made a lot of money that year: 1996. I owned and loved living in an elegant cooperative apartment building on Park Avenue in Manhattan, just a few blocks from the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Guggenheim. The hallways were floored with inlaid marble. You placed your garbage in custom designed mahogany chests outside your front door. The doormen called me mister.
I was a Democrat. Meaning I was so important to right-wing News Corporation that I was given a piece of what they called "the heavy lifting" on a project of extraordinary importance to Rupert Murdoch — a key role in conceiving and building out the Fox News Channel. When I was done, Roger Ailes, Chairman of Fox News, “reorganized” things and had my job “eliminated”. How come? Wait and see. But hear me now: the work I did was the best I had ever done, the best that could be done, and Roger knew it.
My contract had more than 6 months to run when I was reorganized, and it contained a pay-or-play clause, meaning that if I were not employed, I would still have to be paid salary and benefits until the termination date of the contract, even if I got another job. Did Roger give a shit that I got paid after he reorganized me? Oh yes.
Roger wanted to break the contract and stop paying me immediately. The News Corporation attorney assigned to Fox News later told me that she confronted Roger and told him Fox was going to honor my contract and pay me until the terminal date. She reminded him that I had done extraordinary work, and that it was out of the question to do less than treat me with respect. Roger conceded. The contract concluded in June of 1997. Roger put that turn of events into a bank account called "ROGER AILES D/B/A DON'T FORGET TO FUCK OVER DAN COOPER FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE LLC" That bank account had been opened the day Roger was told to put me at the center of the launch team. Deposits were being made frequently, some because I had forgotten to take Groveling and Masochism 101 in school. The truth is, I'm a bit of a narcissist, and I'm quite impressed with my own opinions. So I've always gotten myself in trouble with bosses. On the other hand, I'm really fucking talented.
In July of that year, 1997, I was sweating profusely in the back of a taxi cruising down Columbus Avenue on the Upper West Side. I was wearing my favorite outfit, one I favor to this day. I call it my uniform. It features one of my dozens of Brooks Brothers polo shirts (the ones with the logo depicting a dead lamb hanging from a rope, amusingly referred to over the many decades by Brooks as the Golden Fleece), Gap jeans, Nike sweat socks and Asics shoes. The polo was soaked through from the humidity. My cell phone jingled and shook. It was my agent, Richard Leibner.
Richard Leibner was the most powerful agent of TV news personnel in the United States, representing 800 pound gorillas like Diane Sawyer and Bill O'Reilly. I had known him as a friend for 20 years and as my representative on and off for just as long. Richard shouted, "Where are you?". The street noise was deafening. I screamed "I'm in a cab on the West Side!"
"Do...you...want...to...executive...produce...a...news...magazine?" Richard shouted. This was a dumb question. Of course I did. "Turn your cab around and go see Irwin Weiner right now. Now!" Irwin Weiner had been CFO of ABC News when the legendary TV pioneer Roone Arledge was news and sports president. I knew Irwin well, having worked closely with Roone years earlier on the ABC News magazine 20/20. Irwin now ran an independent production company. Literally three days later, I had a deal to create and produce a weekly half hour for WNBC-TV. I plunged into my work. Ultimately, the series was a great success, and the people I worked for did the one thing that enables me to do my best — they left me alone. And kept complimenting me. It was a very pleasant time, except for one thing — I developed an intense crush on a beautiful 23 year old blond who worked for me, couldn't stand me, but had a clear idea how to get ahead. Which wasn't helpful with my wife. I thought I was over falling for women who didn't like me and who were blatant manipulators. Apparently not.
The fresh air of hands-on production, good ratings, and great people to work for was healing after the horrible experience of working at Fox. Of course there's a but, and the but came two months after I went to work on the NBC series.
In the fall of 1997, the writer David Brock called me and told me he was researching a cover story about Roger Ailes for New York magazine. Could he interview me?
Brock called me, I presumed, because I was the only Fox News executive who had once been in the inner circle of the inner circle, and was now in the wild. I knew pretty much everything everybody wanted to know. The question was, could I talk and live? I paused. Now, I just adore spilling the beans. It's so much fun knowing something first. But much of what I knew about Fox News was secret, presumably proprietary information presumably belonging to News Corporation. And Roger Ailes didn't like snitches. Well, screw him, right? He needed a smack. Or maybe not a smack — maybe a tap or something. To play it safe.
I went along with the interview on the condition that it be on background — meaning no quotes, no "I spoke with a former" anything, that what I would tell him was strictly for his knowledge. Brock agreed.
Brock opened the conversation with a 10 minute monologue proclaiming his ill-regard for Roger. This impressed me. Most writers were terrified of Roger, and he threatened them in no uncertain terms. I asked Brock if Roger had offered to "destroy him". Brock laughed. Yes, indeed he had. Ailes told Brock he would "never work again" if he wrote the article. Brock found this idea hysterical. I didn't.
I answered all of Brock's questions. Two hours worth. Why did I give the interview about Roger, risky as it was, even on background? Because I knew about that SCREW COOPER LLC bank account, and I saw the interview, done carefully, as a way to begin to ingratiate myself with a man I knew to be a schoolyard bully — a coward at heart. Yes, Roger, I'm talking about you.
A friend of mine had a father who plied the psychiatric trade. Dad advised, "Bullies have no ego esteem. They need respect. Always show respect to a bully". I hadn't done that when I worked for Roger. I was badly burned. Now, terrified of Roger's wrath and its consequences on my career, I figured if I filled Brock up with an exclusively complimentary picture of Ailes and my work, maybe the karma would come back around. And besides, Fox was so stupid they paid me out without requesting a non-disclosure agreement. Maybe I was safe. And it was on background.
I raved about Roger's brilliance as a marketing strategist. About his uniquely focused, intensely demanding leadership. I said I had never done anything so hard, so well, in such an exciting environment in my life. And it was all because of Roger's never-ending inspiration. I said absolutely nothing negative.
When the article was published on November 17, 1997, it was no longer a cover story. Like most articles about Roger Ailes, it was only marginally critical, with just a hint of admiration. It was at the least a toned-down version of the blast-furnace analysis Brock told me he planned to write. Nothing in it was traceable to me.
A few weeks before the article was published, I was lounging on the sofa in my study on Park Avenue, watching TV and reviewing scripts. My wife Gina was emailing strange men in foreign countries on the computer, a habit she seemed unwilling to break. I was fantasizing about the 23 year old blond, who that day walked into the elevator facing me, threw her shoulders back, projecting toward me her extraordinary breasts, stared at me, and backed up against the opposite wall, putting a sexual no-man's-land between us. The phone rang.
Which phone was ringing? That would be the one on the desk in my study, remember? I jerked out of my fantasy. The call was from my agent, Richard Leibner.
Let me repeat for you again, because I want you to hang on to these facts: the phone rang a few weeks before the New York article was published. The call was from my agent, Richard Leibner.
Richard asked me to come in to see him.
Well now. This didn't bode well. When Richard had a job offer for me, he would always tell me on the phone. Gina suggested I jump in a cab and get over there right away and not take a nap, which was usually my instinct in these sort of situations. I always listened to her. Gina had a nose
for trouble unlike anybody I had ever met. She was also the best thing that had ever happened to me. An extraordinarily brilliant, amazingly beautiful woman, she was 15 years my junior and the catch of the century. After six years of marriage, I loved to simply look at her. Her abundant strawberry hair; her incredible legs; her perfect feet; the six pack she was developing running ten miles a day in Central Park and working with a personal trainer at the most expensive health club in Manhattan. It really was conjugal contentment, just watching her there writing emails to other men.
Naturally, she had somehow psychically decoded my captivation with the blond, and things were a bit frosty.
In my jeans and polo shirt, I impatiently waited for the elevator to the antiqued-up lobby with the massive four foot bouquet of fresh cut flowers, and ran out into Park Avenue to nab a cab before any of my neighbors who were standing on the corner "ahead" of me.
Richard Leibner's waiting room was a bit over the top. The walls were overhung with framed magazine covers and articles ballyhooing Richard and the marvels of his agency, N. S. Bienstock. The greatest item on display was a front page of Variety with a huge headline reading "TOO MUCH JACK IN THE BIENSTOCK". This topped an article documenting the bitter whining by CBS News executives that Richard Leibner was sapping them dry of money by negotiating incredibly high salaries for his clients there.
Richard's receptionist showed me in right away. His familiar office was adorned with a jukebox and shelves bearing such hideous tsochkes I couldn't even look at them. Richard was leaning back in his leather chair, so far back his head was practically touching the floor — his favorite position. I plopped myself as usual on his black leather sofa. I stretched out my legs, intent on looking cavalier. I'm 6' 2", with long legs and big feet. My sneaker bottoms were up in Richard's view. But I was braced for the worst, because maybe this had something to do with the Brock article, which, remember, had not been published yet.
There was nothing in the world of the New York City news media that Richard Leibner didn't know before everyone else. Could he have found out about the interview? Richard usually opened all phone conversations and meetings with a really dirty joke. Not today. In his distinctively Great Neck, Long Island accent, Richard leaned forward and asked me, "Danny. Did yoo give an intavyoo to Noo Yawk magazine?"
Continue reading Naked Launch : Prologue.
View blog authority
Recent Comments
"The Iron Law of Institutions is: the people who control institutions care first and foremost about their power within the institution rather than the power of the institution itself. Thus, they would rather the institution "fail" while they remain in power within the institution than for the institution to "succeed" if that requires them to lose power within the institution." quote from
…http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/001705.html
Writer wannabees giving directions about style and content of your piece are like strangers criticizing the choice of plants in my garden. The appropriate reaction is, “Get lost, it’s my yard”.
I look forward to your further discourse. As a Canadian with paternal roots in the USA, I struggle to understand America’s abdication of moral leadership and eagerness to betray freedoms in the name of security.
No doubt, acquiescence of the citizenry depended upon a news media staffed by people who valued economic gain above democracy and human rights. Mr. Cooper, you appear to have been qualified accordingly. Perhaps you now can make amends.
Jefferson’s words are often worthwhile and these particularly cogent:
- "The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure." –
I suspect that Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes would consider Jefferson a naive fool.
…I love the sex, the greed, the nastiness of all of this.
…This is the best potboiler I have read in years and years.
I am horrified and fascinated.
Keep it up.
Keep mixing the sex with the greed and the hustle and the worldwide political drama that this really illuminates.
A great story.
We still don't know how this turns out, after all.
I am waiting with bated breath.
You have two stories here (or maybe 3). One is your personal story, the relationship with your wife and this woman you lusted after. The other is your story at Fox.
I'm sure in your own mind they're very intertwined. But as a writer, you're going to have to separate them a bit. You can still tell both stories in the same book if you want -- it will be a big, fat, book -- but they at least have to be in separate chapters. A little bleed-over is over, but get that separation.
I love the title of the book (nice allusion to Burroughs). I am really interested in the Fox story. And it seems plain that for your own mental health, you need to tell your personal story.
I look forward to reading them. Please do yourself a favor and get a good editor, one who dares to say "no" to you.
…Interesting to read, but your style comes off as tabloid. You're speaking against NewsCorp, and so your audience, ultimately, isn't going to be those who are fooled by its shoddy interpretation of journalism. You might try a tone more simple and clean, especially here in the prologue: your reader doesn't know you yet, and you don't want to approach them too casually, with "exclusives" of what really happens behind closed mahogany doors. Strike the parts about Gina and your blonde assistant and pussy masala and Ian Rae. Not strike them from the book, necessarily, but from the prologue--set them aside for when we know you a little better and, more importantly, after you have established your main point. You have a deeper, more serious subject to address, and you need to aim to have your work shelved not under "true crime" but "media criticism," where it will be taken as seriously as it deserves.
Also, consider structure. This looks like a collection of short-burst writings glued together. I say this because you start so many paragraphs out by establishing time. And you compound that disjointed feeling by frequently telling the reader "more on that later," or something to that effect. Nonfiction writing will always be more powerful when it flows the way nonfiction time does: forcefully, surely, and in one direction. There can be flashbacks and elaborations, but be as aware of them as a writer as we are as readers.
The best part of your prologue so far is where you speak of bias versus indoctrination. It's interesting, it's a good broad point appropriate for an introduction, it's true, and it's important. If I had written this, there's not a bit of it I would toss out. But aside, yes--I would try putting it all aside except for that one segment, and start over using that serious tone. The sordid details can wait for later chapters when we know you better, know your story and your position, and have had time to consider the deeper implications of your work. The prologue is where you sit the reader down and convince him that you have something to say.
…Really, really, really sleazy all around. From this excerpt, I would find it hard to have any respect for Dan Cooper or Fox or Cooper's wife. It's nice of him to let us know all about his lusting over an attractive co-worker --- that was really important --- It was also nice to hear this all from an obviously inflated ego that probably shouldn't be... Great read, I might have picked this book up if I hadn't read this!
…Your emotions are overriding your intellengce - by-far!
This writing, though rich in content,is very negatiave to say the least. Do you know the word balance? Trade-in your neuroticism for it.
You are too good to perpetuate this kind of petty Tom-Foolery.
Your Artistic sensitivity is not to be reduced to a competiton.
All the best , Cooper Tomlinson
…I'm a relatively young guy- I barely remember the launch of the fox news network, though I was in high school at the time. I was not really politically aware back then,and not untill after college did I even begin to pay attention (you can thank GWB for that). So all I have known in cable news, in my life, is that fox news has always existed, so to speak.
However, even though fox news has "always been there" I have always felt, somewhere in the back of my mind, that it was run by a deplorable group of people. The way the talking heads chatter, the way they gussy up their female anchors like cheap midwestern prostitutes- all pointed to something crass that I couldn't identify. As time goes on, more and more justification is being granted to that inner dialouge. So far your narrative seems to say that it was much less a group as it was one man. I'm loving the story so far- and I'm eagerly awaiting the next submission.
Keep up the good work!
…I loved your confessional--transparency is the mother of authenticity--the fox antipode. Your rawness functions as an elegant counterpoint to Fox rhetoric. Whereas, Fox news feeds its viewers an endless menu of the same worn out conceits, your narrative arcs through time as a moving reflection upon a carefully examined life.
The sign of a genuine writer is that the fruit of such an examination, earned through a process of gradual ripening, may be tasted by the reader, the depth of flavor suddenly recalling personal memories with the same valance.
Now that the pandora's box has been opened, is there no escape?
…This is so gross on so many levels. Not least of which is your own responsibility. In future what you do when offered such a job is say no.
…