Here's everything you need to know about the world of television for Tuesday, May 6th 2025:
PRODUCTION NOTES
My apologies for the lateness of the newsletter. I've been running down sources all evening for the main story and it took a lot longer than I expected.
Along those lines, I hope that if you find this story useful, you'll pass along the newsletter to other people. And while I don't spend a great deal of time hyping the paid subscriber option, if you'd like to support my work, here is a link to upgrade to a very reasonably priced monthly or annual subscription. Or if you would just like to "buy me a coffee," here is a link for that as well.
LIKE NEARLY EVERY PROPOSAL IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, THE PLAN TO 'SAVE HOLLYWOOD' HAS BECOME A BIT OF A DEATHMATCH
One of the hallmarks of the Trump Administration has been an often chaotic internal battle to reach consensus on what to do. There are the ideas that Trump unveils on his Truth Social account, competing with the often conflicting proposals from various interest groups, political factions, and think tanks. The various ideas often get rolled out in very public trial balloons, as each side hopes their proposal will be the one that receives the best response from the conservative press, and ultimately, President Trump.
That process has played out this week in the discussions over plans to "save Hollywood." It's not an idea that appeared to have been on the radar in the Trump Administration until last weekend when actor Jon Voight and his advisor Stephen Paul presented their plan to the President to "Make Hollywood Great Again," the details of which Deadline posted in full earlier today. That meeting apparently was the inspiration for Donald Trump's Truth Social post that warned the U.S. government would impose a tariff on foreign film productions.
But I've learned that presentation - as well as some earlier meetings about Hollywood - have prompted a behind-the-scenes scramble inside the Trump Administration, as officials struggle to come up with a workable counter-proposal that can give both the President and Voight a public win, while ignoring some of the ideas that more experienced Commerce Department officials described to me this evening as "monumentally unworkable."
One of the advantages of having worked at a lot of places over the years is that I have a fairly large network of former co-workers. And after yesterday's newsletter in which I wrote about the foreign production tariff proposal, I heard from a former coworker earlier today, who has worked for the Federal government on trade issues for a number of years. They wanted to push back against the proposal presented by Jon Voight, which they believed had some workable ideas, but was also flawed by attempts to use trade policy to achieve certain political aims. I was also connected with two other people who also were working on alternative ideas, and in a combination of off-the-record and conversations on background, I received a solid tutorial on what is and isn't possible under current trade laws.
The Voight proposal offers a carrot-and-stick approach to foreign productions. A 10%-20% federal tax credit would be "stackable" on what is currently available from various states. But if a production "could have been produced in the U.S., but the producer elects to produce in a foreign country and receives a production tax incentive therefor, a tariff will be placed on that production equal to 120% of the value of the foreign incentive received."
It was made very clear to me that the tariff idea was unworkable on a number of levels. The law that the Trump Administration is citing in order to roll out its various tariff proposals has a specific carve-out for items such as motion pictures, which would mean the White House would have to figure out a way to impose the tariffs under a different method. There are also existing deals with the World Trade Organization that at least in theory would prohibit the United States from imposing tariffs in this fashion.
Then there are just the logistical challenges in imposing such a tariff. The Voight plan seeks to create some guidelines for co-productions, but the consensus from the people I spoke with this evening is that it doesn't clear up the inherent unworkability of the tariff idea.
There was also a lot of concern that the way in which the proposal was structured was designed to use the power of the Federal government to shift more American production from Los Angeles and New York City to other states. The proposal is highly critical of current efforts in California to rework that state's production incentive plan. But it also suggests that some of the plan's incentives and tax breaks could be targeted to "states in the Heartland," in order to encourage production in those areas.
One of the biggest concerns I heard was that many of the points in the proposal seemed designed to help the profitability of the studios and large media companies, instead of the publicized effort to "save Hollywood."
"This proposal has several infrastructure tax breaks, incentive plans, and other ideas which won't directly boost production in the United States," one source explained to me this evening. "The proposal allows companies to be reimbursed for spending they will likely do anyway. And it would encourage studios to build new facilities outside California, where wages and the overall cost structure are more favorable to their bottom line. None of that will necessarily lead to increased production in the U.S."
A source described the public release of the details of the Voight plan as an effort to frame that proposal as the starting point and head off alternative plans that are currently being discussed inside the Administration.
One plan would swap out the unworkable tariff proposal for a plan that would include a minimum domestic production plan tied to domestic revenue for streamers, similar to ones currently imposed by several European countries. That plan could also be rolled into a fee that would be charged on streamers whose subscriber numbers reach a set number - for instance, 25 cents per subscriber for streamers with more than 10 million U.S. paid subscribers. That money could then be clawed back by the streamer to offset the costs of additional American productions. "It seems like an overly awkward idea," I was told. "But it essentially would provide an additional tax break for the streamers to spend money they likely would have spent anyway. It wouldn't necessarily increase production in the U.S. but it would slow the rate of offshoring and do it in a way that is politically viable domestically."
That political component was something that was brought up in several conversations I had with trade experts. The Voight plan would include a substantial increase in tax credits, production rebates, and other revenue offsets which would end up being in the range of hundreds of millions of dollars initially. "I don't think there is a lot of stomach among conservative politicians right now to provide tax breaks to Hollywood," one critic explained.
Another criticism was that while the production credits would help with the cost differences between production in the U.S. vs. other parts of the globe, increasing the cost of foreign production would just mean that overall, less production would take place.
"Every one of these companies has an annual budget for producing content," I was reminded. "If we make foreign production more expensive, that would mean there is less overall money for other productions. It is the exact opposite of free trade and would reinforce bad domestic cost structures."
A primary target of the Voight proposal appeared to be Canadian production, which under the proposal would likely be considered productions that "could have been produced in the United States." While the intent seems to be to bring back much of that production to the U.S., the net effect (especially if combined with that strange "bring back Fin/Syn plan") would simply encourage large media companies to create foreign production subsidiaries, who would then license the titles back to the broadcaster or streamer, thereby getting around the intent of the proposal.
One person I spoke with who has direct knowledge of the tariff discussions inside the White House told me late tonight that the Voight plan read like a "fever dream for establishment Hollywood." But that the Trump Administration was unlikely to be interested in making moves that would strengthen the current Hollywood regimes and studios. Or in waging war against the major streaming companies, whom many in the Trump White House see as more friendly than the big Hollywood studios and agencies.
"Whatever decisions that are made are going to come at a cost," they explained. "Every production credit, every seemingly favorable idea is going to come tied to other asks. More conservative content, more production outside the Hollywood bubble. I know a lot of people in Hollywood probably see this proposal as a life preserver. But it's a really an effort to gain control under the guise of helping Hollywood."
IT'S TIME FOR A ROAD TRIP
Apparently Hartsville, South Carolina is the location of the last remaining Yogi Bear Honey Fried Chicken restaurant:
In the 1960s, a restaurateur from Columbia, South Carolina, developed a method for infusing a honey flavor into fried chicken. Celebrity restaurants were all the rage at the time and the inventor, Gene Broome, began to seek a celebrity endorsement for his honey-flavored chicken restaurant. He was reportedly turned down by Jackie Gleason, among others, before settling on the cartoon character Yogi Bear (and presumably coming to some arrangement with Yogi Bear owners Hanna-Barbera for the naming rights).
The new restaurant’s theme included a roadside neon sign representing a big, smiling Yogi Bear holding a chicken leg. Customers could choose between two-piece Boo-Boo Baskets, three-piece Cindy Bear Baskets, nine-piece Picnic Baskets (or “pic-a-nic,” as Yogi would pronounce it), or 21-piece Jellystone Baskets, along with sides and desserts. The store’s original location in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, was a huge hit. Additional locations began to open across the Carolinas. Yogi Bear Honey Fried Chicken seemed poised to become a regional, if not a national, brand.
The chain was later sold off to Hardees and while the existing restaurants remained, no new locations were allowed to open. Leaving this one last, glorious restaurant that I must visit.
ODDS AND SODS
* I learned today that I am now a member of the National Press Club, which would have made my C-Span loving mom very proud.
* The "documentary" TMZ Investigates: What Happened to Justin Bieber? will premiere Wednesday, May 14th on Fox.
* Apple TV+ has renewed The Studio for a second season.
* The fourth and final season of Acapulco will premiere Wednesday, July 23rd on Apple TV+. The series finale will premiere Wednesday, September 17th.
* Season seven of Love Island USA will premiere Tuesday, June 3rd on Peacock.
WHAT'S NEW TONIGHT AND TOMORROW
TUESDAY, MAY 6TH:
Bollywed (Fuse)
David Spade: Dandelion (Prime Video)
Frontline: Antidote (PBS)
Murder Has Two Faces (Hulu)
Parent Wars Series Premiere (A&E)
The Devil's Plan Season Two Premiere (Netflix)
Untold: Shooting Guards (Netflix)
WEDNESDAY, MAY 7TH:
Full Speed Season Two Premiere (Netflix)
House Of Payne Season Thirteen Finale (BET)
Kun by Agüero (Hulu)
Last Bullet (Netflix)
Nature: Hummingbirds Of Hollywood Season Finale (PBS)
Sullivan's Crossing Season Premiere (The CW)
SEE YOU ON WEDNESDAY!