Reporter Who Reviewed Leaked Wolverine Flick Gets Cut

LOS ANGELES - Fox News columnist Roger Friedman is out after posting a review of a leaked full-length work print of " X-Men Origins: Wolverine ." Fox News said Monday that the company's representatives and Friedman "mutually agreed to part ways immediately."

Friedman had been an entertainment writer who has contributed to FoxNews.com for 10 years. He wrote in his Fox 411 column Thursday that downloading the 20th Century Fox superhero prequel was "so much easier than going out in the rain" and that the movie "exceeds expectations at every turn."

The early review of the film, which 20th Century Fox described as a "stolen, incomplete and early version," was later removed from the Web site Friday. Fox News and 20th Century Fox are both units of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.

____________________________



Read the rest here. I'd heard from a friend that as soon as the leak hit the web, the FBI got involved, and this was several days ago. Shouldn't they be doing other things, though, like cracking down on drugs and finding Bin Laden? I digress. I suppose it's this reporter's own fault. And while I'm not sure if his severe lapse in judgment to download a movie produced by his employer ILLEGALLY merits being discredited as a journalist, he does deserve to lose his job. It's strange tho, the double standard between the movie and music industries collectively. In music, it's great to have positive reviews before the product launches, and that it's considered an honor to be even granted permission to hear anything.

The film business, as I'm coming to understand, operates differently. They market differently and they seem to protect their projects and contacts a little more fiercely. But are the two really that different? Both are creative industries and involve sensitive, ego-maniacs in control (or out of control, depending on who you talk to). Was it Roger Friedman's ego that got the best of him in this case or was it the suits not wanting to look bad? I'm sure the controversy will only help stoke interest in the movie, which, even before the leak and the review, have been generating very positive buzz. But why did this guy get crucified for doing what music bloggers do every day?

My guess is it comes down to money. The film business isn't bleeding cash as quickly as the music suits and they are still operating on a very old-school, good-ol boy system. It's almost elitist. Blogs, however, have been stealing and reviewing/posting music early for years online and it's allowed the bottom to drop out of those big, impressive Universal, Sony, Warner and EMI offices without looking back. Hollywood is concerned, but maybe their guarded-ness has prevented the Internet from taking control of their pockets. So far.

I'd be interested to talk with someone on the subject and how they've managed to stave off the cultural evolution of wanting everything now. Perhaps a scene-by-scene download doesn't make for good entertainment as much as a song would. Psychology be damned.