Hollywood Writers End Strike

The screenwriters have voted to end their strike, with 92.5 percent voting in favor of calling it off. Congratulations to the WGA members for holding out and getting significant concessions from the studios.

Screenwriters Deal Looking Good

The Washington Post and other papers are carrying news that screenwriters are strongly in favor of the tentative agreement with studios:

On the key issue of compensation for work streamed over the Internet, both sides gave a little. The studios and their network allies originally asked the guild for time to study the issue and declined to offer any residuals for digital media when talks broke off in early December. The guild, in turn, held fast, arguing that writers had to share in the profits of what may become the preeminent way to view filmed entertainment.

Under the proposal's terms, the studios would have a "window" to display programs over the Internet or other digital media without having to pay writers residuals. The window for an established show would be 17 days; the window for a new show would be 24 days. In the deal's first two years, writers would get a maximum fee of $1,200 for streamed programs.

Those windows were the biggest point of contention in Los Angeles on Saturday night. "Everybody thinks this is going to set a bad precedent," Galvin said.

In the third year, things get interesting, because writers actually get a small percentage of the gross revenue - something that the directors did not get in their recent negotiations. This sets a precedent for everyone. I hope to be able to take down the banner at the left of this window shortly on a ratified agreement.

Studios Play Hardball with Writers and Producers

The big studios are starting to cut loose writers and producers who were on long-term deals, according to Variety. Maybe the studios think they are saving money, but more likely they're trying to send a message. However, it might backfire, particularly as at least one person found out by reading online that his deal had been terminated. Maybe the studios think that they can completely settle on reality television. It might work in some cases, but eventually all "reality" all the time is going to seem pretty damned identical. In any case, I wonder if the studios realize just how strongly they are signaling that they want the writers to go away for good. You'd think that it would take an idiot not to realize what this collection of actions communicated, but then, corporate bigwigs sometimes do seem far removed from all realities except the programmed television type.

Real Lesson From the Golden Globes

On NRP's Weekend Edition Sunday, I heard a story about the Golden Globes having "become the biggest, high-profile casualty of the ongoing Hollywood writers' strike." The emphasis was on how much the Los Angeles area lost in business opportunity in ceremonies, advertising, services, and parties - $80 million, in the estimate the show decided to use.

It would be easy - and I'm sure there will be those who do so - to use this as an example of how writers are hurting everyone else by being stubborn and selfish. I supposed you could look at it that way, but I prefer to turn that view upside for a moment. if the writers can keep that from happening, then, to at least some degree, the writers make all that possible - actually a drop in the bucket when you consider all the money made by producing and exhibiting the entertainments themselves. None of this, of course, is solely due to the writers. But, as one quickly sees, none of this happens without the writers. this is not commodity work that can easily be farmed out to the firm of Tom Dick & Harry. In fact, writers are perhaps the least replaceable people in the entertainment industry. Different actors, with varying degrees of success and appeal, can undertake the same characters. Different directors will offer different visions of the story. But the underlying tale, the dialog and plot and conflict, come from the writers. Change the writer, and you have something that is completely and irrevocably different as steak is from a fish fillet. Both may offer excellent meals, but you won't find someone eating one and mistaking it for the other.

There is no need to seek pity for writers. All of us, no matter what medium of expression we choose, do this of our own volition, even if we're of the type unsuited to any legitimate and honest form of employment. (Please note the intended irony.) Working as a stock broker or traditional business owner or even entertainment executive can pay far better. Oh, some writers are stars in their own right and do command enormous sums.

But most struggle to one degree or another to find enough work, to pay insurance costs and put some aside for retirement, to pay for lessons for the kids and upkeep for the car, all with far less guarantee of having gainful employment next week than even those in the most turbulent high tech start up. Writers are expected to pitch ideas, provide spec scripts in Hollywood, underwrite all costs of doing business, find ongoing projects, deal with taxes - in short, to take risks that would seem enormous to anyone brought up only on experiences of being employees. When you invest and risk, you want reward.

In this case, writers aren't asking for the world. They are asking for some return commensurate with their investment. They want a little security, continuing revenue from projects that, themselves, continue to provide revenue to others in the industry. Society as a whole has recognized that such expectations are reasonable. That's why the US Constitution recognizes the need for protection of intellectual property, why everyone "knows" that book authors are supposed to get royalties, and why the television and movie industries have institutionalized additional pay in the past.

That is why having payments for web use of material is only right. perhaps the studios have been taking a chance on the medium, but they also read the writing on the wall. They invest because they must, and they expect some payoff for every use. That's why they come down so heavily on those who post clips on Youtube: because they don't want others to make money off their investments without their say or their participation in the profits. Because writers are hired on a temporary basis and can strike, there is a legal fiction that they are employees. They are not; they are solo practitioners and businesspeople. They also make possible enormous sums that cascade throughout, profiting institutions and people directly and indirectly. For all they do, a small cut of the Internet revenues is not greed, but, rather, a business necessity. It is also right.

More Deals With Writers & Why You Should Care

First David Letterman made a deal with the Writers Guild so he could use professional writing talent (and get stars to start showing up on his show again). Then came United Artists, which Tom Cruise is trying to revive. Now the Weinstein Company, a huge name in independent film, has signed an interim deal with the WGA. This has lessons for those writers who think that they always have to give in and have no power.

“We need to get people back to work,” Mr. Weinstein said of the agreement. He said executives of the major film and television companies — which broke off talks with the writers last month — had reacted “negatively” to his decision to reach independent terms. But Mr. Weinstein said he felt an obligation to help break the logjam that has shut down much of the entertainment industry.

Other production companies are seeking independent deals. The major studios haven't given in, but there is only so long they can hold out when companies that can and will produce film and television - and online entertainment - swoop in to pick up consumer dollars. The reason writers have felt that they have little power is that they have given it away by giving up.

As for another example of why to push for rights, there is this "tidbit" passed on from writer activist Debra Cash:

Presented by The JetBlue Card from American Express, Times On Air(TM) is the latest addition to our many in-flight entertainment options. Tune to channel 41 of our seatback TVs to watch lifestyle programming exclusive to JetBlue from the New York Times' library, including interviews with celebrities and influencers, home and garden segments, and travel tips.

As she notes, "...and they wonder why writers are striking over residuals for the as yet undetermined media of the future..." Actually, they don't wonder; the major corporations just want it all for themselves. Now is the time to keep pushing back.

Striking Writers Talk to Venture Capitalists

Thanks to reader Debra Cash for pointing out this LA Times story: writers are talking to sources of money to see if they can create their own web site outlets:

At least seven groups, composed of members of the striking Writers Guild of America, are planning to form Internet-based businesses that, if successful, could create an alternative economic model to the one at the heart of the walkout, now in its seventh week.

Three of the groups are working on ventures that would function much like United Artists, the production company created 80 years ago by Charlie Chaplin and other top stars who wanted to break free from the studios.

Oh, this is smart on two levels. At the most basic, writers need to find ways to lessen their dependence on studios. That means going into business and developing their own production outlets for their scripts. Although venture capital firms have shied from pure entertainment plays in the past because of their risk, the money plunked down for YouTube has got them reconsidering. Their business model is fund something to get it going and then either take it public or sell it off to make their profit. And theater has often gone to wealthy individuals to bankroll shows on Broadway and other places. When the backers have enough money, they don't miss it much if it doesn't pan out, and, oh, the parties they get invited to. So now is the time for all writers to be considering how they can take what they have and make a "product" out of it. For the purists among us, don't forget that at one time, virtually all art and music was possible because of the generosity of patrons.

The other reason this is a smart move is purely negotiation. Studios stall on talks when they think they will get more leverage that way. But when they see that someone might be making money without their getting a cut, the situation becomes a powerful inducement for a rapprochement.

Freelancers Striking - More News

The situation between the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the Alliance Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) is bad. The two hit an impasse, with the latter demanding that the former withdraw some demands if negotiation was going to continue at all, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The hard line stance of the WGA apparently isn't only about Web rights, but about getting jurisdiction over reality tv and animation writing, two areas that have been beyond its pervue. This may be a key negotiating blunder. Broadening jurisdiction is contentious. Getting online residuals is contentious. Trying for both of them at the same time may have been enough for the producers to say, "Fine, we're going to take our ball and go home." Both sides are butting heads, trading heated news releases, and it's unclear when they might go back to talking.

I support the WGA, but do wonder whether the approach is the most practical and effective in the long term. They might have used one thing as a trade for another. Yes, they'd like to cover reality tv and animation, but so far as I know, they never have before. On the other hand, the online issues are facing their current membership now, and would seem to be far more important in the short and long run. Standing on principle is important, and it's important to know the difference between a principle and a wish list. I wish both sides good luck in coming to some agreement and getting everyone back to work.

The other news on the freelance strike front comes from MTV Networks, where freelance workers walked off the job because of changes in health and dental benefits. I don't think these people are writers, but I can imagine readers of this blog scratching their heads. Health? Dental? Yup - it's called permalancing. The company categorizes people as freelance workers, and yet provides benefits, controls their hours, and otherwise treats them as employees. This could turn out to be a much bigger problem than MTV and parent Viacom are expecting. This story ran in the New York Times, and my guess is that members of the IRS and New York's department of revenue are all reading it. They don't like when companies try to get out of managing withholding, their share of FICA, and other niceties of corporate existence. The IRS went after Microsoft on similar issues and won, and I wonder just how much more than the price of benefits this might run Viacom.

NBC Show Crosses WGA Strike "Line" - Looks for Scabs

From the oops-thought-I-had-posted-this department comes an entry that was written in a timely manner, if not posted in the same vein...

Carson Daly's show on NBC is going back into production, sans writers, according to the Associated Press. Daly isn't a member of the WGA, and apparently has asked pretty much anyone to send in jokes as a "fun collage" not meant to "make fun" of striking writers, according to the Smoking Gun. Given that he needs the help, maybe he should wait to go back on until the strike is over so professionals might have a chance to make him sound amusing.

Another View of the WGA Strike

Here's an interesting take on the writers' strike from an industry analyst viewpoint. Seems that some number of industry people may actually agree with the writers. The really intriguing point, though, is that the strike could have some unexpected results, like causing the studios to spend less on speculative ventures (and they put a lot of money into those), which could, ironically, turn into less money for the writers. Instead, writers will end up becoming the entrepreneurs.

A Comment on Writers Guild of America

Whenever news of Hollywood writers appears, there are usually a number of freelancers who experience envy: Why don't we have someone protecting our rights, getting us money, and so on? I have nothing against WGA West (the Hollywood-oriented division) at all, but freelancers need to realize that the circumstances are night and day in their differences.

WGA came out of the studio system for movies and television, and so had a tradition of the writers being employees. That's what allowed them to form a union in the first place, because US law prohibits independent businesspeople from forming unions. (I believe it historically comes from concerns about monopolies and price fixing.) But even today, the writers are technically employees - temporary, to be sure, but employees, nevertheless. Producers and studios have to deduct taxes, they pay money for benefits to WGA - and they, not the writers, own all pretty much all the rights to the work. For those who have never looked at a WGA standard contract, it's an informative experience. Notice that the writers are going on strike to get more income from additional uses of their scripts. The reason they're going on strike is because they don't own the rights in question, and, so, cannot force an agreement in other ways.

Some rights - like publication and the right to reacquire a script - do come back under specific circumstances, and you can see some of that here. But the rights that writers have to convey are extensive. The trade off is for money and benefits. In other words, if you think that being a WGA writer means getting the best of all worlds, you're not being realistic. When you're in business, you have to make trade-offs, and that's true whether you're writing an article or a screenplay. Indulging in wishful thinking and wanting an organizational knight in white armor to protect you doesn't get you anywhere and only breeds resentment. Instead of pining for what isn't, take your energy and focus on what it - the opportunities you have to negotiate contracts, to work with companies that are giving you what you think is a reasonable deal.