What Happened to Article on Playbill re: "Physical Assault, Vomit in Aisles, Stalking in Streets..etc." ??? — Page 3

The *first* time he has ever intervened in editorial duties? That's notable.

I agree it's likely connected to finances. How can it not be since producers pay Playbill's bills?

Fosse76 said: "ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "Remind me of the relationship between Playbill and the theatre owners as the official supplier of programs? Is the contract between each individual landlord, or one contract with the League on behalf of all the Bway landlords?"

Playbill pays the landlords to use their magazine as the official program, while producers had to pay only if they wanted the cover to be in color, though that no longer applies."

Interesting. Thanks for that info.
So in theory, Birsh COULD have supported the workers and kept the story up, and the landlords would have been at a disadvantage to penalize Playbill..? As in, if they’d said “we’re cancelling our contract”, that’s the landlord’s profit down the drain (as well as Playbill’s advertising revenue).

And I’m guessing there’s no one ready to swoop in and replace Playbill - unless Showbill was able to? Different company I believe… right?

Rough and quick thoughts here, and I’m sure there’s much more to it. Either way, it’s a bigger story now than it was going to be. Congratulations Phil - Streisand Effect unlocked!

Updated On: 2/14/23 at 08:50 AM

I do see your point WestEndGal, but I also wonder about the risk of letting on that a story was being written. I can see producers and landlords being approached for comment and saying, “Oh you’re writing an article for Playbill? No you’re not!” and having it be killed long before now.

I also didn’t mind that it was just from one perspective. If they ask for comments from landlords, don’t they also need comments from the good audience members? The bad audience members? This was the perfect way to begin looking into this, I think. Management have had their chance to act, and they didn’t.

BorisTomashevsky said: "I do see your point WestEndGal, but I also wonder about the risk of letting on that a story was being written. I can see producers and landlords being approached for comment and saying, “Oh you’re writing an article for Playbill? No you’re not!” and having it be killed long before now.

I also didn’t mind that it was just from one perspective. If they ask for comments from landlords, don’t they also need comments from the good audience members? The bad audience members? This was the perfect way to begin looking into this, I think. Management have had their chance to act, and they didn’t."

I can see that too, but surely it would be more productive to have at least given management / theater owners an opportunity to respond etc. before publishing something like that. And it would have at least increased its chances of not getting yanked! I’m not defending the audience behavior and obviously many FOH rightly feel like they’re not being supported or heard, but it just seems these days that everything is being done to cause maximum outrage, which never really seems to lead to productive and nuanced discussion, and this article felt so ott and sensationalist when I read it - via the playbill insta post before it got removed.

This is the Streisand-effect at its finest.
If the article had stayed up, it would be long forgotten with last week's news.
Yet here we are.
I hope the Daily Beast article has opened the door for other media to pick up this story.

WestEndGal said: "It just seems these days that everything is being done to cause maximum outrage, which never really seems to lead to productive and nuanced discussion, and this article felt so ott and sensationalist.."

That is true, but I think yanking the article just feeds into that avoidance of productive and nuanced discussion. Whichever industry insider/s reached out to Playbill about the article, could instead have let the article stand and released their own public statement to critique it: "There is variation in how different theatres handle these issues. Here is our theatre's policy, and here are some examples of how we've handled specific incidents. We aren't denying the article contributors' experiences, but we're disappointed that Playbill didn't reach out to us for comment too." They could have contributed to and elevated the conversation, instead of trying to smother it before it really got started.

BJR said: "I'm forgetting now, does the article really not note if they reached out for comment?

It's an interesting story through the lens of the Editor in Chief's role at Playbill. Clearly interested in some harder-hitting material, but the publisher stepping in for the first time ever makes me wonder how this tenure go."


You’d think the CEO of Playbill would have known what he was getting into when he hired Diep Tran. She was the former editor in chief at American Theatre Magazine, and it was under her leadership that it went from being basically the regional theatre version of Playbill with a relatively impartial view of things to a far-left, social justice-focused journal. This sort of “we need to do better” article is her brand. I’m surprised this kind of reporting didn’t happen sooner, and that the powers that be were so surprised by it.

hearthemsing22 said: "I also see people on other social media sites complaining about how now Playbill, this website-they're not reliable sources anymore because they took down that article...please. Where else should they get the info? People can also publish articles on their own. I've found jobs because of these websites."

None of those points have anything to do with each other. And the job listings are totally irrelevant here- they're not journalism, they're classifieds that anybody can submit.

BWW and Playbill aren't really journalism most of the time- they publish press releases and share production-approved media and softball interviews. And both have a vested interest in staying on the good side of producers and theater owners in order to keep their access (and, in Playbill's case, literally keeping their publication in theaters).

Kad said: "BWW and Playbill aren't really journalism most of the time- they publish press releases and share production-approved media and softball interviews. And both have a vested interest in staying on the good side of producers and theater owners in order to keep their access (and, in Playbill's case, literally keeping their publication in theaters)."

Agreed. A couple of other quick points:

1. Regardless of Diep Tran's track record or the effect of this on her "tenure," this particular article was (whatever the cause) not at any reasonable journalistic standard. At a good journalism school, this would have been a generous C-.

2. While Phil Birsh is doing some good-on-paper-at-least succession planning by bringing his son into a position of significant responsibility, make no mistake that Playbill is a relationship-driven business and that Phil remains that relationship. It is also important to remember, as I have noted before in other contexts, that a lot of folks around here overestimate the degree of formality in Broadway agreements at the business level.

Updated On: 2/18/23 at 05:56 PM

Updated On: 2/18/23 at 06:31 PM

Sutton Ross said: "That's ridiculous. Theaters serve booze and that won't be changing. Security can remove the 10%. Period. "

I’ll drink to that!

Islander_fan said: "I work front of house Broadway. And, yes, some of the issues mentioned in the original playbill article are things that happened to me. But, on the other hand, there were things in that article that I felt were, perhaps a tad over the top.

Most of the article seemed to describe anecdotal stories, not trending behaviors. There have always been drunk people in the theatre, and according to a friend of mine who's been ushering for nearly twenty years, they usually arrive in that state. They aren't getting drunk at the bar. Logistically, it'd be a challenge due to small theater size (you really can't just hang out at the bar) combined with slow bar lines, and only 30 minutes or so of time before the show starts, etc. You really can't get drunk at a theater unless you were already at the edge in the first place. More people try smuggling food into the theater than they do alcohol.

My usher friend did mention the craziness of the pandemic, but as that was a very unique situation, most of the pushback from certain audience members is no longer relevant. And he said lack of enforcement was heavily contributed to by the wannabe actors serving as the enforcement team. Many of them would hesitate approaching someone they already warned, and often did not notify management of any issues.

Entitlement is on the rise, as many don't think policies apply to them, and Disney's "don't say 'no'" answer to customer service has infected many businesses. People know there will be no consequences to their rudeness. But a show's producers ultimately decide what type of behavior they will tolerate versus what should be enforced. My friend has been shoved numerous times, but as a consequence of tight aisles and impatient people, not a malicious act of violence. Not that it's any less rude.

My friend noted that entitlement is worse at a theatergoer show like Take Me Out than at a tourist show like Come From Away. But many of the incidents he's encountered are pretty much typical of those audiences and not really on the rise.

Believe it or not, according to my friend, it's the Playbills that cause much consternation among the staff. People grab them right from their arms without asking. They also try to unbundle stacks and make a mess because, God forbid, the usher was seating someone else and they couldn't wait. They also interrupt ushers in the middle of a sentence while they are assisting someone, or often shove their way in front of the person being helped. He said you'd be surprised how many people have barely stepped into the theater and start freaking out that they didn't get a Playbill yet (in Shubert and Nederlander houses they are distributed on the aisles). Because they only have a limited number of Playbills on the aisle with them (particularly when there is a cast insert), they try to direct them to get Playbill from their aisle, which bizarrely makes some people angry. He said it's crazy how bad it's gotten.

The one trend my usher friend has noticed is the increasing number of people who can't be bothered to let the ushers assist them. These people don't want to show all their tickets ("how do you think I got in" is a common response), while not knowing which seats everyone in their party has, yet get annoyed by the usher wanting to see them so they are in the correct seats. Some don't want the usher walking them to their seat, and are often rude about it. When enforcing basic policies like no bags in the aisle, or when telling people not to place items on ledges or the stage, their is an increase in the mocking that occurs people will briefly put stuff on the ledge or stage as if to say "look at a troublemaker I am" afterward. And increasingly many aren't seeing it as an immediate request and do it at their own pace.

My takeaway is that general rudeness is on the rise more than any specific behaviors.

ETA
(My usher friend also said that there is a rumor that it was Disney who contacted Playbill's CEO and threatened him with lost advertising revenue if the article wasn't removed. Considering Disney's long-standing hands-off approach to misbehaving customers, as I mention above, it wouldn't surprise me if it were true).

Updated On: 2/20/23 at 02:12 PM