Thought of the Day for TPTB
A response to Joe Mallozzi's chat with the SamJack Horsewomen, 13th April 2002
Supervising Producer and Writer Joseph Mallozzi made a number of allegations against the SDJ campaign.
SJHW: How's the mail been?
MALLOZZI: Well, Brad gets the occasional nasty letter, but they all seem to Be from the same handful of individuals. And of course we've been getting positive mail as well - which is great. Sadly, my hate mail has slowed to a trickle. I will have to make do with the odd incoherent rambling death threat passed along to me from the SDJ site.
As a member of SG-1 Team, I'm aware some of us write as individuals on a weekly basis or less offering opinions, advice, critique, and asking questions. We talk about how we feel, usually in response to the latest spoilers or news of the apparently happy-clappy set. Mr. Mallozzi appears to confuse 'critical' and even 'satirical' with 'nasty'. If we wanted to get 'nasty', we would, for example, have published at the site Mr. Mallozzi's ill-informed response to the Salon.com article, which he posted to a number of discussion lists and public forums.
The Guestbook posts have been used as a big stick to beat us with throughout the campaign by certain sectors of Stargate's online fandom, but we had good reason for providing that safe place for fans hearing the news and viewing "Meridian" to vent, and will not renege.
The SDJ position is becoming more entrenched because MGM and the producers will NOT engage with us or listen to our deep concerns about the future viability of Stargate. They are not obligated to agree with us, we recognise that, but for the producers to publicly favour one sector of fans while dismissing and publicly insulting another is simply forcing more fans out of their support for Stargate and more revenue out of MGM's coffers.
At this point, MGM has no idea of what the fallout of fans will be from Daniel Jackson's departure. We regret that they have seemingly made no moves to assess the potential threat to their investment in the Stargate series from the loss of Daniel Jackson and Michael Shanks, both character and actor enjoying phenomenal popularity. This is clearly at the root of fans' utter incredulity when they hear the news online or in a newspaper, or when the see "Meridian" air, for MGM have not announced Michael Shanks' departure. Those writing, posting, calling and emailing via the SDJ site simply cannot believe that Daniel was discarded.
We at SDJ have made ourselves publicly accessible. MGM have our email addresses, both personal and site, telephone numbers and home addresses. They have made no attempts whatsoever to negotiate with us, to make use of our network of contacts to assess the potential of this threat to ratings and revenue. They appear to have chosen instead to try to do nothing but wait us out.
MGM have nothing to fear from us as individuals or collectively.
It is the nature of online fandom that news spreads quickly. We have been offered a lot of insider information from concerned fans, none of which we have printed though it was verified by different sources. We have also respected the confidentiality of journalists who have offered and exchanged information. For example we knew about the animated series but did not publish the news as it was to be part of an exclusive interview for a magazine.
The campaign has been conducted ethically and openly throughout. I am deeply disappointed at these unwarranted accusations from Mr. Mallozzi.
SJHW: Are the cast & crew aware of the SDJ campaign?
MALLOZZI: Yes, some are more aware of it than others. Unfortunately for the real Daniel Jackson fans out there, the individuals involved in the SDJ campaign have done their cause a disservice by a) being rude and insulting
Mr. Mallozzi should perhaps define what a 'real Daniel Jackson fan' is to him. SDJ has forwarded letters from 238 'real Daniel Jackson fans' from countries as diverse as the US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, South Africa, Jordan, Israel, Chile, Argentina, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. All of those letters were from people who consider themselves 'real Daniel Jackson fans'. They expressed disappointment, shock and incredulity, anger - strong and powerful criticism of the decisions that led to Michael Shanks' departure. The letters have furthermore been printed and mailed by a variety of individuals in the US and Canada, none of whom have expressed qualms at the content. We have even engaged the services of translators for those letters not in English to be sure of their content before forwarding them.
The editorials and articles posted at SDJ are the thoughts, feelings, judgement and opinions of the individual fan who wrote them, some of which *are* strongly expressed critiques, opinions and even satire, a useful tool to make a point forcefully and immediately. The Guestbook - an open forum on the site for public posting - has some impassioned, angry and bitter posts from people stunned by the news and very angry over the unfairness once they read Michael Shanks' comments about his reasons for leaving Stargate.
In the first rush of shock and grief after "Meridian" aired, Mr. Mallozzi's comments likening losing Daniel to losing the little monkey from "Friends" were insulting at best and some posters did take them personally. I regret that Mr. Mallozzi's views, shared with a favoured sector of fandom and aired in many forums and lists online, continue to disgust and dismay fans, some of whom have posted about him here.
Our view of the Guestbook is as it has always been: (a) the opinions are those of the individual poster, NOT of SDJ. (b) we saw the need for a safe place for fellow fans to vent their feelings of shock, grief and anger towards MGM. (c) we stand by this decision because we are so determined NOT to do anything to harm Michael Shanks' reputation we preferred to take whatever heat was generated in the online fandom from those posts than having fans venting their outraged feelings on MGM employees.
Ironically, BOTH *MGM* AND *SCI-FI CHANNEL* have Guestbook/discussion boards in which a number of less than complimentary messages about Joe Mallozzi's contribution to Stargate have been posted. Neither of those corporations takes responsibility for the content of their guestbooks other than to define acceptable use, nor do they apparently police or censor the views of posters. Yet Mr. Mallozzi ignores them completely, choosing instead to single out this website for criticism. The only website run by fans.
MALLOZZI: and b) encouraging individuals to be rude and insulting and threatening to those involved in the production.
A prominent quote from the SDJ website: "|| We're all stunned; many of us are grieving and angry. We *URGE* you to *PLEASE* be *CONSIDERATE* of all MGM and Stargate Productions employees while stating the strength of our feelings and support for Daniel Jackson and his importance to Stargate in calls and letters. Thank you. ||"
This request urging protestors to be polite has been up at the Solutions site as long as we've had the telephone numbers, appearing coupled with the telephone numbers, though we've amended/strengthened the text over time. NOTHING in this request could be construed as encouraging callers or letter-writers to be quote "rude and insulting and threatening". Those fans joining SG-1 Team are issued with a similar admonition in their welcome message and admin reminders are posted periodically. Mr. Mallozzi is wrong to make such an allegation without any evidence to support it.
The SDJ contact email is on every page at the site. When I write I give my home address and make it clear what my association is with SDJ. The SciFi Channel contacted us to remove a phone number which we were happy to do for them. No concern has been expressed to the SDJ campaign via our site contact email, or directly to us as individuals about the content or conduct of the Solutions website by MGM, SciFi Channel, Stargate Productions on behalf of Brad Wright or Joseph Mallozzi, by either Brad Wright or Joseph Mallozzi as individuals. Nor have Michael Shanks' agent or legal representatives contacted us on his behalf.
In light of this, we respectfully remind Mr. Mallozzi that he is posting his personal opinions and assumptions as an individual from a position of power as a member of the production staff without in any way being an OFFICIALLY sanctioned representative of MGM and Stargate Productions. If he is representing MGM and Stargate Productions as their official representative, then he should clarify his position as a matter of urgency. Is it indeed MGM's official policy to further incite, inflame and distress fans already divided by conflict?
MALLOZZI: As a result, they're viewed as an 'out there' vocal minority by many. And quite frankly, they haven't helped the character of DJ any.
Journalists from publications as diverse as Salon.com, the LA Times, The Guardian, The Australian, Yahoo news and a variety of online SF, TV and movie news and commentary websites have disagreed with Mr. Mallozzi's view. The UK SF press has been supportive and fair re sentiments expressed both pro and anti the SDJ campaign - the volume of mail received about Daniel Jackson has impacted on their letters pages for four months. There was no similar impact from the campaign to renew Stargate for season six. The impact of the campaigns visibly in the press is not comparable, though Hank Cohen was quick to praise fan support as a factor in the renewal for season six. Brad Wright was equally quick to deflate any fan pretensions to helping save the show in his Lycos chat, choosing instead to praise Hank Cohen.
The UK's Sky Channel was deluged with mail - enough to contact their distributors and to advertise the fact they'd received mail in their letter of the month. The day after "Meridian" aired in the UK, MGM was deluged with over a thousand phone calls from shocked British fans. Such a response is indeed unprecedented. The sustained and passionate response of British fans has shocked TPTB...and "Meridian" is shortly to air in the US.
The active campaigners for SDJ are of course a minority, visibly facilitating an informational website and Yahoo mailing list, SG-1 Team. We are *NOT* the sum of the protest against the loss of Daniel Jackson, the departure of Michael Shanks, the creative direction of the show or the conduct of the producers online.
Solutions is an informational website. We respect our readers by offering the interviews and comments of all the individuals concerned in this issue and allowing them to judge for themselves what the truth is and to decide for themselves what their response will be. What will win over one fan may offend another.
MICHAEL SHANKS: "But, really, its just great to see that people feel strongly enough to do something about their feelings and I think they've gotten enough of both sides of the story - mine and MGM's - to have enough information to take a perspective on the whole situation".
Our editorials are the last thing visitors to the site will see. Michael Shanks' opinions and comments are reported as fairly and openly as Mr. Mallozzi's or those of Brad Wright or Richard Dean Anderson or Amanda Tapping.
It is certainly in Mr. Mallozzi's interests to have us believe the generic 'we' of protestors against the loss of Daniel Jackson, the departure of Michael Shanks and the creative direction of the show are a 'vocal minority'. It was in fact Mr. Mallozzi who coined the phrase:
May 26th 2001 Joe Mallozzi chats with the SamJack Horsewomen
SJHW: Do they [TPTB] get much flack from the anti-SJ quarter?
MALLOZZI: "Oh yes. Lots of flack. The uproar has yet to die down completely."
SJHW: How do you gage how the fans feel?
MALLOZZI: "That's a bit tricky as well. The fans who disliked D&C were very vocal - but that doesn't mean they're in the majority."
Attacking and dividing fans from his position as a producer ad writer for the show appears to be Mr. Mallozzi's modus operandi in response to criticism, the way he chooses to exercise his right to free speech. Fans will continue to exercise their right to free speech also, though 'we' lack the authority with fandom that Mr. Mallozzi enjoys.
Our own choice in response to criticism of the SDJ campaign has been to urge our supporters wherever possible NOT to engage with those attacking and baiting us but to instead channel our energy into the positive: to write more letters to MGM et al.
SJHW: How was it like when Michael Shanks was on the set for Abyss?
MALLOZZI: It was all very polite. In fact, I ran into Michael the weekend before shooting started and he informed me that he had been misquoted in his interviews and that the fans were overreacting.
Michael Shanks has now been interviewed *SEVEN* times about the reasons for his departure, in seven different magazines at different times and by different journalists. He has appeared at SG-4 and half a dozen 'Evening With' Q&A's around Europe, Ireland and the UK. His responses have remained consistent throughout, though expressed more strongly over time. Is Mr. Mallozzi saying that Michael Shanks was misquoted in ALL of his interviews? Some were printed in December 2001 but I have yet to see a retraction of any kind from the magazines in question.
Mr. Shanks also had ample opportunity in Frankfurt, London and Glasgow among others to correct fans' overreaction in person. There could be no doubt we would listen. Is it not one of the main points of our campaign that we will NOT force Mr. Shanks into any action against his wishes? We continue to want Mr. Shanks' participation in season six and the movie to be exactly what he and MGM can negotiate and reach agreement for.
MICHAEL SHANKS interviewed by Thomasina Gibson for Starlog #024, Mar 2002
Not lost but gone before
Somewhat surprised by the intensity of people's reactions, Michael Shanks had this to say:
"In terms of the big internet campaign and things like that, I think it is great. That said, it has also been a bit overwhelming. I mean, it's all supportive and a lot of people I've talked with have been very sad about the character's death, which again is quite an ego boost. But, really, its just great to see that people feel strongly enough to do something about their feelings and I think they've gotten enough of both sides of the story - mine and MGM's - to have enough information to take a perspective on the whole situation". Read more
MICHAEL SHANKS interviewed by Sharon Gosling for Xpose #66, Mar 2002
Daniel in the lion's den
It’s not a decision that has been accepted easily by his thousands of fans, a fact that evidently bemuses him. While he has taken pains to assure the ‘Danielites’ that it was, in the end, his decision to make, the dedication of these viewers has taken him by surprise. In an action that is largely unprecedented, one group of fans took out several advertisements in magazines such as the Hollywood Reporter, campaigning for his return. Looking at one such advert he smiles wryly.
“It’s very flattering, is the best way to put it, I guess. It’s very nice to see a group of people go to that amount of effort to bring it into the public eye even more than the show would do itself, in a way. At the same time it feels like a little bit too much in the sense that if people have the money to do something like that, you really wish it was going towards something that was helping people. You know,” he continues, indicating the article in question, “arguably that does, but the same time, I wish it had gone to a better cause. But the point is, no, I've never seen anything like that before and yes, it’s very flattering.” Read More
MICHAEL SHANKS interviewed by Jayne Dearsley for SFX #90, April 2002
The gate escape
Those producers did announce that Shanks would return in season six. Is that true? “Privately, they’ve made no such commitment to me. There’s nothing on the slate, as of right now.”
Still, he can rely on his fans to fight the good fight on his behalf. Many have reacted badly to the treatment their favourite character has received, swearing that they won’t watch the series any more. Others have formed torch-wielding lynch mobs and yelled from the rooftops that they love Daniel and want him back.
“It’s very flattering,” is Shanks’ response. “It’s nice to know that you must be doing something right if you have that kind of debate with the fans going on. If people are expressing themselves then at least you’ve made some impact, for better or for worse! I’ve read one site — some fans have a website called www.savedanieljackson.com — with a whole brochure of information on it. For the most part I agreed with it! I couldn’t really sit there and go, ‘Well, you shouldn’t really say that...’ I just go, ‘They’ve got a point!’ I can’t say these things, but these people will." Read More.
In the press and in law there is a burden of proof. The press in the US, UK and around the world LOVE ugly, messy fan wars and fanatics. SF fans above all others are singled out for the tired old stereotype of the lonely, obsessive loser - a stereotype I have seen perpetuated in this forum. It makes EXCELLENT press. High emotions, heated words and messy battles.
Whatever WE as fans believe, the ethical press has a burden of proof. If the LA Times accused the SDJ campaign of forwarding death threats to Joseph Mallozzi it would be liable to offer proof because of the threat of lawsuit, which would also require proof.
With ALL the factors inherently AGAINST the SDJ campaign - the tired stereotypes of fans, 'fangrrls', in it because Michael Shanks is a 'hottie', SF fans = losers, fans = fanatics and sad obsessives - what has the mainstream press chosen to report? Salon.com, the LA Times, The Guardian, The Australian, - quality newspapers all - have looked at our SDJ site, they have read the Guestbook, have even interviewed us. NONE of them has written the SDJ campaign off as a vocal minority, NONE of them argued against our right to protest, NONE of them has pulled our campaign to shreds. They don't know and have no obligation to the show, to any of the individuals concerned in cast, crew or fandom, or to the campaign, except to report fairly and accurately. They simply have to be able to prove what they say, offer factual basis for opinions. Nielsen and Showtime ratings are facts. Stargate's demographics are facts. The quoted interviews are facts.
Internet posts and websites live with us forever. It takes no time at all to create a Yahoo ID and join lists such as Team, Alpha Gate, samandjack and forums such as GateWorld and the newsgroup...to see what all sectors of fandom say, what they believe and how we interact. Like it or loathe it, we have ALL been judged. We ARE judged each time an article appears in the mainstream press. The press aren't obligated to listen to the views of 'the other side'. They are NOT fans. They are not invested in SF. They simply have to be able to offer proof.
The SDJ campaign has been described in the press as tough. We don't deny this and won't apologise for it. We are doing our best to alert MGM to the dangers facing the future of the Stargate franchise. 'We' are responding to a situation 'we' did nothing to create or perpetuate and have in fact battled for two years online. Some fans are coming to join this battle purely because of "Meridian" airing. If there were NO grounds for our fears, the hard, unpalatable truth here is that the press would hang us out to dry for it. They haven't. They have in fact been amazingly fair and rational in reporting the campaign and the danger Stargate faces. The fact this is far from the norm in reporting fan campaigns is another clear danger sign MGM appears to be ignoring.
Another hard, unpalatable truth is that the power to end the campaign lies not with fans, not with 'us' in SDJ, but with MGM and people like Joseph Mallozzi. There are supporters of the SDJ campaign who are Michael Shanks fans, but not all Michael Shanks fans. Some are Daniel Jackson fans, but not all Daniel Jackson fans. Some adore the Jack/Daniel friendship but 'we' can't claim all J/D buddy fans. Some protest the writing. Some could have taken losing Daniel but can't take having Jonas thrust on them. Some have been disgusted by the behaviour of fans who are against the SDJ campaign. Some disagreed with us but in trying to be fair and even handed, were flamed and came to 'our' side in reaction to that. And some cannot and will not take the comments and tactics used by Brad Wright and Joseph Mallozzi against fans who cannot speak from the position of power they hold as members of the production team.
The one thing Brad Wright and Joseph Mallozzi, MGM et al have NOT done is engage with us. They have made NO attempt to contact us privately, to ask for our concerns or to listen to us. They aren't obligated to accept our point of view in any way. But as long as they ignore our concerns, as long they continue to respond to fans wanting, needing, demanding and hoping to have Daniel returned to them 22/22 with '1/22', 'possibly', 'maybe', 'don't know', 'out there vocal minority', 'rude', 'insulting', 'threatening', 'YOUR fault we aren't going to Gatecon', 'your fault fandom is in uproar'...yadda yadda. As long as THEY go on, we go on, because their conduct drives more people to 'our' side every day.
The campaign would be OVER if MGM announced definitively that Michael Shanks was to return to Stargate as Dr. Daniel Jackson for X-no episodes in season six after reaching agreement with the producers. This is NOT our problem, but THEIRS. They misread their audience, for which there are consequences. 'We' have been criticised for encouraging people to call and write, for giving houseroom to strong opinions, some offensive. We still believe Stargate has the potential to be THE single most impressive SF franchise in TV history, both creatively and financially. We don't believe it can succeed without Daniel Jackson.
While we believe there is any chance to achieve and ensure that success we will go right on being vocal. We ARE a campaign, however widespread and disparate our membership. We are doing all in our power to alert MGM to the depth and breadth of what IS negative fan/viewer response to losing Daniel Jackson, which is symptomatic of the creative changes and direction of the show. MGM aren't obligated to act on fan concerns. They are however obligated to act to protect their investment, revenues and future business plans.
Even if 'we', the highly visible members of the SDJ campaign shut up and went away as so many seem to wish without saying another word, it would be ludicrous and dangerous to believe that meant no one at home is switching off. People ARE switching off, all over the world. Maybe those disgusted by the online actions of TPTB will never return to Stargate, but for those who simply want Daniel back in Stargate because they can't watch the team and the show they LOVE without him, those viewers can be won back.
It is and always was the choice of MGM, Brad Wright et al. Not ours.
The SDJ campaign members are once again deeply disappointed by the online activities of Mr. Joseph Mallozzi. His comments are at best irresponsible, no doubt incendiary and at worst libellous. He presents his personal opinions, assumptions, allegations and hearsay as fact, his words carrying the weight of his position as a writer and supervising producer for Stargate SG-1. Michael Shanks has no connection with our campaign: he will not refute Mr. Mallozzi's allegations nor would we want or expect him to. We have only Mr. Mallozzi's word for the mood on set.
The SDJ campaign has not at any time forwarded letters to MGM, SciFi Channel or Brad Wright containing death threats. We have not at any time forwarded Guestbook posts or letters to Mr. Joseph Mallozzi. We have not been in contact with him in any way but publicly in threads he has posted on forums such as GateWorld and lists such as SG1Fans. He has taken issue with a number of fans over their comments. What he does as an individual and what fans do as individuals is not our responsibility, but theirs.
If Mr. Mallozzi IS acting as a sanctioned official representative of MGM, then MGM is responsible and liable for Mr. Mallozzi's online conduct and allegation against fans.
We respectfully remind MGM that unless they choose to engage with us, the only knowledge they have of fan resources is this high-profile website, the unprecedented publication of four advertisements in prestigious US industry and UK SF publications in support of Michael Shanks and his importance to Stargate as Daniel Jackson, and the excellent press enjoyed by the SDJ campaign in the quality, mainstream press around the world.
For Mr. Mallozzi and/or MGM to attribute all comments and actions with which he/they disagree to the Save Daniel Jackson campaign is unfair and unwarranted.
Read the full transcript of Joe Mallozzi's chat with the SamJack Horsewomen
Alison, 2002.
,Stargate SG-1 and its characters are the property of Stargate (II) Productions, SCI FI Channel, Showtime/Viacom, MGM/UA, Double Secret Productions, and Gekko Productions. All blog entries represent the opinion of the poster. All editorials represent the opinion of the author. All linked content represents the opinion of the linked site's webmaster. Copyright on all articles/editorials/blog entries belongs to the original author. Offer void where prohibited. Please remain seated while the aircraft is in motion. Warning: Coffee will be hot. A moose once bit my sister.
