• by Paul Gough , July 8, 2003

Could the imbroglio over the use of Spike TV actually help the rebranded cable channel? It might.

Filmmaker Spike Lee and media giant Viacom announced yesterday they had settled Lee's suit over the use of the name Spike, a lawsuit that forced Viacom to rethink its strategy in rebranding the channel TNN as a network focused on men. Terms of the settlement weren't disclosed but Viacom will start using the Spike TV name and logo immediately.

"What's that old line, there's no such thing as bad publicity," said Larry Gerbrandt, a television analyst and chief operating officer of Kagan World Media. "There's far greater awareness of Spike TV than there ever would have been."

Robert Passikoff, president of Brand Keys Inc., said Tuesday afternoon that the controversy hadn't hurt Spike TV's chances of success from a branding standpoint.

"They got more publicity than they ever could have gotten with the campaign they were running, which was not a bad campaign to begin with," Passikoff said. Despite the June injunction against using the name Spike TV, The New TNN decided to go ahead with its multi-million advertising campaign, focusing instead on its position as the first men's-only cable channel. Everything about the campaign seemed to be the same as it would have been without the lawsuit, save for the name and logo.

Passikoff said TNN had done a fine job with the campaign explaining why they were different and what they were about, which was more than just the name Spike TV anyway.

"They had done such a good job that to some extent it didn't matter," Passikoff said. He said the publicity surrounding the case, far from being a negative, drew attention to the network and its positioning. He doesn't see any lasting effects with the name Spike TV or the channel itself.

"They went ahead and did exactly what they should have done, which was in light of some impediment, like the threatened lawsuit, they went ahead with the best campaign they could, which was one based entirely on the values that the cable network was going to represent," Passikoff said.

Gerbrandt said that Spike TV's success will rise and fall on what's on the channel and not on the advertising or the controversy that surrounded the name.

"The name alone isn't going to do it, nor is the concept alone. It is going to be ultimately about compelling programming," Gerbrandt said. For the viewer, Spike TV isn't in the same category as what Gerbrandt calls an enthusiast channel, like The Food Network, CNN Headline News or even MTV or VH1, which people watch because they're interested in that category. "Spike has a lot more in common with networks like TNT, Lifetime and TBS, and even A&E. You go there for programming," Gerbrandt said.

The name and the marketing campaigns will only take the channel so far and the programs, which viewers migrate to no matter what the channel's name, will draw or repel them. "It's one of those things that is more important to the network than it is to the viewer. It expresses their programming philosophy."

Viacom had unveiled the rebranding of The New TNN as Spike TV to great fanfare earlier this year. It was about to reposition the channel as the first network geared toward men when Lee filed suit in New York State Supreme Court to block the name change. Lee argued that Viacom was intentionally using Lee's sensibility and public image for the new Spike TV. Viacom said it was ridiculous but a state Supreme Court judge slapped a temporary injunction on Viacom, forbidding it from calling TNN Spike TV. A trial had been set for Aug. 18.

In a New York courtroom Tuesday morning, lawyers for Lee and Viacom said the lawsuit had been spiked and that the cable network was now free to use Spike TV at will. In a statement read by his lawyer, Johnnie Cochran, Lee said that he wanted to protect freedom of expression.

"I am concerned that my efforts to stop Viacom from using the Spike TV name could have the intended consequence of threatening the First Amendment rights of Viacom and others," he said. Lee had been concerned that he would be associated with what he considered objectionable programming, such as reruns of Baywatch and Star Trek plus animated series like Stripperella and Ren and Stimpy.

Viacom said little in its public statement, other than expressing its satisfaction that the matter had been settled.