Tuesday, August 15, 2017

PR blind spot and Twitter backlash combine to close ‘Great Comet’ on Broadway

It’s an ignominious end for a groundbreaking theater production.

“Natasha, Pierre and The Great Comet of 1812” premiered on Broadway in November of 2016 to wide-acclaim and 12 Tony Award nominations. It was given the Extraordinary Excellence in Diversity Award from Actor’s Equity’s National Equal Employment Opportunity Committee and remained a star vehicle, with ticket sales supported by the presence of multi-platinum soloist Josh Groban.

However, after a casting controversy and PR missteps over the replacement of new lead actor and “Hamilton”-alum Okieriete Onaodowan, the show has announced it will close.

When Groban departed, some questioned how the production would fare without a bona fide star.

Deadline wrote:

While the musical, based on a 70-page section from Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace, earned the devotion of many critics – along with a season-leading 12 Tony nominations – it was Groban’s presence that sold the tickets. In fact, the show never would have gotten a Broadway booking absent a bankable star’s name on the marquee. Great Comet won Tony awards for set and lighting design, but was denied the key prizes that move the box office.

After Groban’s departure, the producers took a chance on Onaodowan, but according to show-creator Dave Malloy, ticket sales were “in desperate shape.”

Producers turned to Broadway legend Mandy Patinkin, hoping to leverage his star-power to boost August’s ticket sales. With a narrow performance window in Patinkin’s schedule, producers asked Onoaodwan to cut his run short.

[RELATED: Join us for the Employee Communications, PR and Social Media Summit at Microsoft.]

The optics of asking Onoadowan, an African-American actor, to set aside for Patinkin, a white actor, prompted an immediate outcry. Tweets such as this started coming in:

After the tweetstorm, Patinkin withdrew from the show. The New York Times reported:
“My understanding of the show’s request that I step into the show is not as it has been portrayed and I would never accept a role knowing it would harm another actor,” Mr. Patinkin said. “I hear what members of the community have said and I agree with them. I am a huge fan of Oak and I will, therefore, not be appearing in the show.”
The producers appeared to be blindsided by the controversy, releasing their own statement via Twitter:

Though many social media users cried foul at the cast change, other fans were disappointed to miss the chance to see Patinkin return to Broadway:

Without a star to bolster ticket sales, the show’s future was bleak—and producers announced it will close on Sept. 3. In the wake of the closing notice, some are questioning the Twitterstorm that might have hastened the show’s departure.

American Theatre Magazine wrote:

This was more complicated than producers being racist. After all, this was a show in which almost half of the cast are people of color, and where the lead Natasha is played by black actor Denée Benton […]

It is not to say that those behind the #MakeRoomforOak hashtag were wrong. Actors of color are still underrepresented on Broadway, especially in lead roles, and the loss of even one role is a large blow to representation. And white men are more likely to be produced and represented on Broadway than women or people of color (after all, Lucas Hnath and Joshua Harmon were able to get to Broadway much earlier in the careers than the more accomplished Paula Vogel and Lynn Nottage).

Minority performers and advocates argue that no matter how much planning went in to this move, the optics would have been bad.

Cast members of the Broadway production have also spoken out, thanking the show’s creators for the work they did to create a diverse production—also pointing out that Broadway is far from any kind of parity.

In her article for American Theatre Magazine, associate editor Diep Tran ends with an “entreaty”:

[…] for producers to be respectful of artists of color and their efforts, and for social media mavens to take a breath before condemning. Then perhaps we can grapple with the complications together and come to an understanding that doesn’t require a backlash or a controversy or a Twitter hashtag.

Communicators should take this as a lesson to bolster their campaigns and ensure they’re avoiding blind spots. Once outrage grows online, it’s very hard to control the story’s narrative—and effectively launch a balanced conversation.

Do you avoid more nuanced topics when when writing messages for Twitter or other online platforms? Why or why not?

(Image via)



from PR Daily News Feed http://ift.tt/2vAkBC5
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)