Wall Street Journal writer admits to leaving most shows at intermission...- Page 2

[Marianne2]

Posted: 12/3/14 at 11:06am

Agree with everyone that she shouldn't get anymore comps because of this article. Not sure if she considers herself a theater fan or not, but she certainly doesn't sound like an avid one here. That's not to say disliking shows is not allowed, but it sounds like very few shows makes this woman happy. Almost like some posters here.

[Broadwayboobs]

Posted: 12/3/14 at 11:26am

How can I get her comps for Wolf Hall, Parts 1 & 2?

[Feste]

Posted: 12/3/14 at 12:14pm

Sounds like someone who wants to be seen and noticed rather than actually give any attention to anything outside herself. She made her appearance, had some cocktails and fake kisses, now she's done. It's all about her.

Posted: 12/3/14 at 12:54pm

No one will be interested in what she has to say about theater ever again just as no one would Ever listen to Rush Limbaugh's political views if he confessed he was actually apolitical and had never voted.

Posted: 12/3/14 at 12:57pm

Despite naming Ronald Reagan as his greatest influence, Limbaugh never actually voted for him because he didn't register to vote until he was 35.
in case my sarcasm was not appreciated

[Pootie2]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 5:13pm

Apparently Rick Miramontez of O&M Company sent a letter to the editor but they refused to publish it. (I can't find a full reference to it except on another Broadway board, so not sure I'm supposed to link that.) Basically, he says that she'll never get another ticket from his office and hopes other press agents follow suit.

Some more reactions:
A member of the press comes out as a Broadway Bolter.

[LarryD2]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 5:18pm

Here is the text of Rick's letter:



Dear Editor,

Those of us who happen to love theater and happen to live in New York City are lucky enough to have access to the greatest stage scene in the world. I have been representing plays and musicals for more than three decades, and in my role as press agent I have handed out tens-of-thousands of free tickets to members of the media. While the general public plunks downhard-earned money for the pleasure and privilege of witnessing the world's greatest stage talents flaunt their craft on Broadway, members of the press corps are traditionally given pairs of “press tickets,” gratis. The face value that any given production gives away to the media during designated press performances around the time of its opening is somewhere in the vicinity of $200,000. The hope, of course, is that those free tickets will yield coverage, and that coverage will convince the general public to plunk down said hard-earned money. But there is no agreement, tacit or otherwise, between the productions I represent and the members of the media I invite that coverage will be forthcoming. There is, however, a tacit agreement that these works will be considered, thoughtfully and seriously, in their entirety by those who accept the tickets.

So when your columnist, Joanne Kaufman, penned her piece entitled “Confessions of a Broadway Bolter,” in which she boasts about the sheer number of times she skips out of the theater at intermission (trying, she tells us, not to get “spotted and caught out by the press agent who provided me with the tickets in the first place”). I couldn't help but feel a bit like a chump for having accommodated the woman so many times over the years. Certainly every audience member, paid or comped, has the right to form whatever opinions they might about any production they see, but I don't think it's too much to expect those who attend on press tickets stay for the duration. Would a fine art writer only peer at half a canvas before deciding she's bored and it's time to move on? Does a music reporter think he can make an informed decision on an album if he only listens to a couple of tracks? Why would we accept such sheer laziness from our theatrical press?

“Joltin' Joanne” Kaufman makes it sound like an unbearable hardship to have to sit through the entirety of a Broadway show. As the overwhelming majority of her colleagues manage to sit through (and often rave about) the very shows she bolts from, I have to think that this is less a reflection of the quality of the works and simply indicative of a woman who loathes the art form. It seems to me that a theater reporter who hates theater would be well served to find another beat.

Well, let me be the first of what I hope will be many press agents to unburden Joltin' Joanne from her hardship. She will never be invited to another show by my office. If she deems a show of ours worthy enough for her (fleeting) attention, she is more than welcome to call us to arrange tickets -- but she had better have a credit card handy.

Sincerely,
Rick Miramontez President, O&M Co.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 5:41pm

GO RICK!! That was so great.

[Pootie2]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 5:45pm

I know nothing about the marketing side to the business so I looked up the company...
Lots of big clients

[veronicamae]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 7:38pm

I want to be like OH GOOD FOR YOOOOOU in the voice of Christian Bale to her. What's your point, lady - that you're an ungrateful, unprofessional embarrassment to your industry?

[LarryD2]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 7:44pm

Yes, Rick Miramontez is one of the best in the business. And his letter is perfect. Shame on The Wall Street Journal for refusing to publish it, if that is indeed the case.

Updated On: 12/7/14 at 07:44 PM

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 9:46pm

Was that the sound of an gun shot going into a foot, I just heard?

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 12/6/14 at 9:46pm

Was that the sound of an gun shot going into a foot, I just heard?

[HorseTears]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 6:14am

I hoped something like this would happen. Longtime Broadway publicist, Rick Miramontez, President of O&M Co., penned this open letter to the Wall Street Journal editors. It is the PERFECT response.


Dear Editor,
Those of us who happen to love theater and happen to live in New York City are lucky enough to have access to the greatest stage scene in the world. I have been representing plays and musicals for more than three decades, and in my role as press agent I have handed out tens-of-thousands of free tickets to members of the media. While the general public plunks down hard-earned money for the pleasure and privilege of witnessing the worlds greatest stage talents flaunt their craft on Broadway, members of the press corps are traditionally given pairs of press tickets, gratis. The face value that any given production gives away to the media during designated press performances around the time of its opening is somewhere in the vicinity of $200,000. The hope, of course, is that those free tickets will yield coverage, and that coverage will convince the general public to plunk down said hard-earned money. But there is no agreement, tacit or otherwise, between the productions I represent and the members of the media I invite that coverage will be forthcoming. There is, however, a tacit agreement that these works will be considered, thoughtfully and seriously, in their entirety by those who accept the tickets.

So when your columnist, Joanne Kaufman, penned her piece entitled Confessions of a Broadway Bolter, in which she boasts about the sheer number of times she skips out of the theater at intermission (trying, she tells us, not to get spotted and caught out by the press agent who provided me with the tickets in the first place) I couldnt help but feel a bit like a chump for having accommodated the woman so many times over the years. Certainly every audience member, paid or comped, has the right to form whatever opinions they might about any production they see, but I dont think its too much to expect those who attend on press tickets stay for the duration. Would a fine art writer only peer at half a canvas before deciding shes bored and its time to move on? Does a music reporter think he can make an informed decision on an album if he only listens to a couple of tracks? Why would we accept such sheer laziness from our theatrical press?

Joltin Joanne Kaufman makes it sound like an unbearable hardship to have to sit through the entirety of a Broadway show. As the overwhelming majority of her colleagues manage to sit through (and often rave about) the very shows she bolts from, I have to think that this is less a reflection of the quality of the works and simply indicative of a woman who loathes the art form. It seems to me that a theater reporter who hates theater would be well served to find another beat.

Well, let me be the first of what I hope will be many press agents to unburden Joltin Joanne from her hardship. She will never be invited to another show by my office. If she deems a show of ours worthy enough for her (fleeting) attention, she is more than welcome to call us to arrange tickets -- but she had better have a credit card handy.

Sincerely, Rick Miramontez
President, O&M Co.



(Sorry don't know why the weird Euro and TM formatting things are happening in my copy
Goodbye Old Girl!

[Pootie2]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 8:36am

HorseTears, thanks for the proper link, but if you scrolled up, the actual letter was already pasted.

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 8:52am

Agree, great letter from Rick !!

[Mattbrain]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 9:36am

And I thought Teachout was an asshat.

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 1:22pm

I just assumed HorseTears didn't notice it, thinking the original letter was another Phantom of London signature, since they run about the same length.

[Pootie2]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 1:45pm

I just wonder if WSJ was/is being inundated with negative attention about this. More pressure, that would be great. Certainly WSJ is on Twitter/FB, not sure about Joanne Kaufman. The only official WSJ response so far I think, on Twitter, is merely that she doesn't review theater shows for them. A technical truth, but come on now.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 3:26pm

Larry already posted it, it wasn't needed again.

I'm glad that ungrateful, obnoxious, smug "reviewer" will find it harder to get into incredibly theater performances for free now.

[HorseTears]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 3:26pm

I just assumed HorseTears didn't notice it, thinking the original letter was another Phantom of London signature, since they run about the same length.

I know Hater was being facetious, but this is ACTUALLY what happened.

[LarryD2]

Posted: 12/7/14 at 3:28pm

Yes, Kaufman actually rarely writes about theater, so this probably will have little to no effect on her continued employment with the newspaper. In fact, they're probably thrilled that the article is generating so much buzz, even if a fair amount of it has been negative towards Kaufman. I mean, how often does any article about theater get this kind of attention?

If anything, Kaufman will find her name removed from a few press lists--but given that she seems to hate theater, that shouldn't be such a big deal.

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/8/14 at 6:46pm

"I know Hater was being facetious, but this is ACTUALLY what happened."

Hilarious!

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/8/14 at 7:27pm

Banning her from O&M's shows is not enough.

I would like to see her fired from the Wall Street Journal.

[Pootie2]

Posted: 12/8/14 at 7:30pm

^They won't because she's not their "official" theater critic.

I don't know what it takes to actually fire a journalist except fabrication and plagiarism...