rocketpop

Am going to read, so that I might actually do some legal analysis today.

karion

In theory. But the person who goes fi-core believes that his or her (but let's be honest, his) talent is so amazingly awesome and unique that no one will be able to stop them from being offered lucrative gigs by pro-their-amazing-talent, anti-union producers.

Whether that's true or the dangerously deluded ramblings of a success-addled mind is a matter of conjecture -- no one ever does it, so no one really knows.

Of course, you'd have to find an anti-union director to direct it, and some anti-union actors to act in it, and anti union grips and gaffers and hair and makeup and sound and ... it's a union town.

GingerVitis

DorothyMantooth

Hmmm... I bet I could find the complaint on the NLRB site & get to the bottom of this. Be right back!

(And as to your last question, as far as I can figure the most "practical" answer is gonna be, "yes!")

DorothyMantooth

Thanks to you, too, Mantooth! I sort of prided myself on keeping up and understanding the issues, but there are a few twists that seem inconsistent.

The studios' demand to take certain items off the table prior to further negotiation seems to violate the NLRB's dictates, so it should be interesting to see how the WGA complaint works out.

As a final, more practical question, is it reasonable to assume that once a writer goes "FiCo," s/he is effectively blackballed in the industry?

karion

And is where the writers come in.

DorothyMantooth

I don't watch Ellen, so I don't know what she has been doing. I do realize that her show isn't owned by a network (I think it is syndicated), so she had contracts to fulfill to her various affiliates. Nevertheless, I understand the ire.

And Leno makes more sense now, too. Admittedly, I didn't watch any of the shows last night, so I can't opine on the quality, but I am intrigued by your point about him not having a gig lined up next year. Maybe that is the point - he is auditioning for another gig, although I can't imagine where.

I guess that it seems that there should be some kind of waiver for talk show hosts who anchor a show, but that is probably not a well-thought out position. It does seem that there is a danger is the host is effective and funny - that writers aren't essential to a show's success.

karion

My take on the writing ban for the hosts is that you simply can't "prepare" jokes. I mean, whether I'm actually writing a joke down, or simply composing it in my head, it's still "writing," right? Of course, I have utterly nothing to base this on other than my own keen legal reasoning. *grin*

Also interesting that you mention "core," 'cause a WGA member declaring "Financial Core" status (AKA "going fi-core") would allow them, basically, to give up all of their rights as WGA members (including voting rights) but be able to go back to work. It's basically legal scabbing, and that's what everyone thought the soap writers would do pretty early on. I guess they have? (I know the soaps stockpiled a shitload of scripts before the strike, so I don't know when they will -- or did -- run out.)

Obviously, this whole fi-core thing has been HEAVILY touted by the AMPTP as a way for the writers to "help themselves." (Need I add, "My ass"?) But I don't know how many writers have declared, if any.

(p.s. I just did a quick Google and some dude here, at least as of November 14, claims that no soap writers have gone fi-core. But here's a contradictory article by the lying liars at Variety.)

DorothyMantooth

I mean, who knows where the semantic line is drawn -- the point is that if Leno is a union guy, which he is, and supports his writing staff, which he claims to, he shouldn't be doing anything that resembles what he was doing before.

Again, look at Conan, who was very clearly sucking on purpose to illustrate a point. Jay's ego wouldn't let him do that, which is especially awful since NBC has already fired him to make way for Conan next year and he has nothing to lose.

As for Ellen, I don't know -- is she doing monologues and bits, or just dancing around the stage? The reason they were mad at Ellen was that she didn't even take a day off for the strike -- the networks made Conan, Jimmy and Jay return, while Ellen just rolled over like an improperly-adopted puppy and has been getting paid the whole time.

GingerVitis

Going back to my first question, is Leno in the clear if he just recites his material to a voice recorder and memorizes it? Is it really the act of writing it down, either on paper or typing it out?

And, since I am still asking questions, hasn't Ellen been breaking the rules since she returned?

karion

You can be fired (or not re-hired) for the most trivial of reasons and never get more work because your career mysteriously "cooled" while you were working. Or you could be the wrong ethnic flavor of the month. Or too old. Or too female. Or too much like someone younger than you who's become a recognizable brand (watch out, Diablo Cody clones!). The reasons are endless. That money might easily be all you make, ever.

And karion:

1. If something was written by writers before the strike, it is considered "struck work." So Leno's writers would write his monologue, and if he (as a WGA member) writes it himself, it still counts as a writer writing it.

He could have gotten away with being like Conan and exploiting his comic persona with no jokes, per se, but he didn't, and that's why the Guild is angry.

2. I don't believe Regis and Oprah operate under the same WGA contract that Ellen's writers do -- her show has a writing staff that essentially works like a late-night staff, as opposed to Regis and Oprah, who are nonfiction news/interview/what-have-you. Their staffs may not be WGA to begin with, or they might be covered under the newswriter's agreement.

3. The soaps are written by scabs who don't ever plan to be Guild writers. The WGA doesn't like this, but it's a practice that's happened during every strike ever, so there's not much they can do besides not call attention to it. Soap writers tend not to overlap genres the way feature/tv drama/comedy writers do, so it doesn't actually cause that many problems once the strike is over.

GingerVitis

karion

Mantooth, can you help me out on a few things? I read my Finke daily and have been actively following, but there are a few things I don't quite understand.

1. Under WGA rules, Leno cannot write the jokes he conceives of down on paper? He is just supposed to remember all of them without resorting to cue cards or teleprompters?

2. Why did Ellen Degeneres catch shit, but none of the other talk show hosts did (Oprah, etc.). I realize that Ellen herself is a WGA member and Oprah and Regis probably aren't, but don't they employ WGA writers?

3. How are the soaps still on the air?

I hate that I haven't figured these out yet.

karion

First, with regard to Leno, he wasn't allowed to write down his monologue, yes? Just mentally compose it and not put pen to paper? Do I have that correct?

Second - Ellen Degeneres took a PR hit for "crossing the line," which I assume means she is writing material for her show, which has to be a violation like Leno. Why did she take the hit, but not Oprah, Live with Regis, et. all.

And finally - how are soaps still on?

karion

*Yes, yes, that's obviously an oversimplification. on't lynch me for trying to be poignant or somesuch.

**Okay, shit. This whole comment is an exaggeration/oversimplification. But fundamentally, it's true.

DorothyMantooth

DorothyMantooth

Whereas low-level studio execs are a) a dime a dozen and b) make far more than $40k, en route to their eventual high-level studio-exec salaries of untold millions. And they have never made you laugh, or cry, or kept you company when you are bored or sick or lonely or have had an exhausting day.

There is fat to be trimmed in the industry, absolutely. But it is not on the writer's side.

GingerVitis

Carol Gardens

Umm, not sure how much more I can say about this whole thing. I will say that the advertisers are not dumb and the deals, so far anyway, are not done by number of page view's or video streamed, but done for flat fee's depending on period of time and how ad's are used on the site.

I should also say that I am not really pro-writers or pro-studios. I do know that there are many people who make around $40K a year (for perspective, writers on top shows easily make $20K per week, not including residuals) who are out of work because the studios are big bloated money-grubbing behemoths and the writers are looking to "revolutionize" the guild and are looking to expand the reach of the guild which the studios likely are not going to agree with. Some compromising would be nice.

ae38

kenboy

Can you show me where the writer(s) of Lost get $1,000,000 the first time an episode is rerun on ABC? I'm not talking about the license fees that networks pay studios to air each episode, I'm talking only about the residual paid to the writer.

I love your thing about the cost of bandwidth and site design, too. If the sites the networks are using to stream their shows are incurring high bandwidth costs, it means that they're showing lots of streams, and therefore, collecting lots of ad revenue. Conversely, if they're not collecting any ad revenue, they must not be showing many streams, and therefore, their bandwidth costs aren't all that much.

Funny how the internet scales like that, no?

kenboy

DorothyMantooth

DorothyMantooth

Especially if my residual income -- whatever line you consider that to come from -- is set to become obsolete once all content is streamed via the web. Without a new plan in place, that would seem to be quite a windfall for you and an ass-screwing for me, now, wouldn't it?

GingerVitis

ae38

It does not make sense, which is why the writers are asking for a percentage of the profits, if and when they ever appear.

GingerVitis

Leno's monologue may well have been funny, but even if he wrote it himself (violating WGA rules in the process), there is no way one man can write a new, joke-filled monologue day in and day out. That's why a writing staff is valuable -- you may not be particularly entertained by what they come up with, but they're coming up with it every single day.

Let's see how funny (or even coherent) the writer-less staffs are in two weeks -- that'll be the test.

GingerVitis

But anyway, writers get paid at the top line. Studios make money from the bottom line. DismalScience is right in that writers are clearly not business savvy. If I am losing massive amounts of money at the bottom line on online content (broadband width and upkeep plus desiging the sites doesn't come cheap), and advertisements help to offset some of that loss so I can convince my BOD its a good idea to help advertise the network, how does it make any sense to now outlay further costs (to writers) from the topline till I can at least make sure I'm in the black? The simple answer is that it doesn't. I have a strong premonition the writers are going to lose on that one.

ae38

Carol Gardens

Carol Gardens

I also wanna add -- on the subject of the 4 cents -- that the writers were told in '88 to accept the 4 cents because DVD technology was so "new" and "unproven." And they got hosed! I'd be shocked and disappointed if they made the same mistake again.

DorothyMantooth

The studios, already presumably breaking under the horror of having to pay 4 cents per DVD to the writers, insist that no one has yet figured out this internet thing and whether or not it's possible to make money on it, so they shouldn't have to give the writers anything. (technically, the studios offered to pay $250 for a year-long right to stream a show as many times as they want online; by comparison, a broadcast rerun = $20,000.)

kenboy

Carol Gardens

After all, better to break the rules during the premiere and have to change his game later than disappoint millions of viewers on his first night back with an abysmal show.

But the abysmal shows will follow....

People Paula

The meta point here isn't the level of entertainment these late night shows give us, either with or without the writing staff. All it does is showcase the level of skill of the host himself. Leno, like him or hate him, is a pro. Conan is a toad.

The WGA shouldn't fold based on the level of funny of Leno, nor should it take heart when Conan looks like a deer in the headlights without writers. Over the last month, NBC reminded us how bad Leno's old shows used to be -- nobody will ever want to see them on the internet or DVD. Leno's show will never be like Johnny Carson's -- there are no "Tea Time" skits that are at risk of earning money for some producer without compensation to the writers.

The issues the WGA has to focus on involve primetime TV and feature films. The late night wars are merely a distraction, unless the WGA uses them for their own means -- replace Letterman's "Know Your Staff" segment with "Know Your Striking WGA Writers" and get Nora Ephron back on there for a short chat (and a different writer every other night) and you'll have something that might shake up the strike talks like Leno did with Schwarzenegger and the California governor's race. Granted, Letterman might not want to do that, but you can bet your bottom dollar that the AMPTP wouldn't want to see that, either...

GreyGander

Malthus

ADismalScience

DorothyMantooth

Fritzpeterson

All the WGA can say is: we will allow your writing staff to come back to your show if you make an independent deal with us. Exactly what happened with Letterman. Now, the rest of the hosts don't have their own production companies. And the networks are refusing to break AMPTP party lines and negotiate separately.

I'm not sure what sort of "tough stance" by the WGA you're advocating here, either. They're picketing the shows. (And effing Jimmy Kimmel seemed mightily pissed off by that fact last night.*) They're getting the word out about the status of negotiations (or lack thereof) and the AMPTP's hard-assedness as much as they possibly can through their own web sites and videos. What else do you suggest they do? Start firebombing the studios?

*I feel the need to clarify that I don't actually watch that piece of shit show, but read about his pissiness about the pickets this morning.

DorothyMantooth

Fritzpeterson

Ugh. All late night talk shows suck, really, and flounder along the minimum threshold of "just funny enough not to change the channel." At least we can thank the strike that the awards shows will know they suck this year.

procrastinator, esq.

Magister

Why in the world wouldn't they? If you're not going to negotiate with your knives in your hands, you're going to negotiate with knives in you. As they (I) say. Night talk show hosts changes minds - did you miss the presidential candidates on their shows last night? Why wouldn't you leverage your relationships there?

If you don't feel that way, if you think that's evil, it's just more evidence that you guys are going to lose. Your opponents will not hesitate.

ADismalScience

Fritzpeterson

DorothyMantooth

@KarenUhOh: Very funny and poignant comment. But the in-flight magazine that plays to the great un-washed masses pays the bills so the writers can do the really good stuff (and sometimes not so good, trite stuff) for the smaller masses who understand and appreciate it.

Fritzpeterson

I don't write with brass handcuffs. Gold only.

Koreanish

Fritzpeterson

The big wrinkle comes, however, with the AMPTP's claims that WWP doesn't actually own all (or any?) of the rights to the shows' on-line content. WWP seems to be claiming that it does, of course. But if WWP didn't really have anything at stake in terms of the major sticking points of the negotiation, this deal isn't quite as important/precedential as a lot of folks hope.

I still think it's good, though!

(Whew! I am long-winded today!)

DorothyMantooth

@kakapo: The WGA did not make ANY deal with anyone but Worldwide Pants (Letterman's production company, which also produces The Late Late Show). Just like Carol Gardens said.

The WGA has not "allowed" anyone to go on the air! (No matter what stupid "conditions" or "concessions" you're claiming they're imposing on the hosts!) The hosts were forced back on the air by their studios under threat of *everyone* losing their jobs. The hosts, while members of the WGA, are also members of other guilds -- which are still under contract with the studios! The hosts were therefore in breach of those contracts by staying off the air during the strike.

The studios are most certainly using this as a bargaining tactic. And the shows most definitely need their writers.

I really can't believe that anyone could seriously be arguing otherwise.

DorothyMantooth

He was an old blowhard and somehow he got to Lincoln for these people. I don't get it.

SinisterRouge

Niko Bellic

Ah, actual clarification. Thank you!

Although, this whole mess is still damned confusing, even, I'm sure, for all who are involved in it. I suppose I could have googled and figured some of this out, but I was very curious about the actual terms of this odd agreement, particularly about the online stuff.

Kakapo

@TheDismalScience: I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but Ronald Reagan is dead.

crookedE

Carol Gardens

I don't think you understand - these concepts are related. As they say, the best marketing you don't pay for.

ADismalScience

Was speaking in a format/production sense then, but you're right - I am lazy with terminology.

Also, this is how I stay sane, don't hate my lazy! I'll be here all day and all night...

ADismalScience

Niko Bellic

Niko Bellic

They aren't making qualitative judgements; they're making quantitative ones. Britney Spears is vastly more marketable than Radiohead. Ask Nick Denton's wallet if he should run a Britney Spears story or a Thom Yorke story this morning.

Or simply click the logo and scroll down, young padawan, to learn the ways of the world.

ADismalScience

Niko Bellic

actorpull

Wrath of Farrakhan

Bos'un's Mate

KarenUhOh

It's like this. Everyone can go back on the air - if they do so in a manner that makes the public aware that:

1.) There is a writer's strike
2.) It's hurting the quality of the show

Last night was a worst-case scenario. It was funny, writer-free, and devoted minimal time to the strike. The whole guild's bargaining position is predicated on the concept that writers are mission critical to the success of the broadcast. If not...uh oh!

ADismalScience

Oh, for the love of...

Now I'm irritated and still a bit confused.

Kakapo

Bos'un's Mate

That is exactly what will happen. As someone with associates in the industry, I'm also keenly aware that this is exactly what they are all secretly worried about. Until they've had a few.

@SinisterRouge:

So learn the lessons!

ADismalScience

PandoraSpocks

SinisterRouge

SinisterRouge

Or, conversely, made a better show.

Tough to justify your high salary then, writerman!

ADismalScience

It's more like:

"You're only allowed to go back on the air if you suck hard enough to justify our bargaining position."

Here's the thing, guys: there is a REASON why we have Viacom, Time Warner, BMG, or content distribution networks generally in the first place. They determine the suitability and quality of content for us.

FYI: creative types need this. They need to be reined in, told what to write, instructed to place products, and forced to appear amidst advertisements. This is because writers, sadly, don't understand how to monetize their own creations. And even if they learned to do that, even if they had a YouTube or the intertron in some other form to distribute their content through, they wouldn't do so in a satisfying manner. They'd use different formats. They'd deny money from advertisers they didn't like. They'd generate foul, unfunny, avante-garde, or trite content and get it out there.

Artists are in this position because they suck at making business decisions. Guess what! The strike is another bad business decision! Have fun with that!

ADismalScience

Wrath of Farrakhan

magneticfields

Were they just allowed to be back on the air but only if they were completely silent?

That would have made a very interesting couple of days of television, anyway. I would have actually tuned in.

Kakapo

fiveinchtaint

Screen Name

What?

KarenUhOh