Letter to Head of Original Content Development, Netflix

Greetings, Ms. Wolarsky,

Allow me to introduce myself. I am a loyal Netflix subscriber and have been for many years. My partner Patricia used to work as a Sales manager for Pitney Bowes in the Bay Area in the late 1990s; she fondly remembers one of her early customers called Netflix, based in a small location in Los Gatos, that needed shipping equipment to send DVD envelopes to customers. When she told me about it at that time, I remember thinking, “Geez, that seems wildly inefficient; what if we could watch movies over the internet?” And indeed here we are some 20 years later! I have come to thoroughly enjoy Netflix and its eclectic offerings; from the documentaries to the sleeper movies to the BBC series to the Netflix originals.

The purpose of my email, however, is to register a complaint and express my dissatisfaction regarding the decision to cancel the Netflix original series “Gypsy.” I understand that as an original content provider, you’ve got to make tough choices regarding where to invest. But in my mind, it’s a poor business decision to commit to a series and then pull the plug after only one season. It has alienated your loyal subscribers who truly found the series to be a compelling work with thematic and artistic merit. It seems amateurish for a streaming platform to cut the cord when clearly the narrative arc had not been allowed to evolve. I can't imagine any other platform, cable channel or network behaving with such disrespect towards its own properties.

I imagine that the decision makers were swayed by the negative reviews; but let me assure you that there is a broad and growing fan base of Gypsy that might surprise you. And, not all the reviews were poor; EW, an influential entertainment site, rated it a "B+".

http://ew.com/tv/2017/06/23/naomi-watts-makes-gypsy-a-captivating-riddle-ew-review/

I can only imagine the devastation that Lisa Rubin and the cast & crew experienced with the cancellation.  It seems questionable to me that many other fledgling series were greenlit for additional seasons (for example, “Friends from College,” an abysmally boring show), and yet Gypsy was yanked after only one. Often, artistic vision takes time to evolve and unfold gradually. I would strongly argue that the themes of Gypsy are contemporary and compelling and warrant further exploration. I say this especially as a woman and as a member of the LGBTQ community; we need to explore these ideas through our artistic expressions as an aspect of our culture and our shared humanity.

I am quite sure that there are many factors that must be considered when renewing a series for another season (factors that I can’t imagine). I would exhort you to strongly consider these factors within the context of a business decision. Yes, there is risk in greenlighting Gypsy for further development; but I can assure you that there also is upside. As an original content provider, I’m sure you are obsessed with the content funnel. Why dismiss Gypsy? Why not see it as a fledgling property that could be resuscitated with some competent script doctors? I believe strongly that the raw material for a compelling season 2 exists for Gypsy, and that it just needs an investment from the platform that launched it. Consider it a challenge to knock the critics on their respective asses by renewing Gypsy, investing it, and also promoting it. If Netflix has business executives like other aggressive leaders in the business community, you thrive on a challenge and are not likely to shrink from long odds.

Please, to those of you in charge of original content development: consider your loyal subscriber base. It's more than just an analytics game. If the viewership numbers of Gypsy were low, I think Netflix ought to take ownership of that issue and ask why. Where was the promotional campaign for Gypsy? It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; if a show isn't promoted, the buzz among subscribers hasn't a chance to build or flourish.

And just as importantly, consider the careers of the creators and cast, knowing that many of these people are the fledgling talent that may someday fill your pipeline for future material. As a provider of original content, please don’t dismiss the talent at your disposal. Instead, offer young talent a platform for growth and evolution, all for the ultimate goal of broadening and deepening your original content portfolio. It seems frightfully disrespectful of a young talent such as Lisa Rubin to just dismiss outright her creative expression. Is there misogyny at foot here? Is there exploitation of her lack of power as a fledgling artist? Did she stand her ground and refuse to suck someone's dick on the casting couch for a season 2 greenlight? It's rather disturbing to ponder and it's truly upsetting.

Don't disregard the original content at your disposal. Otherwise, other platforms might pick it up. I'm imagining HBO could pick it up as an expansion to "Big Little Lies"; Sid and Jean move to Monterey. Jean becomes the new resident therapist in Monterey .... Dolly is enrolled at the local public school ... Sid becomes the other "cool" mom, volunteering at her school to teach music .... the possibilities are endless for creative expansion of this raw material. But you've got to seize the opportunity. (Oh, also, Sophie Cookson is gonna have Hollywood by the balls in 5 years ... you'll be forever sorry if you neglect content that she starred in.)

Thank you for taking the time to read this email, Ms. Wolarsky; and thank you for considering my plea. I’m quite sure that you’ll hear from other loyal subscribers with the same exhortation.

Sincerely and respectfully,

Sarah Leritz-Higgins