The Smithsonian Sells Out to Showtime
The Smithsonian Sells Out to Showtime
The Smithsonian Institution is an American treasure, attracting some 25 million visitors every year. It keeps an incredible archive of collections and has some of the most talented curatorial staff on the planet.
But last month, the Institution announced a joint venture with Showtime Networks to create a new television network. While at first blush the deal sounds like a creative way to raise much-needed funds, this deal is bad news. Two main problems:
1) The Institution refuses to disclose the deal they signed with Showtime, claiming it is a “business contract that does not involve federal funds.” Actually, the Institution is publicly chartered and receives 75 percent of its funding from federal appropriations or government grants and contracts.
2) Though details are murky, we do know that the arrangement gives the new joint venture a “right of first refusal” on key parts of the Smithsonian archives. In other words, filmmakers, historians, or others who might want to use certain Smithsonian materials could be blocked if Showtime executives say so. PBS documentarian Ken Burns called the policy “terrifying,” and said it “would have prohibited him from making some of his recent works.”
Over 200 concerned filmmakers, law professors, historians, archivists, Internet pioneers, and others have signed a letter asking the Smithsonian to annul the contract and hold public hearings. Also, the Center for American Progress has filed a Freedom of Information Act request asking that the contract be brought into the public eye. (We’re pleased that Electronic Frontier Foundation is representing us on this request.)
Tomorrow morning, Ken Burns will be joining me at the Center to give a public briefing on this issue. More details HERE.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“The Institution refuses to disclose the deal they signed with Showtime, claiming it is a “business contract that does not involve federal funds.†Actually, the Institution is publicly chartered and receives 75 percent of its funding from federal appropriations or government grants and contracts.”
But Showtime is paying the Smith its private money, not the Smith giving showtime public money, so it dosn’t involve federal funds.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:20 pmKen Burns has done some pretty awesome work!
April 17th, 2006 at 4:23 pmIt’s simple. Bush is trying to steal all of our national treasures just like Hillary tried to steal the White House silver.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:24 pmI think this is more showtime or its parent company being corrupt then the federal government. I am not intimating our government isn’t corrupt, I just don’t think this has much to do with our establisment.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:28 pmJust goes to show you that the “Artists” at showtime and the “Educated Historians” at the Smithsonian are as greedy as anyone else.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:33 pmIt is owned by the taxpayers,(where do you think fed funds come from) disclose EVERYTHING. Do not limit access to anyone.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:37 pmI think this is more showtime or its parent company being corrupt then the federal government. I am not intimating our government isn’t corrupt, I just don’t think this has much to do with our establisment.
Comment by Krazny
I think you’re right. CBS owns Showtime and Sumner Redstone (born Murray Rothstein) owns the majority share of CBS. I guess it must be a cabal of Right Wing WASPS and Left Wing Jooooz trying to steal our national treasure. I can’t wait to read the fine print of the contract. The plot thickens.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:40 pm“Smithsonian On Demand will be a unique programming service that is as entertaining as it is informative. This isn’t ‘Museum TV,’” said Blank, “It will blend Showtime’s gift for story telling with the Smithsonian’s integrity and treasure trove of fascinating resources.”
Once Redstone and CBS get their talons into the Smith you can say goodbye to integrity and to the treasure trove. Priceless artifacts will be walking out the back door faster than historical revisionism will be walking in. For the Filthy Left this is a WIN/WIN situation. They get to write the story any way they see fit AND keep the goodies featured in the films.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:46 pmcome-on think progress
who is behind this.
this has the feel of an insider deal.
who did the negotiating?
what connection is there between smithsonian management and the white house or the bush admin or the republican party?
who’s the fox in the henhouse?
April 17th, 2006 at 4:46 pmThough details are murky, we do know that the arrangement gives the new joint venture a “right of first refusal†on key parts of the Smithsonian archives.
Why would the executives at Showtime have the privilege to refuse access to the Smithsonian’s archive? Why would they have any saying at all on who gets to see the material and who doesn’t? Is this even legally possible?
April 17th, 2006 at 4:47 pmJust goes to show you that the “Artists†at showtime and the “Educated Historians†at the Smithsonian are as greedy as anyone else.
Comment by Tundra — April 17, 2006 @ 4:33 pm
Oh yeah, I watched the architecture industry deteriorate over the 14 years of my career because we greedy artists were willing to make deals with Corporate America to eat.
I assure you it’s probably more about saving the museum (hence the part about badly needed funds) than about greed. Greedy people rarely become starving artists.
Don’t you righties ever give anyone the benefit of the doubt? :)
April 17th, 2006 at 4:47 pm#3 – It’s simple. Bush is trying to steal all of our national treasures…
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
I like it better this way. The Hillary thing was just lame.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:48 pmPriceless artifacts will be walking out the back door faster than historical revisionism will be walking in.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — April 17, 2006 @ 4:46 pm
Oh come on. If anything, it’s more about right-wing Evangelicals removing evolutionary treasures and dinosaur bones so they can deny that they ever existed at all. Pretty much what the Catholic Church did to non-Catholic history several centuries ago…
April 17th, 2006 at 4:52 pmI guess Disney is next to purchase the Capitol Building.
April 17th, 2006 at 4:56 pmWow the privatization of our national history. Capitalism at its worst. Can’t anything in this country just stay public. Public land being sold off to counter our budget deficit, public domain being used to create profit for private companies and now public history being sold to the highest bidder.
April 17th, 2006 at 5:01 pmOh yeah, I watched the architecture industry deteriorate over the 14 years of my career because we greedy artists were willing to make deals with Corporate America to eat.
If the art was worthwhile individuals would have funded it. If noone wants it then you are just a buggy whip manufacturer (Not to get back to the 17 year and 40 year old thing). Perhaps art is like Disco, Dead??
April 17th, 2006 at 5:02 pmSo now even America’s history is verbotten unless Showtime approves it? What the hell is this? How much money did they give to the Bush administration to pull this off?
April 17th, 2006 at 5:04 pmThis is a very complicated issue. Technically, the Smithsonian is a separate trust, so the deal probably isn’t illegal. It certainly isn’t nice, though, and people like Ken Burns are correct to be concerned.
April 17th, 2006 at 5:08 pmPerhaps art is like Disco, Dead??
Comment by Tundra — April 17, 2006 @ 5:02 pm
Only in America where it’s about quantity and not quality.
April 17th, 2006 at 5:10 pmOK, I tried I got nothing more hehe.
While the deal did not have an effect Federal Money it did on artifacts. Are those the governments or is the Smithsonian available to do what it wants with them?
April 17th, 2006 at 5:15 pm#3 – It’s simple. Bush is trying to steal all of our national treasures…
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
I like it better this way. The Hillary thing was just lame.
Comment by Zookeeper
I know you do but to make that work you have to put Bush and Redstone together in the same room cutting deals instead of each other’s throats. Sorry babe…CBS and Redstone are behind this. Maybe Redstone is a closeted Neo-Con (Jew)
(Now dancing to: James Brown….”I feel good” )
April 17th, 2006 at 5:26 pmSo now even America’s history is verbotten unless Showtime approves it? What the hell is this? How much money did they give to the Bush administration to pull this off?
Comment by Godfry Daniel
You mean the Left Wing Jew who ownes CBS who ownes Showtime don’t you? I don’t think Bush even knows about it yet. My guess is John Kerry and Ted Kennedy are pulling the strings on this one.
April 17th, 2006 at 5:30 pmOh, wait! I bet the Smith has the “blue dress”. This could be a scam of Bill’s to remove the “stain” from his legacy.
April 17th, 2006 at 5:32 pm“Stain from his legacy”, get it? HA!
April 17th, 2006 at 5:35 pmOK, I tried I got nothing more hehe.
Clearly you’re not 17 ;)
While the deal did not have an effect Federal Money it did on artifacts. Are those the governments or is the Smithsonian available to do what it wants with them?
Comment by Tundra — April 17, 2006 @ 5:15 pm
Usually the expensive stuff is part of ‘collections” that are owned or sponsored by wealthy families like the Rockefellers, Hearsts or Biltmores which is then loaned to museums. Museums sometimes own their own collections, and in the case of the Smithsonian, I believe We The People collectively own some of the less valuable stuff.
April 17th, 2006 at 5:35 pmI believe We The People collectively own some of the less valuable stuff.
I think we the people should take our 75% of the operating costs and our less valuable stuff and start a new museum. Perhaps some of those wealthy families may not want their stuff run by showtime.
Clearly you’re not 17 ;)
Oh, but together we could pretend, can you get your dads car? :)
April 17th, 2006 at 5:44 pm#14 “I guess Disney is next to purchase the Capitol Building.” Comment by Max-1
That’d make sense, the people who work there are Goofy. :)
April 17th, 2006 at 5:47 pmI think we the people should take our 75% of the operating costs and our less valuable stuff and start a new museum.
I agree. And you know, we may own the building.
Perhaps some of those wealthy families may not want their stuff run by showtime.
Probably notthe people who acquired the art, but the current trust running the inheretence might not care so much.
Oh, but together we could pretend,
You seem to have forgotten that I bathe. Must be the rush of all that blood from your head ; )
can you get your dads car? :)
Comment by Tundra — April 17, 2006 @ 5:44 pm
Not likely, he died in 1994 ; )
Besides, I’m not 40 yet…
April 17th, 2006 at 5:54 pmHow can they sell something when it’s not clear that its their’s to sell? And why? Ostensibly this has been positioned as a means by which the shameful neglect to The Smithsonian’s physical plant can be paid for. However, as is the case so often with this administration, I look for the tell-tale trail of cronyism.
As noted above, one time long-time staunch Democrat Sumner Redstone is Chairman of the Board and controlling shareholder of the Viacom and CBS Corporation media conglomerates including Showtime. This past Presidential election was the first time Mr. Redstone turned turncoat and threw his considerable financial bulk and business influence behind Bush/Cheney.
Looks like Smithsonian Regents Dick Cheney, John Roberts, et al finally made that support worth Sumner’s while. Special bonus: PBS finally gets the previously postponed payback for their Bush/Cheney criticisms and general lefty sensibilty. If serious documentarians like Ken Burns want to use Smithsonian resources, they’ll have to get in bed with Showtime.
April 17th, 2006 at 9:50 pmBush intends to sell off every publicly owned thing in America > the National Parks are next! Smithsonian will be used by Showtime and exploited until all its national treasures are gone! Heck the Baghdad museum was professional looted in Iraq, so why not the Smithsonian?
April 17th, 2006 at 10:51 pm[...] The Smithsonian sold out to Showtime and won't disclose the contract terms (Think Progress) [...]
April 18th, 2006 at 12:17 amIf the art was worthwhile individuals would have funded it.
comment by Tundra
Have you ever heard of van Gogh or Modigliani? These are just two artists whose names come to mind who sold almost nothing during their lifetimes but whose works now sell for millions.
April 18th, 2006 at 12:34 amI’m wondering about the Smithsonian… heard a report on All Things Considered to the effect that the museum has mounted a show on global warming that doesn’t mention how human activity might be a big factor:
Scientists squelched there too???
April 18th, 2006 at 12:59 amStart Burning the Books, King Freek Bush is at the Helm of the Wacko Ship Nutjobs and they don’t read or need Books, just shotguns, pregnant barefoot women, beer, and the Bible, which they, the hicks of Anne Coulter Anti-Intellectualism, use for a Coaster.
April 18th, 2006 at 2:00 amIf the art was worthwhile individuals would have funded it.
comment by Tundra
I have seen some remarks in my times that made me think Tundra, this remark of yours makes me think, it makes me think that you are not able to think, that ignorance must be bliss for everytime I read your remarks you seem to swim in that ignorance joyously and with repetition and yet bother with nary a fact nor spout an original thought. One then wonders what a mind like yours should be like, do you simply stare at the TV all day? Does Jerry Springer Show remind you of your neighbors? Do you Listen to Falwell? Or Limbaugh or Coulter?
April 18th, 2006 at 2:14 amOh, wait! I bet the Smith has the “blue dressâ€. This could be a scam of Bill’s to remove the “stain†from his legacy.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — April 17, 2006 @ 5:32 pm
“Stain from his legacyâ€, get it? HA!
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
To I-WRONG-I,
April 18th, 2006 at 2:40 amYou don’t have to repeat your oh-so-clever joke for us to get it; whether we find it amusing is another matter.
[...] covers the Smithsonian/Showtime controversy blogged today on ThinkProgress. Among the signatories to our letter opposing the deal: “filmmakers Michael Moore (’Fahrenheit 9/11′), R. J. Cutler (’The War Room’) and Alex Gibney (’Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room’); the actress and writer Anna Deavere Smith (’Twilight: Los Angeles’); the law professor Lawrence Lessig; and Jacoba Atlas, a senior PBS executive.” [...]
April 18th, 2006 at 7:42 amThe Smithsonian is part of America’s NATIONAL heritage, it isn’t something which should be sold for a quick buck.
April 18th, 2006 at 9:03 amThe Smithsonian is part of America’s NATIONAL heritage, it isn’t something which should be sold for a quick buck.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
What’s the big deal? You didn’t mind so much when Clintonn sold the Lincoln bedroom and military components to the Red Chinese for a quick buck.
April 18th, 2006 at 10:58 am#39 – Just like you don’t seem to care about Pres. Bush doing the exact same thing, or when he drowns us in massive debt, or sends our soldiers off to die for oil, or doesn’t care that China stole the technology and information from the spy-plane that fell out of the sky over their country.
It must be very comforting to only see things from the skewed neo-con perspective “Right between the I’s”. I guess ingorance IS bliss for you!
April 18th, 2006 at 11:26 amAs an insider who is INFORMED but will not see a DIME from this deal: Actually, no one is “stealing anything” — if anything, this is an opportunity for rarely seen archival material to make it out to the masses. Nothing is being taken away, only given–Showtime’s $$ to the Smithsonian, the Smithsonian’s content to us. Why, because the deal happens to involve a mainstream player such as Showtime, does VOD = selling out? Think of the video-on-demand library as a digital museum. As for Ken Burns’ personally and politically-motivated rallying cry against the deal, it makes for great news; but unfortunately for him–and fortunately for the rest of us–he doesn’t have a clue what he is talking about. Access to archival material, incidental or otherwise, was never and will never be limited because of Showtime. I think this deal is a huge opportunity for doc film, filmmakers and our nation’s untapped historical materials. Learn the facts before you go on a smear campaign that could kill the deal altogether. Asshole.
April 20th, 2006 at 2:56 pmthis deal gives showtime the right and ability to censor and revise history. The Smithsonian has received too much federal funding to be considered owner oi the items in the archives. Everybody involved should say oops! and back off.
There was a similar attempt in the past by another quasi government org. to control intellectual property. At that time, the perpetrators arrogantly said ” you should check with us to learn the facts before you go on a smear campaign” EXACT WORDS! The public is not as stupid as they thought, and the scheme was shot down.
Smithsonian needs a management shakeup and a good lawyer who can write fair contracts, so the Burns and Moores and PBS pay a higher royalty when they make a profit using Smithsonian material, but student and labor-of-love videmakers can access the material free or very low cost.
May 25th, 2006 at 3:17 amEric
On guard, you rascal!
March 19th, 2008 at 12:29 pmChristene
The more you are willing to accept responsibility for your actions, the more credibility you will have.
April 4th, 2008 at 10:23 pmbig deal debt national
April 13th, 2008 at 10:02 am