Film Industry Doesn’t Know How to Market Its Products

The most revealing part of “Two Universal Execs Lose Marketing Posts” [April 17] is near the very end when Buffy Shutt and Kathy Jones reiterate the absurd defense most entertainment marketing executives believe: that marketing movies is different than marketing other products.

If you rated industries by the effectiveness of their marketing, movies would rank as the second-least effective of any industry (network TV is, hands down, the absolute worst) as the people in it do their best to maintain this failed status quo and their high-paying jobs.

They argue that movie marketing is different from all other types, so only they are qualified to do it. Surprisingly, they are correct. Movie marketing is different, but sadly, no one in the industry knows the real reason why this is so. As a result, they continue on their merry way, proving they are excellent mis-marketers.

Mr. [Edgar] Bronfman wants to bring in non-movie marketing personnel. That will be an improvement if--and that is a big “if”--they know what that critical difference is that does set movie marketing apart.

However, Seagram’s stockholders should not count on it.

C. RICHARD KAJELYN

Woodland Hills

*

While I am not connected in any way with the industry or any of the individuals involved, I take strong exception to the tone of the article.

Writing about the forced departure of Buffy Shutt and Kathy Jones, reporter Claudia Eller mentions the “desperation” of Edgar Bronfman--a peculiar word to use when reporting that a chief executive is reshaping an organization. The story cites unnamed sources at Universal for various ills at the studio.

Let’s leave Hollywood gossip and unattributed opinions to the terminally hip Westside magazines and free “newspapers,” and keep it out of The Times.

HARRY PARKER

Venice