Hello, I just wanted to gauge opinion on a minor controversy that's circulating around the committee of my society.

Our local newspaper reviewer always asks for two tickets for free. This year we offered to give him/her just the one ticket, as we thought "we're a cash-strapped society, the friend can jolly well pay". Now he/she is threatening not to come and review the show at all.

He/she apparently always needs another person to discuss the show with. And when I asked why, said reviewer's friend in the company said "because it's always been the case."

Now, we really need all the ticket revenue we can get, so the extra bit of cash from the reviewer's friend would have been helpful.

I can't think of another newspaper, local, reginal, or national, that needs two tickets for someone to review a show (unless you count the occasional times they take the rest of their family to see a show, but that generally is for shows that need a good critical response to improve tickets sales - in our case, the review will come out between one and three weeks after the show finishes anyway).

Does anyone else involved with any other society know of any similar kind of arrangement, where the local reviewer always needs more than one ticket?

Sorry I don't have an actual official answer, but what a cheeky bastard! You don't have to even give the reviewer *one* ticket for free if you don't want to, and they're being uppity and demanding two? Cheek! Have you phoned the newspaper and spoken to the reviewer's supervisor? At the very least, the supervisor should be able to tell you if two tickets is how it should be, or if the reviewer is really overstepping boundaries by demanding more than has been offered.

As someone who has a background in journalism I have to say that that sounds like a fairly obvious misuse of the privileges of the press, and I would suggest that you consider the action suggested by Weez. One ticket for a reviewer is fine, but to demand rather than ask kindly for a second ticket is just not on. Complain to his/her editor, and I can guarantee you that the editor will also find this outrageous, and will most probably not only take the reviewer to task but also apologise to you for his/her behaviour. However, if this person then ends up reviewing your production you then run the risk of retaliation by way of a bad review, which isn't very professional, but then a true professional would never make a demand of an extra ticket for his/her companion.

I've only heard of a reviewer asking (...not demanding) two "tickets" for restaurant reviews. Which makes some sort of sense, if the reviewer wants to taste more than one dish. But for a show? Not.

Perhaps worth dialing around to other local newspapers / magazines and asking if "that's always been the case"? And second Jenny Tyr's suggestion below, to ring the editor. If the show is strapped for cash, it's difficult to see how an editor could object.

(If not - sure you could find someone on this board who is not "reviewing" and can discuss with the reviewer!)

Hmm... thanks for the responses.

It is a trickier situation than may have come across in my first post, as the reviewer is a very good friend of the member of the cast in question, and has been a tireless supporter of amateur theatre in particular for a long time around here. I'm sure he/she must mainly write for the newspaper in a volunteer kind of way. There are other reasons for treading softly too.

I think we've agreed that there are bigger budgetary fish than this. I just hope we can remind the friend of the value of the extra ticket, and they may consider donating some of the cost of it to the society, or to the charities we are trying to support.

It's just the way that the member of the cast in question grabbed me after the rehearsal - for the second time, moaning about things - after a lot of other things that have worried me (not least the budget for my planned Edinburgh 2009 show being frozen in Icesave). "Well, a lot of people have been members of the committee in the past and feel they've done their time," said the cast member when I suggested that people should do a bit more helping than criticising.

But, cheers, it's been cathartic to spill some of my amdram committee worries online. Now to sell some tickets!

Yes this is a tricky problem. The press are invited to a production in order to review/advertise it, and lets face it amateur productions need all the publicity they can get. Ticket sales for amateur shows are dire at the moment for obvious reasons.

However, in my experience the local press are not that interested in amateur shows as they do not spend the advertising revenue that say film distributors spend. The review invariably does not appear in the paper until the following week by which time the show has finished and therefore is only of interest to the cast to find out if they have a "good review" and is useless for publicity purposes. The quality of the review is usually poor as it may be written by someone who has little idea of what makes a good show anyway.

BUT although the press may be entitled to only one free ticket I would have thought that not to supply two is a bit mean spirited of the society. Unless your shows are sell outs (in which case you do not need a review anyway) you are not losing revenue by giving away another comp. The last thing you can afford to do is upset the press and the reviewer as they will have retribution on the society through the review which may be less than kind.

The reason I would never serve on a committee is that the time I suspect this matter was debated - about one say £20 seat - when it would otherwise have been empty anyway would have sent me reaching for the gin bottle!!

Having been involved in theatre for a long time...my guess is from watching 'reviewers' the second person is to help the alcohol fuelled reviewer home safely!

I hasten to add that's not the case here!

It's a problem. I work in the box office of a major London arts venue (I shan't say which) and the press always get two tickets for press night. Their reviews often directly translate into sales, and generally come out the next day, and the run goes on for three or four months, or even longer, so the extra ticket gets paid for eventually. I was in the production Michael H was talking about, and the review doesn't even come out until after the show has closed, so it was hardly advertising. The show was cash-strapped as it was without giving free tickets out to people who aren't contributing in any way to the financial health of the production.

I am a critic for a national newspaper and I've always found it strange that they offer an extra ticket. For over five years I have always refused to accept the extra ticket as I feel it takes a seat away from someone who is paying - but at every event I am offered it.

Only recently have I accepted the extra ticket for the last two productions I saw and I found the presence of having someone with me to be very distracting and have decided to go back to my original plan of just attending myself.

I have always seen these extra tickets as perks. If a reviewer/critic needs to discuss what they are watching with a friend then I would question the ability of that reviewer/critic. But like I've said, they are always offered by the press agencies.

When I work as a reviewer/critic for a local newspaper many years ago we (the newspaper) would always pay for any extra tickets.

A free way of gaining publicity in the local press is for members of the audience on opening night to write to the Letters page of the newpaper - most of them have this section. And if the newspaper only comes out once a week then get some people along to one of the final rehearsals and have them to write someone about how good the rehearsal is.

There is no need to give out extra tickets but it is industry standard. Maybe you can suggest to the Editor of the newspaper that they run an article about how local theatre is staged for the love of it and how little is actually made on every production. When I was in amateur theatre every show only made enought to pay for its staging.

From one reviewer/critic to another tell him to s*d off!

PS. Message to the original poster - what was the outcome?

I think the main line here is the fact that the review doesn't come out until a few weeks after the show ends - therefore having no effect on the sales of tickets.

So do you really need the review or reviewer at all?
Surely the whole purpose of a review is to inform a potential ticket buyer about the standard and type of show.

This delay could be a very good reason to stop handing out the freebies and if the reporter is such a good friend of the cast member and supporter of the society he/she would understand.

I know how much difference the loss of two £20 seat can make to an amateur production budget!