Distorting quotes to hawk theater: how far are they allowed to go?

[April Saul]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 10:41am

Okay, so in my e-mail from Atlantic Theater, they have some pretty glowing quotes from Threepenny Opera reviews...and I'm thinking, hey, I read that Isherwood review, I don't remember him saying that. So I checked, and found this:

From the Atlantic e-mail:
"A chic-looking musical that moves efficiently and with a stylish gait. Ms. Clarke does a fine job of composing decadent yet decorous stage pictures. Mr. Park is vibrant. Ms. Osnes performs with glorious musicality."

From the actual Times review:
"Unfortunately, this chic-looking but pallid staging of Bertolt Brecht and Kurt Weill's scabrous musical drama is also pretty toothless. Directed and choreographed by Martha Clarke, the production moves efficiently and with a stylish gait through the underworld of London thieves, beggars and whores scheming to get ahead in a cutthroat world. At just over two hours, with intermission, it's certainly the thriftiest "Threepenny Opera" I've yet seen. But while Ms. Clarke does a fine job of composing decadent yet decorous stage pictures, she doesn't seem able to elicit performances with the requisite salty tang from her talented cast.

From the Atlantic e-mail, quoting Teachout in the WSJ:
"I've never heard a production better sung or played!"

From actual WSJ review:
"While I've never heard a "Threepenny" production that was better sung or played, the rough edges of Weill's score have been blunted in the process."

I'm an English major and a journalist. While I get that they have to find the good, even in bad reviews, you couldn't get away with mangling quotes like that--changing punctuation, not using a series of periods to show that you're compressing somthing, and so forth--in any term paper or newspaper story. How is that allowed in advertising? Beyond misleading, which I know is permissible, it seems dishonest and unethical.

Not to pick specifically on the Atlantic, but is this acceptable practice with people hawking theater these days?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 10:47am

People are trying to promote their show after a critic trashes it. Their is nothing wrong with using any part of that review that may help them in trying to pull in customers. The critic was trying to keep people away from what he deemed inferior so the producers are using some of his words to try and save it.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 10:51am

You are an idiot, Roxy, truly an idiot for the ages. You just explained something April already clearly understands.

What she's asking is if it's unethical, and, if so, why is it permitted?

Then again, you wrote "Their is nothing wrong..."

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 10:57am

To Growler

To avoid you wasting your time, I say this one word "Ignore". Get it?

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:01am

What Atlantic did here is allowed, and is pretty common practice. As long as they're not changing actual words or attributing things incorrectly, it's fine. Punctuation changes like this are common.

I don't think it's ethical, but they're allowed.

Updated On: 4/9/14 at 11:01 AM

[perfectlymarvelous]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:07am

Stuff like this happens all the time, and it's not really a new thing either. David Merrick was a master of manipulating pull quotes back in the day (and then there was also that time he found people who shared the names of the major New York theater critics, comped them into Subways Are For Sleeping, and used what they said about the show as pull quotes).

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:08am

I agree with the OP: they should maintain the original word order and use ellipses to indicate omissions. But the bottom line is have they not just teased out the praise from among the criticism but actually distorted the original meaning? And I don't think they have in these instances.

[HoundDoggydog]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:10am

They have to be careful though, because they do run the risk of people (like April and myself) going back to the full review, which makes them look bad. I think it is a mistake to treat your audiences like morons which is what the Atlantic did in this instance (and many others do.)

[madbrian]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:14am

I'm a stickler, and when you put quotes around words, you'd better ne accurate. So, I'd agree with Reg's comments; it's fine to use ellipses and choose phrases selectively. However, it is dishonest to put quotes around words if you are paraphrasing, or altering the author's words in any way.

[haterobics]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:15am

They seem to be using the best practices as far as this goes, in that they are quoting the bits they are quoting accurately with their intended meaning. Obviously they are cherry picking the best stuff, but there have been movies where critics have said "While the director tries to achieve a cinematic masterpiece, what actually occurs is a tragic misfire." and the pull quote would be "a cinematic masterpiece," whereas The Atlantic did pull the positive bits from the review to make positive statements, so while still an example of contextomy, it is the better way to do it.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:17am

What they did with the short Terry Teachout quote is 100% kosher.

What they did with the first sentence in the pull-out from the Times, however, is misleading because the "but pallid" was really the point Isherwood was making. Their second sentence and the two sentences of praise for the performers are all fine.

Had they done this with the Times quote, it would have been less noticeable that they were pulling good quotes from a bad review:

"Chic-looking... Ms. Clarke does a fine job of composing decadent yet decorous stage pictures. Mr. Park is vibrant. Ms. Osnes performs with glorious musicality."
--The New York Times

Updated On: 4/9/14 at 11:17 AM

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:17am

Everyone has to decide for himself, I suppose. Even given the original context, I don't think the pull quotes distort what the reviewers said about those specific aspects (though, of course, they reached a different conclusion about the production as a whole).

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:28am

My favorite right now is The Fantasticks which uses a quote from the New York Times about how the show is "the last word in theatrical sophistication" and if you go back and read the article he actually states that when he was younger he used to think that The Fantasticks was the last word in theatrical sophistication. Big difference.

Updated On: 4/9/14 at 11:28 AM

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:44am

"The audience... loved... the... shiny... elephant"
-Ben Brantley

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:47am

I loved the trick Merrick pulled on the critics. Read The Abominable Showman and throughly enjoyed it.

Those were the good old days.

[tazber]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 11:49am

Lol bwaylvsong.

....it's a show.....with music....that....will.....bring you to tears.

The best.....night of theater....I.....have.....ever seen!

[aasjb4ever]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 12:02pm

A few years ago, I saw a photo of the front of house for Dirty Rotten Scountrels at the Imperial, and above each door, one word per review was used to write out “THE (source 1)” “GREATEST (source 2)” “SHOW (source 3)” “I’VE (source 4)” “EVER (source 5)” “SEEN. (source 6)” “REALLY. (source 7)” and I love that tongue-in-cheek approach to cherry picking the best reviews.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 12:08pm

I completely agree with Growl.

[tazber]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 12:18pm

I can't see you Jordan.

That's how I knew to reply.

[newintown]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 12:19pm

"To avoid you wasting your time, I say this one word "Ignore". Get it?"

Jesus H, Roxy, why don't we all just "Ignore" everyone with whom we disagree in the least?

And while we're at it, let's just stop ALL our emotional and intellectual development at the place it was when we were 13 years old.

Updated On: 4/9/14 at 12:19 PM

[newintown]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 12:29pm

We were just watching the commercial for Hedwig (that plays 10 times an hour on Logo) - it's all stock photography and quotes, but who know what the quotes relate to, as the show hasn't opened yet. Are they quotes for previous productions? The movie? How I Met Your Mother? Doogie Houser, MD?

Marketing folk are all pathological liars; it's the only way to do the job successfully.

[haterobics]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 12:33pm

The Hedwig quotes are all legitimate, since none are being used to mislead as though they are about NPH's performance or this production, but the concept of the material in general, based on the movie, I would guess.

“GROUNDBREAKING AND UNDOUBTEDLY AHEAD OF ITS TIME.” - Entertainment Weekly

“THE BEST ROCK MUSICAL EVER!” - Rolling Stone

[Playbilly]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 12:45pm

I miss the intra-thread fighting! Continue!

To OP: It's common. It's unethical. It happens.

[Steve721]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 1:17pm

I wonder how many people actually end up seeing awful or mediocre shows just because of pull quotes that have been manipulated. Theater tickets are so expensive these days that you'd think people would try to find out more about a show before plunking down their hard earned dollars.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/9/14 at 1:34pm

The key word here is "allow." With respect to direct mail, front of house signs and the like, the only limitation is one's willingness to be viewed as pathetic. In ads, there are standards, and they vary by the media in which the ad is running. Beyond that, one could certainly sue, but aside from serious causation issues, there is the fact that the measure of damages is probably the cost of the ticket. So the major risk to the theatre is that every so often someone like the OP will write something like this.