gunningforabasementoffice:

For the first part of your message, the brilliantly summarised post I just reblogged from @justholdinghandsok will answer your question.

Now for the rest my answer. I had three anons by tonight, so I’ll cover everything in one post. And it’s a long-ass one.

Cross-promotion and cross-representation is common. There are also subtle differences. Cross-promotion is actually promoting something, whether by presence, endorsement, or directed conversation. Cross-representation doesn’t necessarily involve outright promo, although it can. Cross-rep refers to big-name stars attached to networks or studios, attending events to represent the aforementioned studio or network, even when the event they’re attending may not have anything to do with their own show. This is also common. It provides not only networking opportunities for the actors, but it also fulfills the need to cross-rep for the studio (or cross-promo, if it’s included).

These things are NOT decided on at the last moment. They’re planned far ahead. So although a studio may not know if their production will receive nominations, they WILL know if they’re going to be campaigning for one, and the contracts are worded appropriately to cover this. Actors have all these things spelled out very carefully. I’ve seen people insisting this isn’t true and that no studio includes such things in their contracts. On the contrary, they definitely do. Anything they can use to their benefit will be taken advantage of. Always.

Whereas a fan is only looking at the disparities between shows when cross-promo or cross-rep is involved, that isn’t how studio execs approach it. They have entire teams responsible for drawing up reports that include demographic analysis, target audiences and markets, main assocations (alignment), public popularity and potential benefit. The only things they’re looking at is how to maximize exposure for the studio and the productions, increase benefit to themselves and create buzz. They don’t care if they’re teaming up a reality show and a docudrama, or a drama and a comedy. To them, it doesn’t matter. Profile of the actors, popularity of the productions, and potential gains are what they care about. It’s standard business and marketing strategy.

I’m not saying that cross-promotion is the only answer with Gillian and PM. But I am saying that it’s definitely a possibility and that IF that’s what it is (in addition to a number of other possible options), then it doesn’t matter at all that one is a drama about serial killers and the other is about the royal family. The profile, voice and fanbase Gillian carries, as well as the push Netflix is making into many North American markets (as well as others, I’m sure) gives them an automatic avenue to easy promotions, new fans for more than just one show, new subscribers (something Netflix is ruthless about), and increased positive buzz. Their marketing departments are looking not at whether or not something “needs” promo, because if a production needs a boost, it’s likely struggling. They’re looking at pairing popularity and strength and then maximizing it. The more prominent an actor within demographic circles that the studio is targeting, the more certain that they will take advantage of it.

Why wasn’t PM promoting The Fall or Jamie Dornan promoting The Crown? Their profile and recognizance isn’t even close to what Gillian carries. Why would any studio choose to use sterling silver instead of the huge diamond they’ve got? There’s likely more to it than that with internal analysis, but that’s a simplistic answer.

What fans think a production needs or wants or what makes sense in relation to it, is not how studios approach it and not how promotions and representations are treated.

And since I’m answering multiple anons with this post, I’ll add one more thing. I saw some gifs on my dash today of Gillian with Darren. She looked at him with the same warmth and love she looks at David with. Yet, we saw none of that where she was with PM. I’m not going to argue opposing perceptions, I just want to point out that we’ve seen Gillian radiant and happy around people, including some she’s just met. Her interaction with PM was unusually cold and awkward. That had nothing to do with wanting to be private, because you can still be private and not look like you’re bored/unhappy/emotionally cold/stiff. Just appearing with someone or sitting with someone has nothing to do with being in a relationship with them, but especially when all the appearances lack any personal feel at all and instead carry a heavy business and professional tone. (Personally supporting someone close to you should carry a much different feel. See David, see Darren, see Piper appearing at the Oliviers with her mom.) Depending on what industry you’re in, you may have that around you, because it exists.

These are facts. I’m sorry that people are being lead to believe none of this exists, or none of what @justholdinghandsok posted as examples exist. May I suggest more critical thinking, more logic and significantly less David hate as solutions.