Stephen King YouTube channel?

[Rrty]

Here's something I think would be interesting for King to try, but obviously it wouldn't happen, just simply because of the random nature of it.

Imagine King partnered up with investors and/or Google to create a Stephen King YouTube channel (I don't believe there is one). The bulk of its programming would be user-generated, much like this discussion board is.

And much of that programming would center on dollar-baby stuff, in addition to maybe fan-fiction-type stuff. There would be adaptations of Night Shift/etc. stories. There would be shorts that would be sequels to existing novels (imagine one about a kid in Derry discovering an It egg that somehow survived). King obviously would put up stuff as well. His radio station could put stuff up. Et cetera.

Obviously advertising would be the business model, followed perhaps by original content that people would pay for, etc. Considering the valuations of YouTube MCNs (see Disney's buy of Maker and DreamWorks Animation's buy of AwesomenessTV, followed by the subsequent Hearst investment which made the latter a truly awesome trade for DWA), I would think someone like King getting in on something like this might be financially justified.

I know King probably has considered none of this, but out of curiosity, Ms. Mod, has any of his business advisors thought about this?

[ Moderator ]

 

[Moderator]

We already have a Stephen King YouTube channel but we use it in a different way. The reason why no one (including Steve) can post videos of dollar babies longer than 2 minutes (that's what is currently in the dollar baby contract) is because it could possibly jeopardize his future commercial film rights options. Although it may seem a bit silly, it has come up in the past when negotiating the film rights that the purchasers have tried to claim that because a dollar baby has been produced, they don't have the first rights to the film and so they should not have to pay as much for the option. Contractual agreements/copyrights would preclude anyone else from doing adaptations of works that have been produced as that would be a copyright infringement. Stephen does not allow fan fiction nor does he allow other authors to use characters or locations he has created in their original work as he wants to retain that for his own use. He may currently have or in the future have an idea to do more with them but if usage had been granted to someone else, he'd be in jeopardy of plagiarizing the work.

There's a reason why you don't see advertising on this site in spite of the fact that it could greatly help to defray the overhead costs. It would imply there was product endorsement which isn't something Steve wants to do and since the American Express commercial debacle, hasn't.

 

[DiO'Bolic]

There's a reason why you don't see advertising on this site in spite of the fact that it could greatly help to defray the overhead costs. It would imply there was product endorsement which isn't something Steve wants to do and since the American Express commercial debacle, hasn't.

Interesting. I still remember that commercial. Why was it a debacle?

 

[Moderator]

Interesting. I still remember that commercial. Why was it a debacle?

Perhaps regret would be a better word as the impression I get is that it would fall into the "wish I hadn't done that" category. When he was signing photos that were sent to him through the mail, the ones that were always returned unsigned were stills from that commercial. He is asked a lot but it's his policy now to never do product endorsements.

 

[blunthead]

We already have a Stephen King YouTube channel but we use it in a different way. The reason why no one (including Steve) can post videos of dollar babies longer than 2 minutes (that's what is currently in the dollar baby contract) is because it could possibly jeopardize his future commercial film rights options. Although it may seem a bit silly, it has come up in the past when negotiating the film rights that the purchasers have tried to claim that because a dollar baby has been produced, they don't have the first rights to the film and so they should not have to pay as much for the option. Contractual agreements/copyrights would preclude anyone else from doing adaptations of works that have been produced as that would be a copyright infringement. Stephen does not allow fan fiction nor does he allow other authors to use characters or locations he has created in their original work as he wants to retain that for his own use. He may currently have or in the future have an idea to do more with them but if usage had been granted to someone else, he'd be in jeopardy of plagiarizing the work.

There's a reason why you don't see advertising on this site in spite of the fact that it could greatly help to defray the overhead costs. It would imply there was product endorsement which isn't something Steve wants to do and since the American Express commercial debacle, hasn't.

See, these are the reasons I've chosen not to be internationally famous.

 

[DiO'Bolic]

See, these are the reasons I've chosen not to be internationally famous.

Sometimes it's better to be infamous rather than famous.

 

[kingricefan]

Sometimes it's better to be infamous rather than famous.

We'll watch for you on the news......

 

[GNTLGNT]

Perhaps regret would be a better word as the impression I get is that it would fall into the "wish I hadn't done that" category. When he was signing photos that were sent to him through the mail, the ones that were always returned unsigned were stills from that commercial. He is asked a lot but it's his policy now to never do product endorsements.

...it was quite entertaining at the time, but I can see why he think's it's cringeworthy...

 

[Rrty]

Thanks for the reply, Ms. Mod. Are dollar-babies still in existence, then? I thought they were. If so, should the program be stopped?

Why did he do the commercial back then? Was it a good way to make some extra money (when perhaps money meant a little more at that time) or was it a loss-leader (in a sense) to sell more books? Has enough time passed to ask what he was paid for that campaign?

You spoke about defraying costs for this site. Here's a suggestion: sell short stories on it. Direct to fans. Why not? What about charging posters to get direct answers from Mr. King on questions? No different than paying money to meet bands. (And if the cost of an answer to a post were, say, $5, it would be comparable to the old days of paying postage to get a book signed by King through the mail.)

Has the ultimate goal of this site and board evolved over time? Is there a monetization-factor being explored for the future?

[ Moderator ]

 

[FlakeNoir]

Thanks for the reply, Ms. Mod. Are dollar-babies still in existence, then? I thought they were. If so, should the program be stopped?

Why did he do the commercial back then? Was it a good way to make some extra money (when perhaps money meant a little more at that time) or was it a loss-leader (in a sense) to sell more books? Has enough time passed to ask what he was paid for that campaign?

You spoke about defraying costs for this site. Here's a suggestion: sell short stories on it. Direct to fans. Why not? What about charging posters to get direct answers from Mr. King on questions? No different than paying money to meet bands. (And if the cost of an answer to a post were, say, $5, it would be comparable to the old days of paying postage to get a book signed by King through the mail.)

Has the ultimate goal of this site and board evolved over time? Is there a monetization-factor being explored for the future?

Just a heads up, if you are speaking directly to Ms. Mod it is better to either tag her, ( @ moderator ) or to quote her post, otherwise she may not receive an alert. (because of the volume of posts, if you are posting during her off hours, she may not have time to catch up with the previous days messages)

 

[Moderator]

Thanks for the reply, Ms. Mod. Are dollar-babies still in existence, then? I thought they were. If so, should the program be stopped?

Why did he do the commercial back then? Was it a good way to make some extra money (when perhaps money meant a little more at that time) or was it a loss-leader (in a sense) to sell more books? Has enough time passed to ask what he was paid for that campaign?

You spoke about defraying costs for this site. Here's a suggestion: sell short stories on it. Direct to fans. Why not? What about charging posters to get direct answers from Mr. King on questions? No different than paying money to meet bands. (And if the cost of an answer to a post were, say, $5, it would be comparable to the old days of paying postage to get a book signed by King through the mail.)

Has the ultimate goal of this site and board evolved over time? Is there a monetization-factor being explored for the future?

[ Moderator ]

The dollar baby program began as and will always be for the purpose of giving new filmmakers a start in the business through showing their film at film festivals or as a product reel and was not meant to be a commercial (for profit) endeavor or for general dissemination to the public. It's one way that Stephen feels he is able to give back for his success by allowing some of his short stories to be adapted for this purpose. What has changed since its inception is the widespread use of the internet. Aspiring filmmakers can still produce their film adaptations after securing a contract to do so and get them seen by the film industry through channels other than sites such as YouTube so no, there's no reason to stop the program. The public is usually able to attend film festivals so if they're that interested, they can see them that way. Consider it like a limited run film.

I didn't work for him when he did the AmEx commercial and haven't ever discussed it with him so don't know what his motivations were for doing it. Knowing Stephen as I do, my guess is that at the time it seemed like a fun thing to do. I also have no idea how much he was paid and it's really none of my or anyone else's business--just my opinion--so have no intention to ask.

If defraying the costs for running the site had ever been an issue, then something would have been done long ago. It is another way of his giving back to fans as well as being able to have accurate information about his work available. That was the original intent of the site and continues to be the primary factor, i.e. as an information source, not a direct sales outlet. Of course the intent is to also have sales increase because of the announcements we make about upcoming works but we leave the selling up to retailers as that's what they do best. The merchandise sold through the site does not directly benefit Stephen as all profit received from the sales goes to The Haven Foundation, not Stephen.

No, there are no plans for a monetization factor being explored in the future for the site.

 

[Rrty]

Thank you for your reply, Ms. Mod. It would be interesting to see short stories sold through the site someday, only as it would make it easier for people to read new work without having to track down the periodicals in which they appear. (I recall the experiment with The Plant and hope someday he may try something like that again, except with this site as the delivery mechanism.)

Perhaps Dollar-Baby films could be seen for a limited time on this site, as they too are difficult to track down because they are at festivals -- then again, digital distribution has risks in terms of people stealing content.

 

[Kingfisher]

...it was quite entertaining at the time, but I can see why he think's it's cringeworthy...

That's actually kind of regrettable to see because I remember the commercials that Orson Welles did toward the end of his life where he seemed like...well...really embarrassed. A legendary icon reduced to shilling cheap products, I don't think he deserved that.

Vincent Price did a lot of commercials too but took it with great stride and humour. That's why I've always loved Price, whatever he was doing you could see that he was having a hoot. There used to be a commercial on YouTube for a bug zapper of all things where Mr. Price delighted in the bugs being zapped, really funny stuff. That was pulled but here's a commercial for a board game

 

[GNTLGNT]

That's actually kind of regrettable to see because I remember the commercials that Orson Welles did toward the end of his life where he seemed like...well...really embarrassed. A legendary icon reduced to shilling cheap products, I don't think he deserved that.

Vincent Price did a lot of commercials too but took it with great stride and humour. That's why I've always loved Price, whatever he was doing you could see that he was having a hoot. There used to be a commercial on YouTube for a bug zapper of all things where Mr. Price delighted in the bugs being zapped, really funny stuff. That was pulled but here's a commercial for a board game

...King was just showing glimmers at the time, of the icon he would become-and as Ms. Mod says "at the time, it seemed like a fun thing to do"...but now through the lens of time, it comes off as lame, rather than the truly campy I believe he was shooting for...not that I presume to know his mind...and IMO, if he were to do something similar now-he and the producers could have a heyday with all of the imagery that fans and the casual public alike would recognize...