August 28, 2002
As I write this, I have just returned from vacation to find a large number of e-mails asking why Disney has decided to take Zorro off The Disney Channel as of early September. I haven't reached anyone at Disney yet to find out the official reason, but I do have some thoughts on the subject. I have been predicting for some time now that Disney would pull the series from the schedule - here are my thoughts on why they may have done this now.
1) The series has been on a long time. Zorro was one of the first series to air on The Disney Channel, beginning with the Channel's debut on April 18, 1983. It has aired continuously since then. That means Zorro has been on for 19+ years - which has to be some sort of record, especially for a series that only lasted two years when it first aired. Looking at it another way is also interesting. Zorro has been on either 5, 6 or 7 days a week during those 19 years. Assuming an average of 6 times a week, that would mean the series has been aired around 77 times - non-stop. Given that the television industry doesn't generally show much interest in older product, those numbers are a real testimony to the series. They do show, though, that the show may be considered "stale" in the minds of the Disney programming executives.
2) It will come as little surprise that there is actually very little Disney still airing on The Disney Channel. They rarely air any of the classic Disney films anymore, and there is little other evidence of the Disney many of us have come to know and love. For all intents and purposes The Disney Channel is just about interchangeable with many other cable channels. They have been paving the way for this for years. When the Channel first was started it was conceived as a pay channel, in which subscribers would pay their local cable company who would then in turn pay Disney. This meant Disney only got money for actual subscribers. Well, as time went by there was a real surprise to many people when Nickelodeon became such a big hit. Their model was completely different - the cable company has to pay the Nick folks for every subscriber to the cable company, not just those who actually watch it. That meant the Nick folks could get a lot more money, especially since they could sell ads on the shows. The cable company also gets to sell ads and everyone comes out happy, right? Wrong - it meant that Disney decided to go the "basic cable" route instead of pay, so now we get breaks in the programs just like on regular TV. Although those breaks are for Disney product and shows, I have been predicting we will be seeing regular commercials in those spots as soon as Disney's existing contracts expire and they fully convert to basic. They are conditioning us for this with the breaks we have today so that when they start tossing in a few cereal commercials it will just seem like we have been watching them all along. Unfortunately, the removal of Zorro and the rest of Vault Disney is just another step in this overall process of turning the Channel into a generic commodity, along with things like the "Zoog Disney" branding. Don't be surprised if you someday turn on the TV and instead of getting The Disney Channel you find yourself watching The Zoog Channel.
3) Hopefully the third possible reason ends up being a good one. People have been clamoring for a home video release of Disney, first on VHS and now on DVD. Unfortunately Disney has been unable to do this due to some legal battles with the Guy Williams estate and others due to some disputed clauses in the old contracts. Basically, those contracts gave Disney the right to air the show on television forever but were understandably silent as to home video. It just might be that taking the series off the air is a good thing, as it might show some forward momentum in a video release. Think about it - if you were Disney, would you want to be airing a show for free that you also hoped you could sell to people? Not likely! The more plausible scenario is to pull it off the air, then later announce the triumphant return of the show on DVD. If you doubt this would fit their model, consider the fact that the Disney movies no longer seen on The Disney Channel are now being sold on DVD themselves.
So, where does this leave us today? Happily, Disney is giving everyone one more chance to watch and tape Zorro before they pull the series off the air. They are beginning a Zorro marathon on Friday, August 30th (actually it's early Saturday morning on the 31st) that will show eight episodes in a block from 1-5 AM. So run out, get a pile of blank tapes and start taping, because by September 9th it will all be over.
Is it worth writing to Disney and asking them to change their mind? It can't hurt! If you do want to give it a try, here's the address:
Anne Sweeney
President, The Disney Channel
3800 Alameda Ave.
Burbank, CA 91505You might want to also copy the following:
Michael Eisner
Roy E. Disney
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista Street
Burbank, CA 91521
If you want to call The Disney Channel their number is (800)874-1687. Ask for the Programming Department and let them know how you feel!
What, you may ask, will they replace Vault Disney and Zorro with? Sitting down? Well, here's the schedule:
12 Midnight: So Weird
12:30: Jett Jackson
1 AM: Boy Meets World
1:30: Smart Guy
2 AM: Sister, Sister
2:30: Even Stevens
3 AM: Sister, Sister (Another Episode)
3:30: Lizzie McGuire
4 AM: The Jersey
The Los Angeles Times picks up the story
August 29, 2002
I was contacted yesterday by the LA Times for an upcoming story about the decision to pull Zorro and Vault Disney off the air.
I spent about 45 minutes on the phone today with
Richard Verrier, the reporter who is writing the story on the Vault Disney
issue. Their interest began with letters and e-mails from people protesting
the news from Disney - they hadn't picked up on the story until people
started contacting them. I think this is a VERY important item to consider
for people in other parts of the country - get in touch with your own
newspapers, tv stations and radio stations and let them know about the
situation. A few newspaper stories will both get the word out to people who
may not already know - and will certainly get some attention at Disney.
We were about 5 minutes into the interview when Disney called Richard with
their side of the story, which was great as I got to rebut it. Here's their
side and my reply:
Disney: by taking these shows off the air we can save money and divert it to
create new shows.
Me: Totally non-sensible. They do not pay anyone for the older shows, which
they own outright. No royalties to the performers. Instead, it will actually
cost them money now since the SAG rules call for payments to the cast of
these sitcoms.
Disney: there is actually a wide market for children at this time of night
due to the different timezones.
Me: Doesn't hold water. With two satellite feeds they are offering the
service at the same time or close to it in most parts of the country. I
gather they offered Hawaii as an example. Well, as I pointed out, a show on
at 1 AM in LA is 10 PM in Hawaii, and it's doubtful a lot of kids will be
watching sitcoms at that hour. Even less at 1 AM for our 4 AM, right? And,
with deference to the residents of Hawaii, there aren't all that many people
there in general as compared to the rest of the US.
Disney: they want to create a 24 hour family channel.
Me: What - parents and adults aren't part of the family? So shows oriented
towards 16 year olds is it?
Other items covered:
1) This will leave the Disney Channel without a vestige of Walt during the
100th birthday celebration
2) Leaving the shows on at that hour at least lets viewers tape them and
watch them later. Taking them off totally cuts out any chance of enjoying
them.
3) I get e-mails every day from people asking about the old shows and how to
buy or see them, so there is obviously a market for this.
4) How many paid subscribers are likely to cancel when the very thing they
pay for is gone. He was quite interested in this aspect, as it would
directly impact the Disney bottom line and that's one of the key elements in
his story - people voting with their wallets.
5) Many of the e-mails I get are from 12-18 year olds who actually do like
the old shows.
I agreed that Disney does need to stay current and that you can't live 100%
in the past, but offered the opinion that leaving the classics on for 2
hours or so a night would be a small price to pay to keep the legions of
baby boomers happy. I also suggested they could do a Classic Disney channel
as they did with Toon Disney.
Other suggestions:
1) Show more of the old shows and not just recycle the same ones over and
over and over. That should help improve ratings.
2) If time slots are limited cycle the shows. I know some will disagree with
this, but I would rather see them air Zorro, rest it, air it again,
rest it as opposed to just yanking it forever. Seeing it every 3-4 months is
better than not at all.
3) Settle the lawsuits and get these things out on DVD.
There were a lot of other areas we covered - thoughts on the theme parks,
stores, etc., but 99% was on the Vault Disney issue. He did say that Disney
was "quite surprised" by the reaction, both in the number of calls and
letters as well as the fact that the Times was doing a piece on it.
The story will run in the TUESDAY 9/03/02 edition of the LA Times
in the Business Section and may also
appear in other Tribune newspapers. I will be waiting to see if they could
make sense out of what I was saying!
So, to wrap this note - get in touch with your own papers if you can.
The more pressure the better.
Thanks for the notes with suggestions from everyone. I think I covered just
about all of the points even if not mentioned here.
Bill
September 11, 2002 update
True to their word, Disney pulled Vault Disney off the Channel.
Well, the story did run in The Los Angeles Times. And in The Chicago Tribune. The Orlando Sentinel. The New York Post. In fact, it ran in several other papers which picked the story up from the LA Times. You can find the story on their website by searching for "Vault Disney". The piece was shorter than I had hoped for, but I think the reporter did a good job of trying to explain what was going on without making those complaining sound like rabid fans. Later follow-ups in letter to the editor columns seem to show that people outside of fandom were also getting involved and letting Disney know how they feel.
In addition, I was interviewed by e-mail for The Nashville Tennessean, and am waiting to see that in print. The draft the writer sent me was longer than the Times piece, and if I get an online link for it I will post it here.
Traffic to my Zorro website has more than doubled during the past week. It's interesting to review the access log and see just how many people from Disney have been accessing the site. One can only wonder what they have in mind...
E-mail continues to pour in. If you have written and I haven't been able to answer yet please be patient - I have never seen so much e-mail. One thing that really stand out is how much of it is from kids in Disney's targeted age bracket - kids who don't agree with the Channel's move at all.
Take a look at the Disney Channel site lately? No mention of the old shows at all. Completely gone as if they never existed. Oh, and from the "I told you so department" - the schedule now shows two types of shows - Playhouse Disney and Zoog Disney.
November 20, 2002 update
No real news, unfortunately. Just two observations about recent developments on The Disney Channel:
1) They now are using the largest on-screen logo, known as a "bug" in the industry, that I have ever seen. It literally covers the lower right corner of the screen. I'm glad they didn't have this obscenity on screen when they were airing Zorro.
2) My DirecTV satellite magazine now longer has a detailed schedule for Disney Channel programming. Instead, they are include on a one-page chart of "Children's Programming". Was that what you were hoping for, Disney executives? I doubt it! It sure can't help in any ratings studies.
I hope this helps for now. I will add more information on any of this as I get it confirmed.
Regards
Bill Cotter