UNFINISHED BUSINESS: The Projects James Gandolfini Left … 
R.I.P. James Gandolfini 
Photos: James Gandolfini, 1961-2013 
Warner Bros Sets Morten Tyldum To Helm … 
Zac Efron Thriller ‘The Falling’ Gets Jeremy … 
Why Was Ex-Soft Porn Filmmaker Recently Hired As Movie … 
ReelzChannel Cancels ‘The Big Picture’ After … 
Cillian Murphy Boards ‘In The Heart Of The Sea’ 
John Legend To Produce Comedy Project About Music Managers … 
Hot Trailer: ‘Crystal Fairy’ 
Sam Taylor-Johnson To Direct ‘Fifty Shades Of … 
Inside AMPAS Board Of Governors’ Meeting: Conflict Of … 
Hot Trailer: ‘The Spectacular Now’ 
Glenn Geller To Run Current Programming For CBS & CBS … 
Shailene Woodley’s Mary Jane Role Cut From ‘The … 
New ‘Star Wars’ Film Cast Breakdown Unveiled 
CAA Signs Florian Henckel Von Donnersmarck, Oscar-Winning … 
UPDATE: Dan Abrams Named New ‘Nightline’ Anchor … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘The Voice’ Finale On Par … 
Joy Bryant Returns To Longtime Agent Steve Alexander At … 
ITV Pays $30M For Controlling Stake In ‘Hatfields … 
It’s for representation in Hollywood. The Wall Street Journal is leaving behind its longtime reps at CAA. I’m told UTA will sell film and television rights to published articles across all sections of the Wall Street Journal, which recently regained its position as the largest circulation U.S. newspaper under new owner Rupert Murdoch. But, wait, doesn’t he own a film studio and a TV network and cable stations? And aren’t his Big Media companies already a major buyer that can do any project and hire any talent? And yet Murdoch’s newspaper thinks it needs an agent. Hilarious!
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
And yet Murdoch’s newspaper thinks it needs an agent. Hilarious!
Hilarious, or deviously cunning.
Rupert’s not going to pay the sort of money that other companies would pay for something from one of his own papers. Yet that same extra money the other companies are willing to pay, will have a piece going straight to old Rupert’s pocket. (And not only for the rights, but for advertising with Rupert’s many media outlets)
This is a way of getting his rivals to give him money.
Don’t put anything past old Rupert, he’s a shrewd old devil.
My lord, if you think Rupert Murdoch has even the slightest awareness of the WSJ retaining UTA or any agency to represent their occasional articles for film rights, you are seriously delusional. This stuff is such small potatoes, such an infinitesimally small revenue item for an individual operating unit of News Corp that it would be ridiculous of Murdoch to give it the slightest care.
Come on now, Nikki. Everyone knows that the film and television business is but a small piece of any media conglomerates overall business. But attempting to ridicule Murdoch for this is even more absurd.
Yikes.
It’s amazing to consider the hubris of Mr. Murdoch as it relates to how little he thinks we understand or know about his imperialist nature. This is all a ruse to create a perceptive smokescreen of a democratic (sic) effort to allow the creators of Wall Street Journal content to have a shot at the free market. But shouldn’t the move from CAA to UTA tell us everything about how serious he is about doing that?
Just when I thought UTA couldn’t get any more boring.
As if anyone needs the WSJ’s permission to use their stories in the first place. A dirty secret among lawyers is that unless you want to use the newpaper’s name in ads you almost never really need a paper’s permission to make a movie or TV show based on one of its stories. Kudos to UTA for landing the client — now let’s see if they are good enough agents to convince people to pay for stories that legally they can use for free!
There could be upside potential because Newscorp knows that to be in the game you’ve got to play the game. It gets them better leverage in extending their brands into other ventures and as such, will help block downward pressure on ad rates and other revenue sources. Overall, this may add to the value proposition.