11/1/07
I'll try to keep this very simple, as it's late in the evening, and god knows we've already been down this road. However... tonight was the big meeting of my union - the Writer's Guild - and 3,000 of us packed the LA Convention Center to show solidarity, receive inspiration from unlikely sources, and get all questions answered. I was on Lucy duty, so my wife went, and for the first time EVER, she has requested to write the Monday blog for me!
Tessa wanting to write one of my blogs is like Nixon going to China. I usually have to avoid looks of derision and moans of "oh fer chrissake" coming from the other room, so this is a red-letter day in our household.
Before the news cycle paints all of the writers in a horrible light, I'm going to make one statement, and pose one question. First off, I'm going to give you a very simplified reason of why we're (probably) going on strike.
Many years ago, writers agreed to a disastrously-small royalty fee for movies released on VHS home video. We agreed to it because it was a new idea that was expensive to manufacture - "movies watched on tape at home!" - and we were "all in it together!" That translated to four cents for each movie bought. But when DVDs came out, the studios refused to raise the rate even though production costs were HALVED, so while they made BILLIONS & BILLIONS, we still got... four cents per movie.
Determined not to let this happen again, we decided to push for a more equitable royalty on internet downloads, which we all know will replace physical DVDs in the next few years. Something more akin to eight cents a movie. The studios said "we're offering you NOTHING cents per movie."
That's like starting a negotiation with someone, holding out your hand to shake, and having the other guy say "how about you go fuck yourself?" So that's where we are. Forget everything you're about to hear in the news: this strike is about THAT. I'll leave it to Tessa to tell you even worse stunts the studios are pulling, and also why writers can't live without royalties.
Meanwhile, I'd like to ask this question: when did America become so hostile to the little guy? When did everyone start cheering for corporations? Sure, we like to think of ourselves as a defender of underdogs, but that kind of sentimentality is limited to the movies - in real life, everyone's a fucking Yankees fan, cheering for the sun to rise. We only really want to hear about the winners, and we want the winners to keep winning. And when the winners stop winning, we forget about the sport entirely.
I've read some pretty vitriolic crap about the writers and our strike, and I've experienced first-hand the schadenfreude right here on the blog. In fact, sometimes I feel like I've spent the last five years fielding comments and emails from those defending the indefensible, whether it be the Iraq War, our disastrous Presidency or pharmaceutical companies.
Before everyone's eyes start rolling, believe me when I say none of this hurts my feelings - in fact, the last five years on here have been brilliantly informative for me personally, often through the folks I disagree with most. But something has shifted in the American consciousness that I find particularly disheartening, and this strike - and the coverage of it - has italicized its meaning. Put simply, why does everyone gotta root for the bullies?
I think people look for things to believe in....things that are always true.. a bedrock as it were. In the rapidly changing world, we have to have something we know is 'real'. With media exposure, it is easier for people to look toward the (over)exposed (celebrities, national companies, etc) for validation of their beliefs. When their favored icon becomes exposed for the fraud that it is, then another is selected to replace it. (this happens rapidly b/c we need to have something to believe in to function). I think the little guy is perceived as chipping away at today's established tenents and eventually when the favored icon is exposed, the little guy is blamed. That's also easy because the little guy doesn't have the help of the media to 'sell' their message of perhaps being the new, true icon.
Cue the toy industry today. It is easy to blame China, but what have they really found about the lead content in toys? At the end of the day, it was all about making it cheaper with the appearance of safety. And gosh knows we want it cheaper first....we prove it everyday.Humans are not prepared to live in 2007. We are genetically set up to live the way the world was about 200-300 years ago. 300 years ago, how many new faces would a person have seen in a day? How many new faces will you see today....this morning? Our minds require that we stereotype b/c there is too much information for our brains to absorb. (did I read somewhere recently that today's newspaper has more information than middle ages man absorbed in a lifetime)?
I almost feel like society is waiving in the wind today looking for bedrock....somewhere we can place our feet. Those place are few, but we all need one. We think we find one and when we are wrong we look for the next. It is at the core of our being.
Whew, it's early (for me)HA! k
I love television. I think shows are getting better all the time, and I have no illusions about why - better writing.
I'm fully in support of you doing what you've got to do to get paid what you should. Even if I have to deal with reruns and stupid reality show crap for a while. I do have books around the house; I won't be bored while you work it out.
From the Canadian consciousness: I support what you're doing and I think you're right. I get paid for my work, why in the world shouldn't you?
Also...if this thing runs on for a bit, can you all come north of the border and write for Canadian shows? Our money is worth it now, honest!
Noticed Letterman has been actually talking/joking about the whole thing in a writer positive way. I'm not surprised but it's a classy move worth mentioning.
It seems the writers should get more of the royalties. Can you put it in persepctive for me? How are the remaining royalties divvied up?
Keep fighting Ian and Tessa. I look at this in a business sense that you are making something, you are producing something, you are creating value (I know I love watching good TV) and should be fairly compensated for it. You and other writers are not asking for the studios to go out of business, but to be paid fairly for what you do, which is to create stories, characters and situations that entertain people. I don't see this as you or other writers "getting away with it" I see it as you just wanting to be paid fairly for your work.
Go little guys and fight for your fair compensation.
Although I admit that I'm going to miss the good shows and hate the reality TV shows that are going to take over.
In response to the comment about the Bronx Bombers, I just want to say that, being a die-hard Yankees fan, yes, even through the coldest, harshest decade ever when they didn't win one, not even ONE, championship ring, and a tarheel to my heart, there are at least two reasons for all of my fellow heels to love the pinstripes, too: Steinbrenner's daughter and at least one granddaughter are tarheels, AND I believe that his family pledged $1 million to name the courtyard at the entrance to Boshamer Stadium. Can the yanks PLEASE get some love from the heels, or have I just guaranteed my status as the most reviled commenter to this blog ever?
Unions have become the bad guys in today's sociopolitical construct, partly because many regular joes and janes have increasingly felt that some unions accumulated way too much power and political influence over the past half-century.
In my little (littlest!) state, unions have a stranglehold on state and municipal budgets due to now-untenable sweetheart contracts that guarantee free health insurance, cumulative sick pay, and generous pensions for life, with early retirement options. (I have acquaintances who retired from teaching at age 50 with full salary and benefits, and are living the life - traveling, taking up painting, etc. Nice work if you can get it. Sheesh.) Teachers' strikes have created an us-vs.-them dichotomy for years, with children held hostage during negotiations.
The writers' cause may be the very definition of "just," but unfortunately it's too easy for opponents to tar you with the bogeyman-union brush in today's insecure economic climate.
OK, that's my analysis. Let me just say I hope the writers' union is able to get a fair hearing for its case and that you are allotted your rightful share of the profit pie. Keep us posted.
Who the heck thinks unions are even on the top 100 forces in terms of power or corruption? Only ones I know are the few who are so mad that they plan to write to President Eisenhower about the problem.Who the heck roots for corporations and other crooks? Only ones I know are the few who think Ayn Rand is cutting edge.
Last week, or the week before, whenever it was, I did not comment, because the discussion seemed so silly. You work (or write in this case) and create a product. If it sells in the marketplace, you should get paid. How can anyone deny that you deserve to be paid a fair wage for your work? Is it because the product is intangible in people's minds? Is it the theory that "it's not hard" to write a show? Or a book? Or a screenplay? Challenge the naysayers to try to do what you do. STRIKE! And let the studios/corporations fall on their faces. Go little guys!
LETS GO METS!
I'm glad you explained the situation Ian. I say go writers!
So are we going to see writer SCABS come in or do you think this will create real change in your favor?
Also- no love here for the Yanks. GO SOX
Ian, best of luck.
Your arguement here, fair pay for fair work, is much stronger than last weeks, one I support whole heartedly.
However, I believe that the entire tv/movie industry is going the way same was as the music industry... dead. How long before someone creates a completely online TV network with all independently produced work? Jump ahead of the game and lead in this direction. Get some venture capital, and make it happen... Bring down the whole TV/Movie cartel. Big music is on its knees.... Video is next.
solidaridad!
i agree, i think it's a good time to disintermediate and go straight up, full frontal indie (although i am of course biased in that direction).
you could spend the down time lining up your own production company - for example, here's a conference i was looking at where you could probably tap directly into a large juglar vein of production money:
looking forward to tessa's piece on monday. hopefully the strike will be a short one and the writers will prevail.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-gelbart/keep-the-strike-in-perspe_b_70923.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/2/2439/01423
Daily Kos, at least, has your back. Maybe you could contact the media and offer to get a writer's point of view out there to counteract the studio lies.
Ian, thanks for the brief explanation. Is there anything consumers can do to show support for the writers? Not watch? Send emails or snail mails or phone calls to the media production companies, I guess? Please advise.
I'm with you on this one.
Royalty-based compensation is good because the pay is based directly on the commercial success of the work in the market place.
Just like the producers, the key creative people should have unlimited financial upside potential because, well, they create the work.
That's capitalism at it's best.The technical folks and other employees should get paid a (fair) wage, just like the rest of us working stiffs.
Break a leg! You've got my support.
Go SOX. Go PANTHERS.
GO WRITERS!!!!!!!!!!!!
For me, watching some boob tube every night after my moppets are in bed has always felt like a guilty pleasure (while my teach-yourself-Arabic and history of British satire books sit mouldering on the shelf). But now, having been informed of the appallingly paltry royalties for Hollywood's writers, I would feel truly guilty for enjoying the fruits of their labours should this situation not be rectified. The scribes make the best shows what they are. They should be rewarded accordingly.
I'm a long time lurker here just lured into posting by this topic.
I'm all for your solidarity with your writing brethren (I'm an AFTRA/SAG member myself) but aren't you kind of a dilettante as far as screenwriting goes? I'm only seeing one credit for you on imdb.com: an unreleased narrative film, not exactly a whole lot at stake there in the royalties department. And as a director your cut is considerably larger than the mere writer, isn't it? It doesn't seem as if your ability to put food on the table will be grossly affected by any WGA strike.
Don't take my point to mean that I'm against the writers, quite the contrary, it just seems your defense rings a bit hollow coming from someone with so few chips at the table.
alan - writers are paid to write screenplays, and tv pilots [are bought] by the studios all the time. many of them never see the screen so you would not see a credit on imdb or elsewhere. but that doesnt mean they aren't working as writers or have chips at the table.
if the studio pays you to write a pilot before they decide if they want to make it into a tv show you have no idea if that show is going to be on at all or become the next seinfeld. but when you get the gig all of these possibilities are in your contract. so say you have the next seinfeld, and its on dvd, and they have it on the internet....the writers need to share in that profit.
its a complicated business with new media in the mix so to say someone doesnt have a dog in this fight is not really accurate.
kjf nails it, alan - we've had at least four shows in various levels of development (and still are) so the stakes for us could be huge. We've only been in this side of the business for three seasons, so give us time, buddy.
Plus lots of writers are uncredited on IMDB - don't look to that site for unwavering accuracy.
you won't be getting tons of royalties from projects that don't make it out of development.
As to the public perception (not mine) of this conflict: for a lot of people this is the millionaires against the billionaires. Not really likely to garner a lot of sympathy.
um, sure, we "won't be getting tons of royalties from projects that don't make it out of development" but that only proves the point that writers should get royalties from their (relatively) few successes to stay alive.
As for public perception, I agree. It's also drop-dead false.