Tuesday, March 14, 2017

So what really happened to the Mark Steyn Show?



Mark Steyn: The Interrogator

Daily Beast: Inside the Collapse of the Mark Steyn Show  I find these allegations hard to believe, but here's the Daily Beast take on what allegedly went on with the demise of the Mark Steyn Show. I would encourage you to also look at various Mark Steyn posts such as here, here and here (there are more). Here's Salon's take (you would think Salon would have gotten at least a whiff of what the DB supposedly dug up).  

The production quality of the Mark Steyn show does speak for itself. So the suggestion Mark just rolled into the studio each day without preparing is suspect on its face. So what really happened? I know this much, Mark Steyn needs a decent attorney to do a bit of enhanced interrogation on these allegations.  




7 comments:

  1. They provide one or two quotes from a couple of those on the staff, but the floor is held for the most part by a Paul Kullman, who was supposedly the cameraman. Awful lot of bile for someone you only worked for for 7 weeks. The writer insists that 8 staff members Steyn wanted the show to fail?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought the same thing. And what's the deal about Steyn having fancy cheese in the fridge? Did the cameraman not get any?

      Delete
    2. The article refers to 'lavish meals and personal expenditure', but the only example offered is artisanal cheese, which isn't likely to break the bank. This Mr. Kullman also complains about driving 'two hours in 'blizzard' conditions. There's a Paul Kullman who lives in Elizabethtown, NY. That's a 90 minute drive from Williston, Vt. The thing is, per the National Weather Service, there was only one day between 15 January 2017 and 20 February 2017 where there was heavy snowfall. That day was 12 February, a Sunday. They also report that there was less than 2 inches of accumulation recorded the first 2 weeks of January and < 17 inches for all of December (about 40% below normal for December). Williston's farther from Lake Champlain than Burlington, so less likely to get hit with lake effect bands.

      If you read the opening paragraphs, the statements of the crew were not provided in legal proceedings. The Daily Beast is saying they got the crew to sign statements in front of a notary, provided to them 'exclusively'. However, they only ask questions of 4 crew members, quote only 3, and provide no more than two sentences from 2 of the 3. And, they insist, 8 crew members tell them that Steyn sabotaged his own show for some perverse reason (wasn't that the plot of The Producers?). It's also strange in their presentation that none of the people they interview are irritated with CRTV for not paying them.

      Delete
    3. You know how Vermonters are about their cheddar. If Mark Steyn was bringing in foreign artisanal cheese, or (gasp) New York, that would be unforgivable. See Ned Flanders' comment below.

      Delete
  2. Although I wasn't one of the employees contacted by The Daily Beast, I can assure you the article is a very accurate depiction of how the show worked. Or didn't work. I worked there from mid November until the bitter end. Paul was not just "A cameraman". He was the Director (Mike Dunn's) right-hand man (though he was seated to Mike's left). The cameras were robotic and Paul controlled their iris, focus, zoom, etc all from remote monitors. He's been in the business a long time and his professionalism and skill is unquestioned by anyone who worked with him.

    The fact that the look of the show "speaks for itself" is a testament to Paul and the other camera people, Ethan the lighting director, Mike Dunn, the director, Joe the music mixer, and Faruk, the postproduction supervisor (and eventually producer- as other producers were fired). Mark very literally often strolled into the building just in time to get his hair and makeup done, showing up on set sometimes hours late, and expected the show to be a one-take affair. He was so unprofessional most of us thought it was intentional sabotage. If it wasn't that it was hubris that make Trump blush. Either way, he obviously didn't expect to have to work to make the show a success.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you are happy Cory Katz pulled the plug and ended this? If it was so bad to work for Steyn, why not just quit? I am not criticizing the crew's technical abilities (that is obvious from the end product). But it is not just the technical quality of the show, the quality of the interviews are substantive and I know it is very hard to do an interview well without preparation.

      Delete
    2. He was so unprofessional most of us thought it was intentional sabotage.

      1. Have you ever worked for anyone who 'intentionally sabotaged' his own product?

      2. Why would anyone do that?


      If it wasn't that it was hubris that make Trump blush.

      3. Why is a slam directed at the President anything but gratuitous here?


      The thesis you're all promoting is that someone who has worked in broadcasting for over 30 years and is too young to be senile is somehow unable to work with a production crew or complete his assignments. There's something amiss in this portrait.

      Delete

I had to stop Anonymous comments due to spam. But I welcome all legitimate comments. Thanks.