Fox parent cancels O.J. Simpson interview, book — Where’s the Money?

Published on November 20th, 2006

MercuryNews.com | 11/20/2006 | Fox parent cancels O.J. Simpson interview, book –As far as I’m concerned it should have never come to this. Meanwhile what happened to the $3.5 million advance? Once these deals are signed and the deal is canceled by the publisher on a whim the author gets the money. So OJ apparently doesn’t have to do anything to make out on the deal. Cripes.

Battered by a storm of protest and criticism, News Corp. — the parent company of the Fox television network — has decided to pull the plug on “If I Did It, a two-part interview with O.J. Simpson that had been scheduled for next week.

In addition, the company said it was canceling publication of a Simpson-authored book with the same title that was to be released Nov. 30 by ReganBooks, a subsidiary of News Corp.

“I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project, said Rupert Murdoch, News Corp. chairman, in a statement released today. “We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson.

29 users responded in " Fox parent cancels O.J. Simpson interview, book — Where’s the Money? "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Zuke said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:05 pm

Wow. That only took a couple of days…

I’m kind of torn between the fact that I do believe in my heart (after watching God knows how many hours of CourtTV) that he is guilty, but what about his First Amendment rights? He was acquitted after all, and the prosecution didn’t go after him a second time (no new evidence?).

The ACLU defends people who publish books and websites describing how to build a nuclear bomb, how to become a hitman and kill people, graphically sexual “art”, etc. so… why don’t they defend O.J. rights?

# 2 dave said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:07 pm

#1 because he did not just write about it…..he did it.

# 3 William K. Wolfrum said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:09 pm

“why don’t they defend O.J. rights?”

What are you talking about? This is just the free market at work.

What, do you think Fox is part of the governme …

Wait, you may have a point after all.

–WKW

# 4 John C Dvorak said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:09 pm

He has no right regarding having a book published by a third party. He has no right to be on a TV show. Where are these rights? Did I miss a memo?

Seriously, where are these rights that are being violated?

# 5 BryanP said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:12 pm

His first amendment rights have not been violated. The company that was planning to publish his book and air his special have made the business decision that doing so would be a horrible PR move. Unless his signed contract for the advance says otherwise he can freely publish the book through some other outlet. He can even self-publish if he wishes to do so.

If the govt. stepped in and said “You will not publish / air this”, then he would have a legitimate complaint.

# 6 Anonymous said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:26 pm

I was on the TV crew that shot the OJ Special… Trust me, he said little of interest anyway and definitely did not implicate himself.

# 7 Billabong said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:37 pm

Fox can’t have it both ways.They consider themselves the “moral”news network and use their entertainment division to appeal to the worst in us. Hey guys if it looks like it and smells like it it’s shit.

# 8 RBG said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:40 pm

It’s called a “pay or play” deal. Absolutely typical in Hollywoodland. The actor gets the dough even if the production never gets off the ground.

So now there are these finished TV and book works. How to make a buck off them even in this climate? Will Murdock sell all the rights away to Sleeze-R-Us and wash his hands of the issue? Or will he just eat the whole project? (You can now thank me for some reply fodder.)

I know there have been advanced sales on the book, have any of them actually been delivered?

Can there be any doubt that one way or another these items will make it to the internet?

I wonder if Simpson could have pulled this off by simple use of a less inflammatory title (like “My Life”); or removing that one especially offending chapter; or calling it “How Some Crazy People Think I Should Have Done It.” The sad fact being, he would have had an audience even if he’d written a book about 25 ways to serve potatoes.

RBG

# 9 SN said, on November 20th, 2006 at 2:50 pm

#1 “and the prosecution didn’t go after him a second time (no new evidence”

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by this. The US Constitution forbids double jeopardy. In other words, once you’re found not guilty, you can never be charged on the same or the same underlying charge again by the same governmental agency. And unlike in Europe or Canada, when a defendant wins at trial, the prosecutor does not get an appeal of the conviction.

From the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: “nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”

# 10 lakelady said, on November 20th, 2006 at 3:03 pm

if the 3.5 mil does have to still go to OJ then maybe the Goldmans and the Brown can finally get the civil settlement that was awarded to them years and years ago. I’m sure their lawyers will go after it like sharks on chum.

# 11 sdf said, on November 20th, 2006 at 3:06 pm

Jeebus, I guess this is the “see if you can get away with asking for forgiveness later” corporate mentality.

# 12 tallwookie said, on November 20th, 2006 at 3:28 pm

awwwww… and i was so hoping to see it – what wrong with this… OJ was declared innocent, get over it already. jebus

# 13 joe said, on November 20th, 2006 at 3:47 pm

can someone get the book. Suposedly its been shipped out already to a few retailers. If someone gets the book, Find a way of putting it on the internet as a download PDF.

I WANT TO SEE WHAT THE SLIMEBALL HAS TO SAY so that People that were involved with the case can rip him a new one & steal all potential revenues from the Book seller + Fox

# 14 RBG said, on November 20th, 2006 at 3:50 pm

Let’s see. We’re supposed to acquiesce to the spirit of a trial finding OJ innocent because it is the right thing to do. But OJ can avoid the spirit and consequences of his lost civil trial by merely making the check payable to his children.

You see, 10. That’s why lawyers will never be able to touch that dough. I know of a serial child-killer who successfully gave up the locations of bodies… in exchange for $ to his family. BTW, he too continues to irritate everyone with his pathological need for publicity. Another reason for the death penalty.

RBG

# 15 rctaylor said, on November 20th, 2006 at 3:57 pm

I can guarantee this advance was sheltered so none of it could be attached by previous judgments. It would be pointless to accept it otherwise. Only in LA could you be allowed to sit enough nut jobs on a jury to acquit this SOB.

# 16 MisterRustic said, on November 20th, 2006 at 3:59 pm

OJ causes Global Warming.

# 17 John Henri Allyn said, on November 20th, 2006 at 5:03 pm

Congratulations O.J, we the American people have a message for you and your psycho bitch Judith Reagan…….

Go home and die.

# 18 John Henri Allyn said, on November 20th, 2006 at 5:11 pm

Quick Ascii get in here and rant and rave about how everything is tainted and make massive generalizations and offer no support for your statements!

Bwahahahaha

# 19 Mr. Fusion said, on November 20th, 2006 at 5:30 pm

#18,
I have tangled with Ascii several times from the other side. His opinions are always thought out and rational even if I don’t agree. Then, looking at your posts I don’t ever recall any post with thought behind it. You’re ranting,
…a message for you and your psycho bitch Judith Reagan……. shows the level of intelligence you bring to the debate.

#14, RBG,
BTW, There is no finding of “innocence” in a criminal trial. You are either guilty or not guilty. Being not guilty, while implying innocence, is not absolute and really means there was not enough evidence to convict. As many here think, OJ might be not guilty, but they don’t believe he is innocent.

# 20 RBG said, on November 20th, 2006 at 5:44 pm

19. I stand corrected.

We’re supposed to acquiesce to the spirit of a trial finding OJ not guilty because it is the right thing to do.

RBG

# 21 John Henri Allyn said, on November 20th, 2006 at 5:45 pm

Check the last o.j blog post and say that again 19. I don’t particularly care about stirring your memory nor your mental acumen assessment.

If he can rant and rave a few times so can I .

I do apologize for the personal nature of the post though Ascii, just wish you would think the whole “Everything was tained and he was framed” argument.

# 22 kballweg said, on November 20th, 2006 at 6:43 pm

All this pontificating aside, I still wonder what his kids think of all this. Seriously.

# 23 Gregory said, on November 20th, 2006 at 6:58 pm

The US Constitution forbids double jeopardy. In other words, once you’re found not guilty, you can never be charged on the same or the same underlying charge again by the same governmental agency.

Actually that’s wrong, and a common misconception. You can be tried again if there is new evidence to support the accusation.

However it better be some damn good evidence, because otherwise the case will be dismissed damn quick.

# 24 Mr. Fusion said, on November 20th, 2006 at 8:03 pm

#23, you are correct that a new trial may be granted or that you may be tried more then once for the same crime. Not as you outlined though. In the US, once you have been found Not Guilty of a crime, you may not be tried again of an offense under the same circumstance with the same evidence. There are two exceptions though. For example, if you are found not guilty of shooting your neighbor, then you can’t be later charged with discharging the gun if the evidence was used in the first trial.

First, if the first trial was tainted then a new trial may be granted. That means if a juror was convinced to vote a certain way or a Judge was bribed, there would be a mistrial. Of if evidence or testimony was obviously perjured then it could also mean a new trial.

Second is the difference between the Federal and state courts. For example, there were cases during the Civil Rights days where offenders were let off in state courts but later found guilty in Federal courts on the same evidence. The reverse is also possible.

# 25 John Henri Allyn said, on November 20th, 2006 at 8:24 pm

Here is the legal definition in case Fusion confused ya

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d075.htm

# 26 ChrisMac said, on November 20th, 2006 at 8:34 pm

All I got (and still get) from this whole OJ thing is..

What happens in Cali is none of my business….
Florida too

# 27 @$tr0Gh0$t said, on November 21st, 2006 at 2:09 am

I wonder if a network like Al-Jazeera would air something like this.

# 28 James Hill said, on November 21st, 2006 at 12:24 pm

Pretty neat trick how Fox News gets all sort of good non-partisan press during sweeps by standing up to this and all Fox did was not air one show.

Good thing the liberals didn’t notice, too.

# 29 daddy said, on November 23rd, 2006 at 5:42 am

Speaking hypothetically of course, somebody needs to take action on this mother fucker. Where are the extremists when we actually need one. This mother fucker is making a fuckin’ mockery of our legal system. One of the fundamental aspects of our society. He’s a fuckin’ killer, everybody knows it, and he’s walking around free. If that’s not enough, now he’s shovin’ that shit into the faces of the victim’s families and the rest of the nation.

It is damn well time a vigilante steps up and takes care of this shit. All we need is one good crazy mother fuckin ex-marine style mother fucker.

In my opinion the best way to hypothetically do it would be public execution style assassination. Find out where this fucker plays golf. Find a clear line of site to one of the driving areas. Wait for him to tee up. And take his fuck ass out with a high powered sniper rifle. It will take the police at least twenty minutes to figure what direction the shot came from. And that’s if our ex-marine isn’t using a silencer. Plenty of time to escape.

And as far as prosecution goes. I think the entire country has a motive for killing his ass right now. So if he got out of killing two people when he was basically caught red handed, I think our man could get off as well, if he’s caught.

I am hypothetically begging for someone to stand up and take action on this man. I think it would be a patriotic act. Don’t let this man continue to mock our society so openly.

I’d stand up and do it myself, but I have neither the proper training nor the nerve for this sort of job. But someone out there does.

And I hypothetically hope that someone does.

Daddy

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!