http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a37uqd5vTw

“When Tom Freston was fired from Viacom in 2006 he received $60 million in severance pay, more than all of the DVD residuals paid to WGA members that year.”

“This past week Viacom reported an 80% leap in third-quarter earnings, boosted by a 57% rise in entertainment revenue. News Corp., which reported $732 million in earnings for the quarter, credited much of the gains to the box-office results from “The Simpsons Movie” and “Live Free or Die Hard.” And even though Time Warner’s overall earnings declined (to a paltry $1.09 billion), its movie earnings jumped 71%, thanks to the success of a new “Harry Potter” and “Oceans Thirteen”.”

“So why are studios playing such hardball? They say they can’t divvy up online revenue until they have a better idea of how much money is generated. Of course, when video came along, the studios persuaded writers to take a tiny cut of the profits, so as not to kill an emerging technology. But once they were accumulating windfall profits, did they ever revisit that deal? Not on your life.”

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-bigpicture13nov13,1,3048316.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

I sympathize with Colleen giving up on explaining any of this to you — reading your exchanges, it’s like she’s been trying to explain the color red to a person who’s been blind since birth. So, on the off-chance that you do have some metaphorical rods and cones in there, I’ll try to pick up where she left off, but in laypersons’ terms.

I’m not a member of any of the guilds — my degree is in live theater with emphases in Stage Managment and Dramaturgy, the latter of which is, yes, a form of Script Analysis/Editing/Reference Editing, so that’s where my loyalty lies regardless of whether I’m in any union or not (I’m not — I’m teaching-track.)

But I just have to point out one thing that was drilled into us in every single drama class — whether it was an acting class, a theater history class, a directing class, a production synthesis (collaboration) class, a set design class or a dramaturgy class:

The script is the *blueprint* for the production.

In other words, the writer is not a carpenter, s/he is the *architect.*

Ooops. There goes your analogy right out the window. But in case you can’t read your analogy anymore: being a talented carpenter is not the same thing as being a talented architect. The talents are, in fact, different and are not just valued differently, they have vastly different levels of importance to the production due to the simple facts that a) the writer is the source of the work and b) the carpenter is not the source of any artistic interpretation of the work — not the writer, not the director, not the actor, not any of the technical designers.

“Knowing that everything in Hollywood is performed by a union member, you’d better believe the assorted trade unions will plug into whatever internet income stream comes out of the writer’s strike…so in a very real sense, the contribution of the carpenter will be “equated” (or perhaps “conflated”) with the writer’s role.”

That would be conflated (minus the “air quotes”), Marc — and conflated is what you just did.

Few in any of the unions or who know what the unions are about are going to be stupid enough to think that most other people in any given union think that their own work is equal in importance to the production as that of the collaborative artistic team (writers, directors, actors, designers, cinematographers, editors). It’s a merit-based system. Each craftsperson climbs up the ladder of merit in his/her craft within the overall entertainment industry.

It’s not up to *us* (pros or fans) to prove that Carpenter Joe won’t be asking for a fair share that *isn’t* equal to (or even approaching that) of a writer, actor or director — yes, your own (lack of) logic is that tortured — it’s up to *you* to prove *your* actual argument (or what you are depicting as your actual argument: that Carpenters will be asking for pay equity with writers, actors and directors.

That ain’t going to happen. For one, arguing for pay equity would require the unions to have worked in vacuums sealed off from each other for the past 100 years in order for them to be totally unaware of the relative importance of each person’s job in the meritocracy of the collaborative process.

You’re mistakenly thinking that there’s any disconnect between the various pro-writer camps, pro or fan. You’re in the minority in your inability to understand the difference between writers, directors, actors, designers and craftspersons (carpenters, electricians, etc.) They all have unions and as Colleen has been arguing (correctly, IMO), the WGA strike is a proxy strike of all of the unions. In supporting the WGA strike, these other unions are not arguing for pay equity among all of the unions (that would be, like, communism and, hate to break it to you, but unions aren’t communism), they’re arguing for pay *proportionality* between what each union makes earnings in existing media and what each union will make in New Media just as soon as the studios stop lying to them that there’s no money in it when there actually is. Oh yeah, and they’re also pushing for a percentage pay bump to account for the studios’ deliberate reneging on increasing the residuals off DVDs when the studios used the same disingenuous excuse of “Oh, it’s a new revenue stream, we don’t know if we’ll *ever* make any money off it” back in 2001 (and with VHS waaay back in the 80’s.)

It’s simple math, really — the WGA, and other unions picketing with them — are pushing to regain all of the ground they’ve lost to the studios lying to them.

— Rob

I only used a carpenter as an example. You’re right, I don’t know a heck of alot about the industry. All I really know is what I see from various reports on the strike, and what I know is this:

Several TV shows have shut down production. Thousands of workers (both unionized and not) have suddenly lost their primary stream of income. Meanwhile, incredibly rich celebrities are showing up at picket lines with bagels and coffee for the “oppressed” writers. As an admitted outsider, that’s a big disconnect, which is what got me thinking about what kind of real damage this noble, glorious struggle can and will inflict.

Sure, the striking writers can say stuff like “while we regret the sacrifices others must make at this time, in the long run we’ll all be stronger for it”, that does very little for the incredibly talented people (yes, Colleen….they ARE talented) marginalized and deprived of their income by creative elites.

In the first place, I promoted that earlier on the thread, and the reference is to both the Screen Actors Guild union and the Director’s Guild whose contracts expire next year.

Moreover, the annoyance with Melissa Gilbert, former Pres of SAG, is due to the fact that she extended the SAG contract by a year, causing the SAG contract and the WGA contract to expire one year apart instead of simultaneously, lessening the bargaining power for both. Now, the writers have to take point on the issue instead of SAG, which would probably have been more powerful as a negotiating force. Bad strategy.

Once again, your ignorance of the industry and how it works betrays you.

The assertion that no one works in Hollywood without being a union member is 100% false.

I”M NOT in ANY Hollywood union and the Hollywood work I did was ALL during a period in which my Graphic Artist Guild membership had lapsed.

Your entire position here is based on the idea that because at some point carpenters MIGHT want royalties, writers shouldn’t get them? Ever?

Carpenters have never gotten them before, and you may very well be the only person I have ever heard of who thinks they should. If you want to continue to be a lone voice in the wilderness for carpenters, knock yourself out, but this is the daffiest position I have ever heard.

Because carpenters MIGHT ask for royalties no writer should get them? Fear the carpenter union!

OK, well whatever.

I am out of here.

Computer off.

You didn’t promote that idea, but other have. Jason Green posted the following paragraph:

“The Writers Union is striking not only on their own behalf, but on behalf of the other unions whose contract will expire in the next year, and who will benefit if the Writers Union is able to get benefits for their members. The other unions will then be able to lobby for those benefits for their members as well.”

Knowing that everything in Hollywood is performed by a union member, you’d better believe the assorted trade unions will plug into whatever internet income stream comes out of the writer’s strike…so in a very real sense, the contribution of the carpenter will be “equated” (or perhaps “conflated”) with the writer’s role.

This sort of disconnect between the various pro-writer camps is what makes the entire issue hard to (A) understand or (B) sympathize with.

Do you honestly believe writers and artists should not get royalties for their work?
Fine, we disagree.

Everyone who gets a share of proceeds benefits from the strike, and I missed the part where I ever promoted the idea that that included carpenters. You’re the one who equated the contribution of a carpenter to the contribution of a writer. Moreover, you’re the one who presented the idea that a writer and a carpenter are the same in regard to contribution and talent. We disagree. So does the marketplace.

No, Carpenter Joe does not have a KEY role in determining the success of a show in the marketplace, unless you honestly think people watch Everybody Love Raymond because of their deep and abiding love for the set dressing.

As a technical support person, I GLADLY promote royalties for writers even though I WILL NOT BENEFIT ONE RED CENT if a writer gets that royalty.

HOWEVER, if it becomes standard practice to consider internet revenue as PUBLISHING instead of ADVERTISING, then EVERYONE who might receive a royalty share from that will benefit INCLUDING comic book artists who are not getting royalties for that right now because it becomes STANDARD.

Oh, look, there’s Marvel putting up their library onto the internet right now…

And “…sounds good on paper but how will it work in practice…”

Well, people who have lots and lots of legal expertise and experience are negotiating those issues RIGHT NOW in board rooms, which is what this whole strike is about in the first place. Negotiating those matters.

I never said EVERYONE should benefit from sales on the internet, just the primary progenitors of the creative product. And looking at Google’s revenue, it does appear that there is no dearth of income to be made from the internet, unless one is being deliberately obtuse in refusing to see it.

It is beyond all logic to incorporate the assumption that consumers will stop using the free content on the internet because publishers and studios will have to pay a royalty to creators from advertising revenue. It is absolutely daffy to incorporate the assumption that the studios will lose vast sums if a writer gets a penny per downloaded video.

You are not entitled to royalty payments because you are an EMPLOYEE and you did not negotiate for them. Just because you did nothing for your own future protection and benefit because you were satisfied enough with your own comfort right now does not mean that the rest of us won’t do what we have to do to make sure that others will benefit from the sacrifices made today.

I’ve cleaned up dog shit for a living, as well as parked cars, done secretarial work and bookkeeping, cleaned swimming pools, and performed manual field labor.

This industry is harder than any of that.

There, I said it. How stuck up of me to think what I do now requires greater effort and talent than filing papers.

And I’m done, because unlike some people, I do not get paid by the hour or get paid a salary to use the internet on company time. I am self employed and only get paid for what I actually produce…

Unless I get royalties.

Since you equate the talent of writers with the talent of gofers, I can’t see any point in canvassing this further.

If this reflects your values, then we have no common ground here. I’m done.

I apologize. I did not see that post…which is why I was so confused by your “food chain” comment.

“The carpenter is not directly and personally responsible for the share of income from a TV show, any more than the papermaker is directly and personally responsible for the revenue generated on a book. While they both contribute to the final product, they did not create the bulk of the appeal of that product.”

Okay…I get that….but that rather exclusionary sentiment doesn’t seem to square with the “everyone benefits from the strike” sentiment:

“The Writers Union is striking not only on their own behalf, but on behalf of the other unions whose contract will expire in the next year, and who will benefit if the Writers Union is able to get benefits for their members. The other unions will then be able to lobby for those benefits for their members as well.”

So, which is it…Carpenter Joe has no real role in determining a TV show or movie’s success….or he does and deserves a cut of it? This is the point where I’m genuinely confused by alot of the rhetoric.

“No one buys a book because the paper is nice, and no one watches a TV show because the carpenter did a great job hanging the door.”

Agreed, but would anyone watch the show without the astronomically expensive efforts to finance and, more importantly, promote it? Again, I take a “primacy of financial risk” position over a “primacy of creation” position. Being a self-professed “capitalist pig dog”, you should understand that those who take the biggest financial risk are entitled to the largest share of the profits…just as they’re responsible for the debt if the venture flops. Writers (or anyone else) should not be responsible for that debt in the event of a flop, but the reverse can’t be true if you’re not willing to shoulder part of the responsibility for, say, a TV show’s dismal failure. The old saying “Success has many fathers, while failure is an orphan” comes to mind.

“The primary progenitor of the creative work gets that royalty, because he is the primary source of the revenue and the primary generator of it.”

Sounds good on paper, but how will this work in practice? With admirable frankness, Joe Harris admitted that this divyving up the credit continues to be a “thorny issue”…making me wonder: is there really any such thing as a “primary progenitor” in mass market entertainment (unlike in, say, a comic book)?

And since many writers also eschew the benefits of a normal salaried job, they also take risks with regard to their creative work that the average secretary does not.

Right, but contracted workers also enjoy elaborate job-protecting measures than the average salaried person would never have. The “average secretary” can actually be fired for not performing up to the employer’s standards. That’s not necessarily the case in a union shop (where mediocrity or flat-out incompetence is seldom delt with swiftly…unionized school teachers being a good example).

“Using your own logic, every single person who contributes to your job should also get a royalty share of every single dime of income you generate.

Do they?”

No, they don’t…because *I* don’t get royalties, either. Does that keep me up at night. Certainly not! I knew the arrangement going into my job that I would receive a salary in exchange for my professional services and artwork, all of which benefits the company. Have some of my ideas turned out to be very successful for the company? I’m proud to say “yes”…but does that automatically entitle me to a royalty payment? I don’t believe so, because there is a network of talented marketing people, salespeople, support people who played a part in that success that I would be foolish and arrogant to assume I’m some kind of financial powerhouse. Of course, the most important player in my situation is the company’s owner, who shoulders ALL of the risk in producing, marketing, printing, distributing and customer-servicing all of my projects.

“You’re the one who asked why technical support didn’t get royalties. OK, Does your technical support get a royalty?”

No. None of us get royalties. I don’t quite see why I should.

“I don’t know what you do for a living, but do they get a share of everything you do beyond their initial fee?”

No, but I’m paid a good wage and enjoy other benefits (weekends, holidays, a semblance of a social life)….all without a union to strongarm that arrangement for me.

“And further, you DO realize that if it becomes standard practice NOT to pay royalties for internet use, that becomes a point for all art and entertainment media not to pay royalties for internet use.”

Right…but an equally damaging precedent can be set when EVERYBODY benefits (either directly or indirectly) from internet royalty payments. If prices are raised in order to ensure absolute fairness and equity, at some point consumers will stop buying it altogether. At what point do you draw the line for internet royalties (since, as Joe points out, there’s a long line of out-stretched hands waiting behind the writers).

“No, guidelines and recommendations at the GAG are not the same thing as at the WGA, but we don’t wield the same authority not because we don’t want to, but because we don’t have the same economic power. We don’t have a more powerful union because of people like you who don’t think there should be a union with that kind of power at all, which is why creators get ripped off every single damned day -no minimum standards and practices that are binding for everyone.”

Gosh, it’s all my fault!

“And wanting minimum standards and practices makes us selfish?”

I don’t recall characterizing you or the GAG as selfish for wanting standards and practices. Please point it out to me where I was.

“Every artist for themself!”

Viva la Revolution!

- Changing policies and business practices in publishing, the internet, and other media industries.

Small world, innit?

There seems to be a plethora of conflicting information concerning the strike and the reasons for it.

There are links available linking to articles about the strike that state these things better than I can. They will also confirm the pay cut.

Mu suggestion is that Engbloom and Rottman do a little research about the subject and stop knee-jerking all day.

The Writers Union is striking not only on their own behalf, but on behalf of the other unions whose contract will expire in the next year, and who will benefit if the Writers Union is able to get benefits for their members. The other unions will then be able to lobby for those benefits for their members as well.

This is why there’s so much solidarity: everyone on the creative end feels they’re getting screwed by the studios on nwe media royalties. The WGA strike is just the first salvo in the fight. If they win, then everyone in that creative “food chain”—writers, directors, actors—will be getting a piece of the pie they already deserve.

Think of it this way: the entire movie and TV industry seems to be moving, however slowly, to an entirely internet based delivery system. The studios are arguing that no creative types deserve ANY sort of financial reward for their work being shown on internet, even though they are reaping profit from it. If a contract were approved that did not include any internet royalties and the entire industry moves to the internet while under that contract, the writers would effectively never get a single penny of royalties ever again. You’re asking an entire group that is one of the most important cogs in the process to give up a major form of income that they’ve counted on for decades. How on earth does that make any sense?

People in this business are not paid based on whether or not you personally like their work, they are paid based on how much everyone else on the planet is willing to pay for their work.

Royalties are paid based on the economic performance of the writer, not on whether or not he won a Pulitzer.

Nitwit and Network Television combine to make Nitwork Television. Nitwork Television each year debuts dozens of new shows, few of which last for more than a season or two. This is proof that not just anyone can write. Even professional writers have a hard time making a show work.

The television industry desperately needs writers. In order to keep the better ones, the compensation they receive needs to be higher than it is now.
=====
Somebody please turn off the BOLD. Thanks.

Remuneration should be commensurate and in proportion to the contribution one makes to the work that generates the revenue. The carpenter is not directly and personally responsible for the share of income from a TV show, any more than the papermaker is directly and personally responsible for the revenue generated on a book. While they both contribute to the final product, they did not create the bulk of the appeal of that product. No one buys a book because the paper is nice, and no one watches a TV show because the carpenter did a great job hanging the door.

Do they?

You’re the one who asked why technical support didn’t get royalties. OK, Does your technical support get a royalty? I don’t know what you do for a living, but do they get a share of everything you do beyond their initial fee?

And further, you DO realize that if it becomes standard practice NOT to pay royalties for internet use, that becomes a point for all art and entertainment media not to pay royalties for internet use.

No, guidelines and recommendations at the GAG are not the same thing as at the WGA, but we don’t wield the same authority not because we don’t want to, but because we don’t have the same economic power. We don’t have a more powerful union because of people like you who don’t think there should be a union with that kind of power at all, which is why creators get ripped off every single damned day -no minimum standards and practices that are binding for everyone.

Wow, that makes publishing SO MUCH BETTER.

And wanting minimum standards and practices makes us selfish?

Every artist for themself!

Phooey.

Wow….that’s some astonishing arrogance on display there. In other words, there’s no real talent in being an electrician, carpenter or “even” a gofer…..ah, but WRITERS! They are the Divine Gift that live among us?

The tottering mountains of crap on TV and in movie theatres don’t seem to support that.

Nitwit

Wow. I’ll get a lowly electrician or carpenter couldn’t have thought up a zinger like that.