E (2:24)

All of them.

A (2:26)

You mean like the one I took of you in your dressing room?

E (2:28)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. With the control top pantyhose. I'm just trying to look.

A (2:36)

I thought you looked great.

E (2:36)

Thank you, thank you. But they also leaked this one of me teaching you how to read. You're making such good progress, man.

D (2:46)

Many of the leaked documents weren't just good gossip. They were enlightening. The emails revealed a massive gender pay gap in Hollywood and demonstrated the way that racism informed the worldview of the top Sony producers and executives. So a decade later, how did the Sony hack change Hollywood? Brian Rafferty is a journalist, author, and now the host of a new podcast from the Ringer Hollywood Hack. The show is an in depth dive into the Sony hack and the immediate aftermath. You can find all episodes in the Big Picture podcast feed right now. Brian, welcome to the show.

A (3:19)

Thanks so much for having me. Allison.

D (3:20)

Now, you were supposed to interview James Franco and Seth Rogen for the interview way back when. What was your first hint that something had gone very wrong?

A (3:29)

Well, I was actually, I was working at Yahoo. Movies at the time and we had one of our reporters was going to interview them. And this was right around the time where things were getting very tense and there were a lot of threats to Sony employees. And we had a day where they were coming in. This is the same week as, I think around the time they'd done that SNL appearance. And we're supposed, they were supposed to come in in the afternoon. And from what I remember, we just kept getting these updates from the Sony publicists saying they're on their way, it's going to happen. They're in the car. And then we saw the news that day where basically a threat came in that, you know, there's a threat to attack theaters that played the interview. And that was kind of the last straw because I think the car turned around, the interview was canceled. And I just sort of watch in real time this incredibly strange kind of international incident just play out right in front of me.

D (4:13)

Why do you think this is a.

F (4:15)

Story we are revisiting on the 10th anniversary?

A (4:18)

I think there's two big reasons. One is that I truly feel like the early 2010s we've all kind of memory hold them. I mean, I think everything that happens before 2015 and 2016, they were incredibly monumental events. But based on everything that followed, I think we kind of forgot them. And I think it's interesting to revisit them. But I also feel as though this is this, you know, this whole release and the controversy over this movie. I think it had a big impact on how people perceived Hollywood, how people in the industry perceive themselves, and even on the kinds of movies we're getting now.

F (4:50)

All right, let's get in the Wayback Machine. Way back to 2014, everybody. Let's jump in. How would you describe the state of Hollywood in 2014?

A (4:58)

I would say, you know, it was fairly. It was running along pretty well. The streaming explosion hadn't quite taken over yet. I think it was still very much a thriving industry. And I think it was an industry that for many people such as myself, who covered Hollywood but also grew up kind of loving movies and tv. I think Hollywood still had this very, was one of the last industries in America to have this kind of aura and kind of glamour to it. Where, you know, it was, it had, you know, gone through a lot of scandals, but it could always get through them. And Hollywood's best product was always, you know, Hollywood itself, it had this very esteemed reputation and we all knew there were problems behind the scenes, but you know, they were always kind of glossed over in the end by the fact they're making all these great movies and shows.

D (5:38)

What was the reputation of Sony Pictures before the hack?

A (5:42)

I mean, it was one of the best studios of the early 21st century. And they made some really remarkable movies. They made the Social Network, they made Zero Dark Thirty. But they also had a really fantastic, diverse slate. You know, they did a lot of Adam Sandler movies, a lot of Will Smith films. But I think in the years right before the 2014 hack, they were starting to have some issues where they weren't a franchise studio. And at the time, you know, Marvel and Marvel and Disney were all kind of working to make this new model of Hollywood where, you know, everything had to be ip, everything had to be franchise. And Sony had made some attempts at that, but that's not kind of where their bread was buttered. So they were in a little bit of a strange place by the time this hack started in the fall of 2014.

D (6:24)

My guest is Brian. Let me get your last name right. Rafterry.

A (6:28)

Raftery.

D (6:29)

Raftery. I'm speaking with Brian Raftery, host of the new podcast Hollywood Hack from the Ringer. It's about the 2014 hack of Sony Pictures Entertainment by North Korea. All episodes are available now. For those who don't remember or never saw the movie, can you describe the plot of the interview?

A (6:46)

Yeah, I mean, it's basically, you know, it's James Franco and Seth Rogen who to Remember back in 2014, they were just the kings of comedy in Hollywood. They'd made a whole bunch of hits and they, they were kind of at a point in their career, especially Rogan where, you know, he had a deal with Sony and he pitched in this movie about two kind of American goofballs who are recruited by the American government to go and interview Kim Jong Un and then assassinate him on behalf of the American it. And that's what happens in the movie. I mean, this is a movie where a real life world leader basically has his head blown off. I don't want to spoil a 10 year old movie, but it. It goes there. It's a very provocative idea. It's very daring. It's very dangerous in kind of a fun way. And it sees its way all the way. Its execution literally goes all the way.

D (7:32)

Well, as you'll learn in the podcast, there's a lot of controversy around how his head gets blown off, so to speak. Let's talk about. Let's listen to the trailer a little bit. We can talk about it on the other side. This is bit of the trailer of the interview.

C (7:46)

Mr. Rappaport, I'm Agent Lacy with Central Intelligence. You two are going to be in a room alone with Kim, and the CIA would love it if you could take him out.

A (7:58)

Take him out for coffee, dinner for kimchi. No, take him out.

E (8:04)

You want us to kill the leader of North Korea?

C (8:06)

Yes.

D (8:07)

What? Oh, good lord.

F (8:10)

All right.

D (8:11)

You spoke with screenwriter Dan Sterling.

F (8:13)

What did he tell you about how they were considering national security implications of this film, if they were considering them at all.

A (8:22)

You know, they really weren't. I mean, to their credit, this was like a very bold idea. And it's the kind of idea that maybe everyone should have stopped for a week and said, hey, is this. How is this. What's the blowback going to be like for this? But they really weren't thinking of it in terms of we want to provoke an anger. You know, people in North Korea, they just kind of wanted to make a provocative kind of social, socially driven kind of comedy, I think, you know, you know, I think the model here was something like Dr. Strangelove. And, you know, I don't think there was a whole lot of hand wringing or going back and forth on whether they should even do this. And to the. To the point where, you know, they all decided eventually in the end to use Kim Jong Un's real name instead of using a fake dictator, which at one point was kind of being kicked around. So they committed to this idea. And I, and I don't think there was a lot of, you know, there weren't a lot of red flags being waved either within Sony or within the filmmaking crew itself.

F (9:15)

Let's talk about the morning of the hack. What do people see on their computers?

A (9:20)

Well, you know, Sony Pictures has a giant lot out in Culver City in Los Angeles with, you know, something like 3,000 plus employees. And so they drive in. This is a Monday before Thanksgiving, 2014. And many of them show up and there's this very weird, kind of, kind of cheesy looking skeleton with a warning on it telling them they've been hacked. And a lot of people first just sort of thought, oh, is this a joke? What is this? But very quickly that morning, people started having their computers confiscated. They were told to shut down. They were told not even, you know, don't even plug in your computer. And so there was this kind of whirl of confusion for the first 24 or 48 hours where no one could really access their Sony, work their servers there. And, and they had no idea what was going on.

F (10:01)

What kind of threats were the hackers making?

A (10:05)

The initial threats were a little vague. They were just sort of mentioning that they had this information that they were going to release, their secrets were going to be put out in the world. But no one really knew what that was. And it wasn't until almost a week later, even less than a week, that these leaks started coming out. First it was a couple of movies that had been pirated that were unreleased, that Sony was putting out in theaters soon. And then it became employee databases and records and health records. And then eventually, worst of all, in some ways was just tens of thousands of hundreds of thousands actually of Sony internal emails which were. Went back a couple years and were very expansive and very damaging.

F (10:43)

Oh, we'll get into the emails in a second. But when did it become a national security issue?

A (10:50)

You know, that's interesting. I think some people, especially in the government, sort of felt right away that North Korea may have been involved. North Korea did not. Like when the trailer for the interview which you were playing came out that summer, there was some official objections raised by North Korean government. And there, you know, there was a knowledge from some within the government that North Korea really had this cyber hacking capability ramped up. And people at Sony, some people didn't believe that. Some people first thought that maybe it was an inside job. There'd been some layoffs at Sony, but it's really only in sort of after a couple of weeks in, I think around mid December, when there's a confirmation from the government that they believe North Korea is involved. So on top of all this confusion of what's going to happen to my data, who's going to read my emails, what's happening to all my stuff, the Sony employees had to wonder, you know, are we actually being targeted by North Korea? There was just no knowns at that point.

D (11:42)

Well, why would you think North Korea would be that upset by this film, which is relatively stupid, that they would risk provoking a serious response from the United States?

A (11:53)

I mean, I think as much as we look at the movie as Kind of this goofy, you know, endeavor. It's, you know, it is a world leader being killed and that is by, you know, a Japanese owned studio, basically Japanese owned corporation. And you know, movies, Hollywood movies are still immensely powerful. You know, they go around the world. There's a very clear message when you put a movie with two very big movie stars that, you know, ends with a leader being, being his head being blown off, basically. I don't know how we would feel if someone did that about a very prominent US Leader too. I think if it was made by a foreign country, I don't think people would start hacking the studio that made it. But, you know, it was very brazen. And, you know, North Korea is a very mysterious regime and one that, you know, is still very unpredictable.

D (12:38)

I'm speaking with Brian Hope I get it right. Rafteri, host, the new podcast Hollywood Hack. Did I get it right?

A (12:44)

It's Raftery, but honestly, it's a weird Irish name. No one, I sweat. No one forget that Wrong. No worries.

D (12:49)

Ryan Raftery, host of the Hollywood Hack from the Ringer. We're Talking about the 2014 hack of Sony Pictures Entertainment by North Korea. I'll get it right by the end of the segment. All right, let's talk about the emails. At the time, Sony Movies division was run by Amy Pascal. Obviously, we know she's a very powerful producer, worked her way up to be chairperson of Sony Pictures Entertainment before the reputation. What made her so successful? What was her deal?

A (13:20)

You know, she's one of those increasingly rare kind of Hollywood leaders in that she absolutely genuinely loves movies, which you would think is kind of a given, but increasingly feels like it's perhaps not as valued as it was many years ago. And she was a phenomenal executive in a lot of ways. She had great relationships with actors like, you know, like Sandler and Will Smith, but also people like Nora Ephron. But she also really championed a kind of very, I hate the word tasteful because it sounds corny and boring. But she made, you know, a lot of these movies that Tony put out in the 2000s like Moneyball or the Social Network. These are movies that she helped champion. And those are, those are not easy movies to make. I mean, Zero Dark Thirty is still one of the most controversial movies the last 20 years. So she was known for really being well engaged with creative types, for speaking their language and for kind of fighting for the project she wanted. And she is one of the best known studio executives out here for the last 30 years, easily.

F (14:14)

Now, Amy Pascal and Sony Pictures Entertainment CEO Michael Linton. They really didn't share the same view of the studio. What made them a mismatch?

A (14:26)

I mean, I think in some ways they were a good match as long as everything was going well. I think they're different. Yeah, they're different personalities. Michael Linton is a kind of a classic, you know, business guy. He was a numbers guy and he was brought in and he even said to the press, I don't really know much about making movies. This is Amy's territory. So, you know, they were kind of like this very competent, two headed kind of machine that, you know, I don't know if they would have. When you read about them or listen them talk, you kind of can't imagine them taking a long vacation together and having much to talk about by day three or four. That wasn't work. But they're both, you know, incredibly accomplished and they managed to keep Sony really kind of chugging along for most of the last 15, their first sort of 10, 15 years together.

F (15:08)

Let's talk about the emails. They always say, whatever you don't want to see on the front page of the New York Times, don't write it down. People wrote stuff down in their emails. One of the big issues was pay inequity for both actors and other Sony employees. One of the biggest storylines involved American Hustle when it was revealed that Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence were paid a whole lot less than their male co stars, no matter how famous they were at the time. Do you see a connection between these emails and maybe the Time's up or the MeToo movement?

A (15:40)

I mean, I think it was very much kind of an early kind of rock that started rolling with these. I mean, I think one thing that's really telling is a couple months after the hack and after there were these kind of revelations that some of these actresses had gotten lesser deals than their male co stars. Patricia Arquette gave this very famous Oscar acceptance speech for boyhood in early 2015. It's the one where, if you've seen that gif of, you know, Meryl Streep and Oprah clapping, it was during this speech and she talked about pay in Equity. And I think it really highlighted for a lot of people in a lot of industries that wait a minute, if it's this unfair in Hollywood, which is, you know, a lot of very wealthy successful people, you know, if Jennifer Lawrence is fighting to get more back end points on a movie after, you know, at this point she was probably the biggest female star in the world. Maybe, you know, then you have to look at your own industry and your own work and looking at the inequities there, I do think that had a very big impact in what we saw in the next couple of years in terms of change. People demanding change from Hollywood and from other industries.

D (16:37)

Let's talk about what the difference was so people can understand the difference in pay.

A (16:43)

Yeah, I had to look at the. Actually don't have the exact numbers right in front of me, but it had to do with their back end compensation. And it was, you know, it was significantly less than a movie that had a lot of stars like Bradley Cooper. And I think also there were also other examples throughout the Sony hack of, you know, there were two film executives who were on, had the same title and the female executive was paid substantially less than the male executive. I mean, you have to remember all these salaries were leaked. They were put out there. So not only are people outside of Sony looking to see how much people make, people are also looking at their own co workers, their own colleagues, and saying, hey, wait a minute, why does so and so get this much when I get this, when I get that much? I mean, it was very, you know, kind of a combustible situation inside and outside the studio.

D (17:26)

Then there was the issue of race. What did the hack reveal about racism within Sony?

A (17:33)

You know, the biggest newsmaking element of the hack, aside from the Angelina Jolie quote you mentioned, was Scott Root and Amy Pascal had this exchange where they made jokes about what some of Obama's favorite movies might be. And all the movies they mentioned were, you know, Django Unchained or a Kevin Hart film. You know, the implication being that he only watches black films. And those emails, when those were released, I mean, Amy Pascal and Scott Rudin both apologized. Amy Pascal went and met with Al Sharpton in New York. But it was. There was really no way to recover from that. I mean, there's no way to spin that. It was incredibly embarrassing for the executives. And it was one of those things too, where, you know, I talked to a lot of people inside Sony for the podcast. A lot of them, you know, some of them on background. And these are people who really respected Pascal and, and they were very disappointed by what they'd seen there. You know, this. The leader of this big company. Right.

D (18:26)

What do the emails reveal about how a major studio decide what gets made and what doesn't?

A (18:34)

Well, I mean, one of the most fascinating things about the hack, and this is stuff that if you really want to drill down and get totally in the rabbit hole, there are so many Emails back and forth about projects that are in development. And one thing that's really kind of fascinating is you can see a particular movie or a show as it gets kicked around the creative conversations. And you can see also that, you know, in some of the emails, there's understandably a fear of risk, of something not working, of not making enough money. And some of it's not, you know, some of it's not really weighty stuff. I mean, there's one of the most fascinating email exchanges in the whole Sony hack is about this attempt to make an ALF movie and just sort of the anguish and the back and forth of like, oh, and Amy Pascal, who, by the way, I think is an incredibly intelligent film, you know, filmmaker. She made Challengers, which I think is still my favorite movie of the year. You know, she's kind of having, after all these months of email notes back and forth, she kind of has this. This crisis that's just sort of like she sends an email saying, you know, what are we even doing here, basically? And I think for anyone who's worked on a long project or, you know, had people work on a project of theirs and not get, not get the green light, you do kind of see the internal kind of back and forth and the anger agonizing and the calculations that go into getting a movie made.

D (19:48)

One of the interesting tidbits from that.

F (19:52)

Hack, from the email hacks was the story about the movie Concussion.

D (19:55)

It starred Will Smith and there was an attempt to sanitize it so it didn't upset the NFL too much. What did the emails reveal about the.

F (20:06)

Way studios can sanitize their quote, unquote art?

A (20:10)

I mean, I think it speaks to the fact that this was a major corporation, and in cases like that, a major corporation doesn't, you know, does not want to irk the NFL. And I think, I think it proved that. You know, when you're making movies with, with budgets in the 50s, 60s, 70s, millions, higher, there is a lot of calculations. You have to do a lot of triangulation. And I think there is a lot of kind of risk management that feels more and more, 10 years later, after the hack, feels like it's even more prevalent nowadays. One of the craziest things about going back and looking at the story is trying to think of movies after the interview that were big studio movies with big stars that were really kind of provocative in a way. I mean, movies that would really make people upset in some ways. And then, you know, I think it's a shame because I think Sony made Movies like Zero Dark Thirty that, you know, were provocative. And I think we're seeing fewer and fewer of those nowadays because you have to take into account who is this movie going to make mad and how are we going to lose money if that happens. So you're seeing fewer really kind of envelope pushing big studio films in the last 10 years.

F (21:15)

Since the interview, I'm speaking with Brian Rafteri, host of the new podcast Hollywood Hack from the Ringer. It's about the 2014 hack of Sony Pictures Entertainment by North Korea. How did journalists cover it back in the day?

A (21:29)

With a lot of, with a mix of zeal and trepidation. I mean, I spoke to a lot of journalists on background and on the record about this. And the fact is these, they were getting these emails that were from a giant dump of data that they knew had been hacked. I mean, these were stolen emails. So on the one hand, they're dealing with stolen data and they're being given it and say, you know, do whatever you want with this. On the other hand, they have an obligation to their readers. So I think there's a, there was a lot of kind of hand wringing after the fact. But, you know, this was covered by mainstream publications, by the Hollywood trades, and by a kind of ecosystem of digital sites like Gawker that isn't quite as robust today. And they covered every single aspect of this. I mean, they, they really found, they went through these rabbit holes very quickly and found stuff, you know, within a day or two of some of these data dumps, full stories on it. And, you know, I think some of the journalists I spoke to were a little, you know, they had some trepidations 10 years later of, you know, did we get kind of played by these hackers? But in the end of the day, they felt they were serving their readers interest. And I, and I do think looking back at the coverage as a whole, some of it was kind of gross and irresponsible that some of them did print, you know, personal stuff that I don't think had anything to do with, you know, Hollywood as an industry or with national security. But, you know, for the most part, I do think that journalists were trying to handle this as tactfully as possible, though I think a lot of people whose emails were hacked would understandably disagree with that.

F (22:55)

What do you think this would have been like if it had happened during social media?

A (23:00)

I mean, this was very early Twitter days, but Yeah, I mean, 2014 versus 2024, it does feel like a completely different lifetime to a lifetime ago. I Mean, I think this would have been as big of an issue as this was, you know, when, when the interview was pulled from theaters because all these theater chains eventually said they weren't going to show it. It did kind of become a free speech rallying cry. You would on CNN saying, hey, Sony should release this movie. People on Fox saying Sony should release this movie. You know, Obama gave a press conference saying he was disappointed that the movie wasn't being released at that point. And I think that would be, I mean that's, that would be pretty much a two week long tick tock, like opinion spree at this point with people fighting that out. And I think there would have been a lot of people coming to the defense of, of Sony if this happened now. And kind of the modern social media source.

D (23:50)

How did Sony's leadership handle the crisis? Who ultimately took the fall?

A (23:54)

You know, Amy Pascal did depart the company a few months afterward. Michael Linton stayed around for I think three more years afterward. You know, in a sense in some ways, I mean there was no playbook for this. I mean even people I talked to in the government who were, you know, cyber cyber attack experts, you know, they had, you know, they run all kinds of drills. They don't run a drill from when a Seth Rogen James Franco movie, you know, irks a foreign government. That's not really something that's in the playbook. And I do think, you know, I actually think Linton and Pascal handled it in many ways as well as anyone could have. I do think the emails that were leaked from Pascal probably in the end damaged her credibility to the point that she could not have remained in that role, though she did go on to become, you know, a multi Oscar nominated independent producer. But I, I don't know, it's very easy to look back and say you should have done this, you should have done that. But when you talk to people at Sony, as I did, about those first few weeks and how chaotic and shocking and unnerving it was, I mean, I do think they sort of handled it as well as they could have. I mean, look, I couldn't have handled any better. There's a million reasons why I don't run a major studio. But dealing with a hacking for many months is one of the things I'd like to avoid in my life.

D (25:03)

I know that when we get a Sony picture screener, it's near impossible to get into. I mean there's emails and there's, yeah, you know, all kinds of, of barriers to us getting into the film. It can Take half an hour. Do you think that they change their business strategy?

A (25:20)

I think they certainly all the studios, but especially Sony because I talked to employees there, definitely changed their security measures. And I think, you know, I talked to one person who was telling me how much of an annoyance the hack was because then that they had to like do two factor authorization and all this stuff.

D (25:35)

They didn't so many which so much.

A (25:36)

Which none of us want to do. No, I, the thing is from a technology, from. In terms of technology, I think everyone got smarter and clamped down about what goes out what, what you put in, you know, what's sort of transmitted electronically. I do think though there has been a little bit of people have sort of forgotten that, you know, putting stuff in a Slack or a DM or a text is not that different nowadays from putting in an email because we still have these kind of leaks or stuff being sent to reporters that are around Hollywood that are not always great. And it's. I think maybe the lesson should be as much as everyone hates getting on the phone in Hollywood, like maybe, maybe everything should be a phone call at this point just to be safe. Or, or maybe you just go back to like real 1950s, golden 40s, golden age. Like you have to drive to the lot just to have a five minute conversation. That might be the only safe way to do things at this point.

D (26:25)

Ultimately, do you think it was a good thing that the emails were released?

A (26:30)

You know, it's a tough question. I put that to people there. I think having these revelations about how the industry worked and being able to apply them to kind of of demand greater social good is a great thing. But I also feel that there were so many people's whose lives, so many people whose lives were really upended and harmed by this that I couldn't say oh, it was a good thing. A lot of people were really hurt and they were just hurt because they worked at a company they loved and they weren't responsible for green lighting the interview. They weren't responsible for putting out ridiculous things in emails. They were just people who working their job who had to go through a lot of uncertainty and scares to get through this. So no, I think there's gotta be a better way for us to kind of affect change in the media and Hollywood and elsewhere.

D (27:13)

My guest is Brian Raftery.

A (27:16)

Perfect. Yes.

D (27:19)

Host of the new podcast Hollywood Hack from the Ringer. It's about the 2014 hack of Sony Pictures Entertainment by North Korea. All three episodes are available now. It's a great listen, Brian, thanks for your help.

A (27:30)

Thanks for having me, Allison. This is one wonderful.

C (27:34)

Oh my gosh. Have you been to Marshall's lately? They have all the brand name and designer pieces you love, but without the jaw dropping price tags. Alright, so here's the you should never have to compromise between quality and price, and at Marshalls, you don't have to. Marshalls believes everyone deserves access to the good stuff, and that's why their buyers hustle around the clock. To make it happen for you, visit a Marshalls store near you or shop.

B (27:59)

Online@Marshalls.Com NYC now delivers breaking news, top headlines, and in depth coverage from WNYC and Gothamist every morning, midday and evening. By sponsoring our programming, you'll reach a community of passionate listeners in an uncluttered audio experience. Visit sponsorship.wnyc.org to learn more.