..Gary Dretzka
..Noah Forrest
..Leonard Klady
..R.J. Matson
..David Poland
..Douglas Pratt
..Ray Pride
..Michael Wilmington

March 13, 2005

Eisner Gets His Top Gun
by David Poland

The ascension of Bob Iger to the top of the Disney food chain, with due respect to Mr. Iger (maybe he'll change it to Eiger… ha ha ha), is all about Michael Eisner flexing his muscles. It is now. It always was. And only Mr. Iger can keep it from "always will be" status.

It is not unlike a political election. Iger is like the vice-president of an often controversial and media-despised POTUS (President of The United States). George W. Bush got his self-described mandate in last year's election. Michael Eisner got his with a year of delivering solid growth for a company in a slump and one magical event… Desperate Housewives. Oh the irony of a nighttime soap loaded with sex and violence as the deus ex machina of the powerbase of Disney.

With that burst of power and the motivation to leave as positive and powerful a legacy as possible, Eisner made his move. He would name his successor and get out before the next slump could occur.

And I wouldn't be surprised if there is one more rabbit up Eisner's sleeve… if he believes that Iger can make the Pixar deal that he did not, and has quietly serviced that possibility by stepping aside a year early and if the deal gets done, the credit goes to Eisner's legacy.

When the true tale gets told a year or two from now, I fully expect to find out that Stan & Roy's last attack on the fort - that rather sadly ineffectual complaint shoved down the media's throat last week - sprung the Disney board into action. Within 48 hours, Meg Whitman (whose candidacy was only a rumor to the media before it was officially over) was in and out and, within 24 more hours, the Iger deal was on the books.

History will surely look at the Disney/Gold coup attempt to be one the most ineffectual and pathetic ever, right up there in recent history with Lorenzo DiBonaventura trying to unseat Alan Horn. And those in the media that sucked up and magnified every little attack on Eisner will deservedly be cast in the perspective that they so anxiously embraced. It is not the job of mainstream media to take up causes… and it is nothing less than disastrous when they end up on the wrong side. The wrong side is, of course, not the losing side so much as being on the losing side after failing to make a truly compelling argument for "your side." Taking the side of those most willing to go on the record is not journalism and when "your side" loses, career hari kari is the only honorable way out. That or a move to another beat.

Another potential issue that this quick movement will avoid is a lot of negatively spun press in the next week or two when the Weinstein separation deal is finally done and signed. (Can you hear the wheels turning? That's Harvey preparing a big splashy debut in Cannes.) Regardless of the truth, Harvey Weinstein will brilliantly spin the story to his absolute advantage and Eisner will be the fool, and The New York Times will print Harvey's version almost unchallenged, and Claudia Eller will print Disney's side, and it's one headache that can be avoided.

Let me also say here and now that a case of very expensive champagne should be going to Zenia Mucha, Disney's corporate publicist. She is very much a publicist. She can obfuscate with the best of them. But she took more public abuse in the media and by the media on this 18 month long story than anyone I can recall. And she did her job… she ate the shit that was shat… she kept herself off the record… she did not respond in kind, though I doubt she'll be going to any New York Times dinner parties any time soon. And, most importantly, she kept the story as much where Disney wanted it as was humanly possible.

And let's be clear… I am not Zenia's pal. I don't know the woman. We may have shaken hands once. And, like I said… she's still a publicist. But the feeding frenzy has been relentless, and like a soldier coming home after fighting for her country and surviving, she deserves respect, even if we don't all feel good about the war she was in.

And while I am pointing out positives about people who are more often bashed than is fair… there is a huge difference between Eisner and Bush… Eisner was one of the major creators of the massive corporation that replaced the barely animated carcass that was Disney when he arrived from Paramount twenty years ago. It would be wrong to give him all the credit, diminishing the contributions of thousands of people and Wells & Katzenberg in particular. But he was and is the king and with that crown comes both blame and credit.

Just a year ago, Eisner was under attack in every way possible. The business was slumping… ABC still in the toilet and even the movie division, which was massively successful the year before, was smashing into the wall. Katzenberg, Ovitz, the Weinsteins and Pixar were all being thrown around in the media with abandon… no one actually wrote much about the reality of the deals… everything became, in the media eyes, about the Eisner cult of poor personality.

Cable company Comcast tried to buy Disney for a discount with paper instead of cash… and people argued that it would be an improvement!

But that may have been the real turning point. The Comcast offer was a problem even for anti-Eisner attack dogs Roy Disney and Stanley Gold. And when they couldn't support Comcast's effort with real enthusiasm, their overall attack was blunted. The trouble with dumping Eisner is that anyone strong enough to unseat him was likely to be far less respectful of the company's history, not more. And Comcast proved that even without buying the company. And then, the earnings estimates went up, ABC started to turn and Eisner launched his exit strategy.

The canary ate the cat… and got to both grin and fly away.

As for Iger, I expect another shift of leadership in the next five years, within a year of the next cyclical slump. But I could be wrong.

Getting back to the political metaphor, there has been no great president who won on the coattails of a strong administration in my lifetime. Nixon was once a Vice President, but he took a long time to get to the big chair and got there on a different energy. George H.W. Bush… Ford… Johnson… no, no, no. That doesn't mean it can't happen. But taking the role of maintaining the legacy is pretty brutal. You inevitably pale in the glow of the legendary success of a former reformer.

But maybe Bob Iger will emerge as a big thinker. Maybe he really has a vision for the future that Michael Eisner hasn't seen. Of course, even if he does, he has another problem… no one is anticipating real change under Iger. And as such, he does not have the mandate of his company's rank & file for change. In the idea of real change, there is hope and fear. People are scared to death at Paramount, but they are also hopeful that Freston (and Grey) will make changes that make the lives of those who survive any eventual purge much better. It will be much harder for Iger to make change without hearing (figuratively), "But Michael did it this way…" than it was for Eisner to get past "But Walt did it this way…" since Disney is in a much better position and is much more stable now than it was when Eisner came onboard.

The whole thing reminds me of a chess game (at least, a movie chess game) where the players are so sophisticated that they know who will win after three or four moves. When Iger's name first came up, I choked on the idea. But I was dead wrong. And just a few chess moves later - more than five months ago - anyone paying attention knew who was 95% likely to win. And Eisner just made that 100% by shortening the game by a year.

Checkmate.

I wish Mr. Iger the best... for the sake of himself, Disney, the entertainment industry, and ultimately, with Disney's massive cultural influence, all of us. Hating corporate giants won't make them go away, so hopefulness is the best option, it seems to me.

-E-Mail David Poland