On the loss of Backstage reviews

by Smartie on April 18, 2013

TheCriticSo, last week word went out that Backstage 86ed their reviews, and it appears that the immediate kerfuffle has died down.

There were loads of different reactions, from the “Wait, Backstage reviewed?” variety, to dispirited statements from many small companies about how Backstage were one of the few outlets they could count on to review shows. Of course, there were the groans about the quality of the writing in the reviews. But bottom line, for the most part, the community was mourning the loss.

The news came at a time when there was a bit of self reflection by the critic’s themselves in this really smart  criticism series curated by Rob Weinert-Kent on HowlRound.

Of course, I was asked by several people if there was anything to be done to reverse the decision. Sadly, I don’t think so. The metrics just were not there. Why should Backstage continue pouring money into a section that simply was not being read? There was someone in an office looking at page view stats, and Backstage readers told this person via their clicks that they simply were not interested in reading reviews.

“Don’t they know how important they are to the industry?” I was asked.

Well, if readers weren’t clicking on the reviews, the publication concluded that they reviews weren’t important to their readers.

Could they have figured out way to make the reviews section more integral to the paper itself? Sure, I bet they could have found some creative solutions. But the bean counters in the corporate office simply look at their return on investment. And paying for to staff a section that was ignored by their readership just doesn’t make bean-counter sense. They weren’t thinking about the industry on the whole, just the impact on their bottom line.

What troubles me the most about Backstage’s decision is that they have now set a precedent. Over the past few years, for example, Variety has cut down on the number of non-major shows that it reviews due to budget cuts. Now that it has merged with a Tinsletown-centric new media conglomerate, I don’t expect that to change. In fact, I won’t be at all surprised if legit coverage is cut entirely. (Hell, in the web redesign you can only find Legit if you hover over “Other.”) After all, Backstage is an industry publication, geared towards actors, but industry nonetheless. And industry wasn’t reading the reviews.

I can’t help but thing that as a community we are failing our reporters, critics and our publications. We don’t spend money in the publications, the lifeblood of every outlet. But we expect that they dutifully attend the theater and file reviews and features. Meanwhile, space is withering along with the ad dollars.

But there is no limit to the internet, you say! Well, that’s not technically true. Companies pay for a certain amount of usage data. The more data, and often the more traffic, the more they pay internet providers. Sometimes this usage is capped, but then they have to pay for overages. And this is not taking into account that they also have to pay for editors, writers, designers, IT staff, etc.

Back in the day of flush ad spending, the big money subsidized the arts coverage of the smaller companies. But as the ad money drifts away, the publications have no choice but to shrink staff, and shrink coverage.

I get advertising is expensive, and often there is no money in the budget for it. And I wish that that an enterprising ad sales person would figure out a way to make the financials work for small companies. I think it would benefit the indie theater community on the whole.

Did you know, for example, that the Village Voice has a super affordable eblast program for theater, and their theater sales rep is really willing to work with small company’s and their budgets? But do they sell tickets? Honestly, it depends on the show. Some shows make their money back. Some don’t see a dime.

(This is totally a post for another day, but I will address it quickly. Honestly, I think in only a few cases do you see a return on ad spending. However, it is the cumulative effort of marketing/advertising/pr that has impact on sales. That said, this is really about the health and longevity of the theater community on the whole, which also encompasses the journalists that cover it.)

The reality of the situation is that publications have rent to pay and a payroll to meet each week. If they can’t make the numbers work, something has to give. And usually what “gives” is what doesn’t generate revenue.

{ 4 comments }

The culture of free

March 12, 2013

And no, I’m not talking comps. This response by a freelance journalist to The Atlantic has been making the social media rounds. Essentially, The Atlantic wanted to the guy to “repurpose” a reported piece he did for another outlet, and as payment they offered the prestige of publishing in The Atlantic. Arts journalist Randy Gener [...]

Read the full article →

On Failure (and my fear of it)

February 15, 2013

  I’ve been working in NYC theater for something like 17 years. I have seen a lot of “failures.” Let me first define my use of failure: The reviews were awful, to the point of career damaging The show didn’t find an audience, and the actors played to audiences of one or two The artists/company [...]

Read the full article →

OMG! Negative Reviews!

October 24, 2012

I recently dealt with the second scenario, and was asked that the web outlet pull the review entirely. Don’t ever do this. That is taking a big giant dump on the free press. Call your mom and sob. Go out for lots of drinks with your BFF and talk about how the critic is a [...]

Read the full article →

Why aren’t they? Try: why should they?

June 12, 2012

“Why aren’t they?” I hear this question often. Why aren’t they reviewing me? Why aren’t they writing a feature story? Why aren’t they giving me a rave review? It’s easy to ask why, but only when you rephrase the question can you actually take action to fix the problem: Why SHOULD they? What are you [...]

Read the full article →

Like the Mayan Calendar, but for NY theater!

January 17, 2012

I always advise that if you are looking for press impact, you need to plan your productions accordingly. Great advice, but… Not helpful. So I figured I would put together a neat calendar that gives a general landscape. Just a note–schedules are always in flux and this is more of a general lay of the [...]

Read the full article →

A case of the Mondays

December 12, 2011

For today’s case of the Mondays, let’s do a little Monday morning quarterbacking for the weekend movie box office. To put it succinctly, it was a crap weekend for Hollywood. And while the pundits blame crappy reviews and lack of testosterone at the box office, I think there’s something a else at play that may [...]

Read the full article →

What can we learn from Amanda Hocking?

July 12, 2011

I have been pretty transfixed by Amanda Hocking, the young woman who made a million bucks by self-publishing her ebooks and then landed a traditional publishing contract with an advance of double that amount. If you read her backstory, she’s like the little engine that could. And she most certainly DID. On her blog, she is [...]

Read the full article →

Economies of scale

June 23, 2011

I was in a lovely little “mom and pop” coffee shop having a delicious iced coffee and overheard a meeting between the proprietors and a few other people. They were discussing how to boost the small shop’s revenue. One woman was very enthusiastic about knocking off a version of the Starbuck’s Rewards Card, which is [...]

Read the full article →

What we can learn from those cute little Meerkats

May 9, 2011

When you have a show that taps into a television craze, do you capitalize on it, or get huffy, puffy and self-righteous? I guess you guys know what side I am going to come down on, right? When the press calls and the interviews start rolling and they bring up this TV craze, you kind [...]

Read the full article →