Criterion & Eclipse in the Press

[hearthesilence]

One defense for that article is that it was in the works for quite a long time, which is possible for feature articles, especially the New York Times. But even if that were true, they should update it accordingly, and by the time that article hit publication, they completely ignored any indication that the correction they were calling for was already implemented and that the first results were about to be released. That's what made it seem like a hit piece - the general point was already valid, but it really felt like they went out of their way to shame Criterion in unforgiving fashion. Far from the first time they've done something like that, but it doesn't make it any less mendacious.

[tenia]

Despite what I think/thought about the chronology, the article did feel like a pure hitpiece to me, in particular where it seems very disingenuous with how rightholdings work and pretty much ask for movies to be released by Criterion despite them being already released by others.

[furbicide]

My hot take is Criterion were already in pre-production on that "blind spot" and the article was a plant. It was a way for Criterion to get pub to a market group who didn't know who Criterion was and they were ready to fill it. The timing was a coincidence that worked to Criterion's benefit, which it did. It's not uncommon for companies and businesses to plant some stories about themselves to take advantage and widen their market share

It's an interesting theory but I'm not sure it makes sense from a PR perspective – the piece made Criterion seem like a dinosaur company that had been failing to confront unconscious biases. That in turn ensured that the course-correction that followed would be seen as atoning and playing catch-up than leading, when of course leading and shaping the discourse is how a company like Criterion would prefer to be perceived (and as it's mostly represented in the new piece).

Perhaps I don't know enough about the machinations of the marketing world; after all, slogans like this exist. But in this case I suspect the most obvious explanation is the correct one: Criterion got a kick up the arse from The New York Times and decided to fast-track some releases to diversify their output.