Gore Takes Lead Role in Race for Hollywood Donors

By MARC LACEY

Aug. 10, 1999 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITER

WASHINGTON —

Al Gore was quick to join the chorus of politicians who, after the Colorado school shootings, decried Hollywood’s role in desensitizing young people to violence. But when he huddled with industry executives last month at the Century Plaza Hotel in Los Angeles, the vice president was gushing with film friendliness.

At the private meeting with potential donors, Gore distanced himself from the federal inquiry into Hollywood’s marketing of violent movies launched recently by President Clinton. Participants said Gore made clear that the government study--disparaged by some in Hollywood as a witch hunt--was the president’s idea, not his, and was initiated without his input.

Gore is by no means the first politico to wag his finger with one hand while extending his palm with the other. In this case, the vice president’s delicate maneuvering was prompted by the early demands of the 2000 campaign--in which he is engaged in a three-way scramble for Hollywood-related cash with his Democratic challenger, former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley, and the leading Republican candidate, Texas Gov. George W. Bush.

In their quests, all three are finding a political climate within the entertainment industry that is generous--yet wary.

Gore, benefiting from Hollywood’s tried-and-true link to the Democratic Party, raised $318,050 during the first six months of the year from donors directly linked to the television, movie and music industries, according to the nonpartisan Campaign Study Group. The analysis includes contributions from industry employees as well as their spouses and college-age children who do not have other jobs.

Gore’s sum exceeded the amount Clinton raised over a similar period in the years before his 1992 and 1996 campaigns. But Clinton had much of Hollywood to himself.

“When Clinton first came on the scene, he came to Hollywood out of nowhere and just blew everyone away,” said Brian Swardstrom, an agent with the Endeavor Agency in Beverly Hills who gave $1,000 to Bradley.

“People aren’t excited about . . . these guys [Gore and Bradley] the way they were about Clinton.”

Bradley, who has enjoyed celebrity status since his days as a professional basketball player and mined Hollywood regularly in his days as a senator, raised $225,174 in industry-related money through June 30. His supporters, many of whom have known and supported him for years, include Walt Disney Co. Chairman Michael Eisner, Warner Bros. chief Terry Semel (who recently announced his resignation), producer Quincy Jones and actors Tom Selleck, Paul Reiser and Steve Guttenberg.

Bush, meanwhile, tapped the entertainment industry for $247,750, an unusually high sum for a Republican. His contributor list includes Eisner, actress and diplomat Shirley Temple Black and a variety of entertainment executives scattered throughout the country.

Donors Make Their Presence Felt

Rick Albain, who heads ANA Special Effects, gave the maximum $1,000 contribution to Bush, and his wife did the same because they believe he will be a good leader for the country--Hollywood included. “The movie business is my livelihood,” he said, adding that he’s tired of seeing film production shifting to Canada or elsewhere because of labor costs.

Albain, for one, does not see the Hollywood-violence link so many politicians are playing up.

“I don’t believe watching television or movies is going to create weird people,” he said. “I believe that you are born that way or grow up that way.”

Other givers, as well, say they are sifting through the candidates to determine their stance in--as one insider put it--this “absurd movement against violence and sex in the media.”

Although total donations from the financial and legal communities far outstrip the amount the candidates raise from Hollywood, the industry is an attractive source because it is well-heeled and relatively self-contained--a little bit of effort can result in a good return. There’s also the glamour factor; every campaign likes to have its contribution list studded with celebrity names.

Perhaps not surprisingly, none of the three leading recipients of Hollywood money has publicly embraced the federal inquiry of the industry’s marketing practices, which Clinton has ordered the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission to embark upon.

Gore’s camp, when asked about his comments in his private meetings with Hollywood insiders, acknowledged only that he has had numerous discussions with them on issues facing the country. A spokesman said the campaign does not comment on such conversations.

But those private conversations appear to be relieving some in Hollywood.

“At first there were doubts” about Gore’s stance on Hollywood and violence, said Andy Span, a spokesman for DreamWorks SKG. “As the vice president has begun to address this issue, I think many in the industry who had concerns have been made more comfortable.”

Bradley’s spokesman, Eric Hauser, said the former senator does not have sufficient details on the Clinton-ordered inquiry to stake out a position.

As for Bush, a spokeswoman said he supports the inquiry. But the Texas governor does not bring the issue up in his speeches.

Gore Receives Broad Backing

In the three-way struggle for Hollywood’s adoration, Gore has succeeded in obtaining broad backing within the industry. A review of his Federal Election Commission report by the Campaign Study Group, a Virginia-based research fund, shows contributions from whole blocs of executives from DreamWorks, Paramount, Time Warner and other entertainment concerns.

Gore givers also include actors Chevy Chase and Kevin Costner, Quincy Jones and singer Barbra Streisand. Another backer, Haim Saban, chairman of Fox Family Worldwide, took issue with Gore on the question of whether Hollywood violence contributes to incidents such as the Columbine High School shootings.

“I happen to disagree with the vice president on his opinion on this matter,” said Saban, who was not privy to closed-door comments on the federal inquiry. “You’re going to agree with a candidate on most of the issues and you’re going to disagree on some of them.”

With the election still 15 months away, numerous industry players are hedging their bets.

“It’s a long way to Election Day,” said one studio insider. “We aren’t engaged in the process like the people in Washington, D.C. A friend asks you to give $1,000 to Gore. A friend asks you to give $1,000 to Bradley. You write the checks.”

Semel wrote a $1,000 check to Bradley, but contributed the same amount at a fund-raising dinner he hosted for Bush. Named by Clinton as vice chairman of the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities, Semel also kicked in $1,000 for Gore.

Other donors who have sent off multiple checks include Eisner (who donated to Bradley and Bush), DreamWorks SKG mogul David Geffen (Gore and Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona), Warner Bros. President Ed Bleier (Gore and Bradley), former 20th Century Fox executive Marvin Davis (Gore and Bradley) and record executive Danny Goldberg (Gore and Bradley).

“Multiple giving is a sign of one’s desire to cover one’s bets,” said Dwight Morris, president of the Campaign Study Group. “No matter who wins, you have access to the White House in case you need to talk to someone.”

Gore’s recent efforts to distance himself from the federal inquiry of Hollywood and youth violence was not the first time he headed west to mend fences.

During his failed presidential run in 1988, Gore held a private meeting in Los Angeles with recording industry executives in which he backpedaled from his role in a high-profile Senate hearing that focused on unsavory music lyrics. Also present was Gore’s wife, Tipper, who, as a witness at the hearing, decried song lyrics laden with violent and sexual images.

That hearing, held at the behest of the Parents Music Resource Center, a group created by Tipper Gore, led the music industry to adopt a voluntary labeling system for albums with explicit lyrics.

“I did not ask for the hearing,” Gore told the record executives, according to a transcript of the session published by Variety. “I was not in favor of the hearing.”

Gore’s current list of contributors shows that he has managed to put many in the recording industry at ease.

But some, such as Reprise Records executive Howie Klein, continue to hold a grudge against the Gores more than a decade later.

“Everyone I know who is politically active has forgotten or forgiven what happened over rock lyrics,” Klein said. “I can’t forget. . . . But if it comes down to George W. Bush and Gore, I’ll vote for Gore. Meanwhile, I’m doing all I can for Bradley.”

Times staff writer Stephen Fuzesi contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Hollywood Money

Presidential candidates who are top recipients of entertainment industry dollars (includes donors employed at movie studios, radio stations and television and cable interests). Each can give no more than $1,000 to an individual candidate.

Al Gore: $318,050

George W. Bush: $247,750

Bill Bradley: $225,174

MULTIPLE DONATIONS

Many Hollywood executives hedge their bets by giving to more than one candidate, in some cases crossing party lines. Here are some examples

* Former Warner Bros. Chairman Terry Semel

(Bush, Bradley, Gore)

* Walt Disney Co. Chairman Michael Eisner

(Bradley and Bush)

* DreamWorks SKG mogul David Geffen

(Gore and Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona)

* Warner Bros. President Ed Bleier