Factual (not Cafe) question: Does HBO obtain releases from all the interviewees on this show?
My vague impression of the law was that:
(1) you don’t strictly need a person’s permission to re-show their face/interview when they voluntarily appear in a public setting or put themselves in a position to be filmed/interviewed – with the exception of commercial use (e.g., using their face/footage in an endorsement, as opposed to a news report or entertainment piece), with the exception of a couple of jurisdictions (e.g., California) that recognize a statutory “right of publicity;”
but
(2) nonetheless, out of an abundance of caution, or to avoid conflict of laws or defamation problems, most candid-camera type shows do, as a practical matter, obtain releases from anyone of whom they shoot footage (e.g., on HBO Taxicab Confessions, they always showed the secretly-filmed people afterwards (and to my shock) voluntarily signing waivers allowing their drunken ramblings/fornication/streetwalker solicitations to be shown). I remember the Girls Gone Wild guys (or some imitator) got sued despite the (somewhat reasonable) defense that taking your shirt off at Mardi Gras was tantamount to a waiver of any right not to be ogled topless, because they weren’t getting explicit waivers – but their defeat was due to procedural default.
So . . . is HBO/Ali G getting waivers from all his victims? If so, are they doing it before or after they shoot the pieces?
And, more broadly, how many of his interviewees are in on the gag beforehand? James Lipton of The Actors’ Studio was on a couple of weeks ago and (being a pop culture maven), he gave the impression that he might well be aware of what was going on (and thus played along but didn’t say anything too embarrassing). IIRC, Cohen faced a lot of problems once he became famous in the U.K., because more and more of his targets became hip to the game and stopped reacting spontaneously – at which point all you have is a guy talking in funny accents and his interviewees at best playing a part in a skit, which sounds like a potentially mediocre SNL premise, at best.
I would also think that even if HBO isn’t giving it away by pre-interview waivers, many PR-savvy American targets would do a little homework and figure out that the “hip hop journalist” was not really on the level.
I have a friend who worked on the legal department of the Ali G show.
Yes, they obtain waivers to film the interviews, but they were very clever about how they did it in order not to give away the gag. For all of these interviews, everybody you see on the TV besides Ali G has no clue it’s a gag. In order to keep secrecy, HBO set up companies (subsidiaries? I’m not too familiar with the legal specifics) in the different countries so that everything would appear legit. I.e., when Ali did his German character, HBO created a company in Germany and had these people sign release waivers for this company, so they believed they would be shown on German television. They did the same thing for each of these different characters. In all cases the interviewee didn’t sign anything that said “HBO” because that would be a dead giveaway.
That’s an interesting explanation tool. If so, sounds like HBO’s approach is consistent with my understanding of the usual practice (regardless of what the law might actually be). I’d imagine interviewees are probably used to signing releases somewhat routinely, for that reason, so that the mere presence of a release wouldn’t put them on their guard.
I guess a separate question would be whether (at least as to the Ali G character) any of the subjects figured it out for themselves – after all, he’s been pretty famous in the U.K. for about 4 years, if not very well known here. I have to suspect at least a couple of them figured out something was up, or knew him from his U.K. exploits.
I’m sure some figured it out, but with the magic of the editing room, I wouldn’t be surprised if we only see half of the actual conducted interviews, if that.
In an interview in the NY Times Magazine, Ali G (or was one of his agents) talked about how some people figured it out that this was a put-on. When that happens (or when the mark starts getting violent), they quickly wrap up (pull the plug) on the interview.
Editing does the rest.
In the Lipton interview, I got the impression that he did catch on, but only on that end. He seemed really flummoxed at first when Ali kept associating art with being gay.
Peace.
“I am gay! I am sooo gay! I’m gayer than a clutch purse at the Emmy’s!” - A slightly inebriated Nathan Lane interrupting an impromtu promo on In the Life (PBS)
Naomi Wolf discussed this in her recent (very long and completely unironic) article in the Sunday Times complaining about his interview with her. IIRC, she was asked to sign a waiver form before the interview started and, at least according to her version, she did try to query it as it seemed even more sweeping than those she was usually asked to sign.
The thing I want to know is whether any of the interviewees have known who he was in advance and then tried to string him along.
He did get his own chat show here in the UK, where guests would come along and be “Interviewed”, take part in a song etc, the most memorable of which was Mohammed Al Fayed. They were all in on it, though.