CBS blackmails Jamie to influence HG's!
The ClubHouse: Big Brother 2000: General - Archives:
CBS Talk:
CBS blackmails Jamie to influence HG's!
Lawyerman | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 10:30 am  The following was posted on the Unofficial Big Brother Fan Page, Insider Newsboard section at: http://www.angelfire.com/tv/bigbrother2000fans/news.html Last Saturday when houseguests were ready to give notice of their mass walkout, Big Brother asked Jamie into the Red Room. Our insider told us what was said: "It was actually Jason, the studio production head that spoke to her, not "John" as she told her fellow housemates. They know she's vulnerable in one particular area - waiting on the table in the Red Room for her was a copy of the Big Brother contract with one section highlighted - the media approval clause." The media clause in the contract becomes binding when anyone leaves the house. It stipulates that houseguests must have CBS approval for any major market media appearances or promotions. (The same clause was in the Survivor contract) "She was told that if they all deserted the show, CBS would severely limit the scope of publicity deals and appearances the houseguests would be cleared for. She was basically told "You guys walk out and you'll never work in this town again." Anyone who knows Jamie can imagine how much that freaked her out! She was then instructed what to tell the other houseguests to help change their minds. All that stuff she told them after coming out of the Red Room was a smokescreen." Although I don't really like her selfishness and vanity, I think the HG's should know about this in a plane banner - "CBS blackmailed Jamie re: walkout." |
Gonnagetfired | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:00 pm  I can't believe no one has jumped on this thread yet. Hey, all you Jamie-bashers: Have at it! |
Lucinda | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:07 pm  Jamie is incredibly phoney. But at least here she acted in a way that was utterly true to her character. In addition, I have no doubt that she never wanted to participate in the walk out and was hoping Eddie would just stand firm so that she could go along with the crowd without there ever being a risk of actually leaving. The RR stuff just fueled Jamie to do what she wanted to anyway. I want a banner that says "WHAT'S UNDER ALL THAT MAKE-UP?" |
Rufusgriswold | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:08 pm  I have no negative comments to say about Jamie on THIS particular subject. This was the first sane, rational thing anyone did since George started his tirade on Saturday morning. She was worried about her career before she went into the RR, so it should come as no surprise that she was worried about it afterwards. I'm just amused that she didn't deal with the key issue in front of her fellow HGs -- if we walk, we can't take advantage of any of the fame that may come. It doesn't surprise me that she soft-pedaled that aspect, though. She was undoubtedly self-serving, but she DID accomplish what needed to be done. Oh, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Jamie actually thought she was speaking to "John." She hears what she wants to hear. |
Ocean_Islands | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:11 pm  None of it is a surprise. It would be good to put it on a banner and see how they chew on it. |
Hammer | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:14 pm  Can't really fault Jamie for this act. Like Rufus said, the entire house was thinking irrationally until she emerged from the RR. And is it really blackmail? They have signed a contract that says CBS controls their media appearances, and the producers were basically reminding them of this fact. These fools thought they could screw CBS and cash in on becoming some sort of "heroes". CBS simply pointed out that they were wrong. |
Battlestar | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:17 pm  What were her reasons for not walking when she left the Red Room?? |
Jefaubel | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:17 pm  I posted this under "In Defense of Jamie" and most of the people who read this and answered thought Ja did the right thing because she is only on the show to further her career and so she shouldn't be put down for doing just that no matter what she has to do, short of murder, I assume, but maybe the Ja lovers would understand that too. My reaction was that this was a deliberate lie from Ja to her fellow HGs whom she agreed to be truthful with and be one with no matter what. |
Kokomo | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:23 pm  I was watching the live feeds during the walkout night - and I could have sworn it was Jamie's idea to go into the RR, she said she wanted "to ask them something" - I don't remember her being called in..as I recall, when she came out she said she went in and asked for John and the staff had to run catch him as he was on his way out and already in the parking garage. Does anyone else remember it like this? |
Iron_Chef | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:24 pm  So tell me fellow attorneys (I'm inactive and clueless on this topic), how binding would you this deem this "media approval clause" to be? I know certain employment contracts can bar a ex-employee from disclosing trade secrets or working in a similar position/field for a set amount of time. Does CBS have a leg to stand on in basically controlling and limiting the celebrity of the HGs beyond the house and beyond the show should they simply walk away? It's pure fancy that CBS would control the HGs to the extent of "never working in this town again." Seems CBS would be drawing upon the late Senator Joseph McCarthy in threatening to permanently blackball the socialists in the house. |
Fruitbat | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:27 pm  I'm not sure this story is true. Does anyone else remember that she voluntarily went to the RR and either asked for John specifically or asked to speak to someone? John was then summoned, in the nick of time, from the parking garage. This does not mean that the same info wasn't conveyed but the details may be skewed. I have no problem with her not reporting exactly what they said in the RR. Most of them don't. The RR often askes them not to repeat what was said. |
Frome2u | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:29 pm  Fruitbat - I remember it the same way as you. Also that she asked specifically to speak with John. |
Elisa | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:33 pm  That's the way I remember it also Kokomo. She went in on her own to talk to John. She came out soon after she went in and Curtis told her that she'd left the door ajar. She answered that she knew she did, that she had just come out to get something. The live feeds reported that there was a rustling of what sounded like paper when she came out and I do remember hearing that. Maybe she came out to get a copy of the handbook, that's speculation because I didn't see what she came out for. |
Creamynougat | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:34 pm  >My reaction was that this was a deliberate lie from Ja to her fellow HGs whom she agreed to be truthful with and be one with no matter what. The account of what transpired in the RR is roughly what I imagined it would be. Jamie was not untruthful. The fact that walking out might limit further opportunities was touched on by the HGs and eventually dismissed. Essentially, Jamie told the group that they needed to think twice about walking out. This wasn't a lie. Jamie handled it the best way she knew how. Her ultimate goal was to diffuse the situation -- I don't think she was ever fully convinced to go along with the walkout. If she had revealed her RR discussions verbatim, this may have incited the HGs even more and her ultimate goal was to diffuse the situation. I suppose people will find fault with her no matter what but I think she did okay under the circumstances. |
Donnalea | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:36 pm  What kind of proof do they have about this conversation and where would they get the info?? |
Fifi | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:48 pm  Iron_Chef. Nope, I'm not an attorney (wish I was!). I just wanted to pipe in with something I remember from Survivor. NBC really wanted Richard Hatch to host SNL and had to get permission from CBS to allow Rich to host SNL. I believe (?) that CBS told NBC "no" that Rich can't host SNL. Being that all the Survivor and Big Brother people were, in fact, nobodys before coming on the show, CBS probably does have a very stringent media clause that allows CBS to control the castaways/houseguests media appearances. They (CBS) probably control the rights of the castaways/houseguests probably up until a year after the show ends. Didn't Cassandra and Curtis talk about this one night...maybe I'm thinking of the night after the second roast when they were all thinking about walking out. |
Battlestar | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:51 pm  I remember Cassandra talking about the Entertainment Lawyer she hired when she was signing the contract as she wanted his input on the wording of the contract. He advised her not to sign it as CBS would basically OWN her for the time period of the contract which doesn't end when she leaves the house. But as we can see--she did not take his advise |
Battlestar | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 01:57 pm  Hey I found it in the Live Feeds using the Word Search option here...looked for the phrase "Entertainment Lawyer" Anyways---it is August 20th at 12:01AM and the lawyer looks like it is a friend of hers and is a woman---this info came from another post |
Battlestar | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 02:04 pm  Copied and paste---from August 20th 12:18 AM "George says they told him to have a lawyer look at the agreement before he signed it. He said can he take it back? and they said he couldn't be on the show if he didn't sign it. So he signed it on the spot. Cass expresses shock. Curtis says there were mistakes in the document. Some boring legalisms. Jamie comments! Says you basically didn't have a choice in signing it. Cass says she saw an entertainment lawyer who could tell her how bad it could get. George asks how bad could it get? Cass says the lawyer didn't want her to sign it. He felt that CBS would basically own her for too long. If someone came along with an offer, she would be stuck if CBS didn't go along with it. Brit asks doesn't CBS have to match the offer in 4 or 5 days. Curtis says basically CBS can pay them crap not to take any offers. Cass hopes to work with the lawyer later on if anything comes out. But her point is if you do become a name, you might miss out on some things, it's a tradeoff. The lawyer had a whole list of changes to the document, before he would advise her to sign it. CBS wouldn't make any changes. She basically had <24 hrs. to work it out. Jamie sent it to a lawyer at work, she figured she could sign it and then come to finals. Brit wanted them to sign it and get her a copy, before she quit her job so she could be assured. They couldn't do it for her. Really stressed her out. " |
Lawyerman | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 02:05 pm  Iron_Chef: I am an attorney with expertise in the First Amendment (I'm a former ACLU attorney), but I only have limited expertise in entertainment law and clauses like the one included in the Big Brother contract. From what I know, those types of "media appearance and promotional" clauses are generally enforcible under civil penalties unless they are outlawed by state law. I'm not a California attorney, but it is probably not illegal to make such a contract. However, such contract usually include a clause that limits their enforcement to one year. (Richard from Survivor has a similar clause that gives CBS the right to approve his media appearances, etc., for up to one year after the airing of the original broadcast of the last show. My understanding is that this is the same clause as the Big Brother contracts.) If Jamie voluntarily leaves the house and coordinates her own media appearances or promotions based in any way related to the BB TV show without CBS approval, she may face a civil lawsuit from CBS seeking monetary damages. What courts WILL NOT do is issue a gag order on her because courts only order such gag orders when there is compelling state interest to do so (e.g. gag order on attorneys during a criminal trial). However, courts will enforce private agreements to the extent that First Amendment will allow, and I imagine that courts will allow monetary damages for someone who violates an agreement not to talk without CBS approval. There is probably a clause in there that says she will be required to pay a certain amount of monetary damage or is subject to monetary damage if she does not get CBS approval for media appearances. If that is the case, CBS can only make her pay up. They can't shut her up. The money damages and the threat of civil litigation is usually enough to discourage her from talking, but no court will actually force her not to talk. This is opinion for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. |
Minibrother | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 02:11 pm  Iron Chef, I'm an employment lawyer, and you are correct that employers can bind former employees from divulging trade secrets and working for competitors, with some limitations (they're called "covenants not to compete"). Although this isn't an employment situation, I think contracts of this type would be even *more* enforceable in this setting. Typically people have the freedom to contract regarding anything they want. I also can't blame CBS (if the above report is true) for playing this card with Jamie. We need to remember that while the HG's were treating this as a (dare I say selfish) opportunity to "make TV history" and go out and seize all the opportunities they are convinced are waiting for them, this was a $20 million gambit for CBS and Endemol (that wasn't going too well anyway). |
Katie | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 02:12 pm  Kokomo, Fruitbat Elisa and Frome2u, I also remember it that way. I was sure that it was Jamie's idea to talk with them and I also thought we heard her say Hi John before they cut her off. As I understand it, they remove the battery from their mic when they go in and the sound we hear after that is when BB lets us hear what is coming through their RR mike not the one they are wearing. |
Annika | Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 02:30 pm  I'm no Jamie fan, but I don't demonize her for being ambitious. Nothing wrong with that. It's her vapid, clueless way of going about it that makes me snicker. She seems to think that you can swing your hair around while seeming to show very little evidence of a personality--and it's going to land you a gig on TV............Well I guess it did! Really........ Her profound self-absorption is her greatest flaw, and spills over into all other aspects of her personality. She seems to have a complete lack of curiosity about anyone or anything that doesn't concern her or something she wants. I guess you could say the same about Brit, but Brit has charisma--something Jamie doesn't have, and a necessary quality for anyone wanting to go into acting. |
Bbrubberneck | Wednesday, September 13, 2000 - 04:21 pm  Re: Time CBS holds rights on HG I remember during the early weeks the HG were discussing appearances after liberation & Dec. 31 2000 was mentioned as the date CBS owned them till. |
|