An Apology
Posted by Craig Mazin on 13 Dec 2007 at 11:45 am | Tagged as: WGA Issues
I catch a lot of crap in here, and a lot of it is either unfounded, misdirected or just plain nuts.
But not this time.
If I weren’t me, and I read the L.A. Times article that came out yesterday, I’d be pretty annoyed.
Actually, I am me, and I’m pretty annoyed.
When I talk to the media, it’s for a purpose. I’m trying to do whatever I can to get my union to do a better job of getting us a deal on New Media. That’s all I care about. You may disagree with both my purpose and my execution, but like I said…it’s my union too, and I’m doing what I feel is necessary.
My purpose is not to simply run down the leadership. When I speak to the media, as I did on KPCC the other day, I try as best as I can to balance the message. Any criticism I have of the leadership is directed in such a way as to say, “I wish they would really do X, because I think it’s X that is going to help writers the most.”
When I spoke to Claudia Eller, her intent was to do an article alleging a possible growing splinter movement within the Guild.
While it’s true that I know many writers who share both my concerns about our current situation, they also all share my committment to trying to get a good deal. No one wants to roll over, no one wants to cave, and no one wants to give away our future. When I said I would strike to the death if they never moved off their separated rights rollbacks and profit-based residuals baloney, I meant it.
She asked for names, and I refused to give any. She asked if there was some kind of movement, and I denied that there was…because hey, guess what? There ain’t.
There isn’t anything like a Union Blues right now, and thank God. When there’s no deal on the table and no specificity to even argue over, the thought of some kind of formal pressure group should give us all hives.
Sooooo…while I have no problem reiterating my essential thesis, which is that New Media is the only thing that matters right now and our union should drop its valueless bargaining chips in order to get to the meat of the issue, I insisted to Claudia that she also print my larger point, which was that this was no time for splinter groups in our union.
She promised to do that.
She didn’t.
So, I got screwed here. I’m not the first guy to get screwed, but it’s very disappointing, and because the article was full of comments by dissenting writers who didn’t give their names, the whole thing sounds like I’m leading or involved in some kind of Union Blues movement…or giving tacit approval of one…and I will never do anything like that.
And so I apologize. Frankly, my spidey sense was tingling on this one, and I should have just hung up the damned phone. I didn’t, I was stupid, I hate the way that article portrayed my feelings on this subject, and I apologize to anyone who read it.
I know some of you think I’m an attention whore who loves being in the paper. Trust me, I’m not. It’s actually very upsetting to read a lot of the things that are said in here about me, because I don’t like being called a coward, a sell-out, a stooge, a jerk, “I’ll see you (punch you in the face) on the line,” etc. Not much fun, ya know? Usually, I get over it pretty quickly, because I’m not a coward (well, maybe I am a little bit, but walking against the wind on this one is one of the braver things I’ve ever done), I’m not a sell-out, I’m not a stooge, and…
…well, okay, I’m a jerk, but nobody’s perfect.
This time, however, I have to tell you…none of you were sicker than I was after reading that. I wanted to make a point about what kind of dissent is defensible and what kind isn’t…and instead, I got used.
Yes, this time I’m perfectly willing to say that I got used.
It’s one thing when the AMPTP decides to make oblique, distorted references to what I write. I’m on record here about the AMPTP. Anyone can come and hear my true opinions about their lying, greedy, manipulative, exploitative ways.
It’s another thing when I’m selectively quoted…particularly when I was promised I wouldn’t be.
So once I finish my Dust Up obligation (in which I’m fairly in line with leadership anyway), I’m done with discussing this topic with the media. All of it. Papers, radio, semaphore…morse code. Go ahead, break out the champagne. 
If someone wants to interview me about my thoughts on steroids in baseball, I’m still available.
But in the meantime, for anyone who felt that article crossed a line, I agree, and I apologize. It was a misrepresentation, and I feel terrible about it. I acknowledge that readership comes with certain responsibilities, and I failed this time.
There won’t even be an opportunity for it to happen again.
Thanks for the apology. So, I guess you won’t be appearing in the Playgirl ‘Men Of The WGA’ spread I’ve been hearing about?
Yeah, journalists can’t be trusted but guess what, there is a lot of disagreement in the Guild. There’s a lot of pressure from The Guild for writers not to speak out but they are speaking privately. Verrone is losing a lot of them with the animation/reality TV issue and though you may not want to be the public face for the dissension, denying the dissension exists doesn’t help the Guild’s cause. It only makes it weaker.
Craig, you do know apologizing only means you are a shill? Real writers never apologize!
…that was tasteless, wasn’t it?
Nevermind then.
Why wouldn’t you stop doing the Dust Up in protest of being misquoted? Journalist should be held accountable in those situations. Believe it or not, even a Republican can make a stand for moral purposes as well as financial ones from time to time.
Craig–
Gracious apology, obviously heartfelt. The lesson here (I speak as a former longtime journalist) is that: (1) Reporters ALWAYS have their own agenda, and usually it involves selling out their subjects (on that point, see Didion’s famous intro to “Play It As It Lays”); (2) Variety and the LA Times have been particularly egregious in that respect during this strike, their coverage a toxic brew of laziness laced with anti-WGA bias. In my view, anyone who talks to Eller, McNary, et al deserves what they get. I called both the LATimes and Variety the other day and cancelled my subscriptions, partly in the hope that I would be one of thousands and that the protest would reverberate up the corporate ladder, and partly for the sheer thrill of it. It was as enjoyable as I had hoped. Please, let’s all remember this the next time Variety comes slurping around for us to take out tribute and congratulatory ads, etc. Not a chance. They’ve banked this guild member’s last nickel.
From the article Craig was quoted in:
But the directors won’t be pushovers when it comes to issues of new-media pay. They have many of the same concerns on that front as writers do.
Nonetheless, they are expected to be more flexible on terms and more sympathetic to studio arguments that Internet-related businesses are still in the formative stages and that there are many uncertainties about where and how soon those future revenues will pour in.
The Directors Guild has spent more than $1 million to study those very questions, hiring two outside firms to prepare a detailed report on new media. The findings will be presented at tonight’s meeting.
“Oddly, we’ve been preparing for this negotiation for well over a year,” said Gilbert Cates, chief negotiator for the directors. The alliance is “tough, rough and nervous because they don’t know what the future holds. We all want a piece of the Internet; the difference is the tactics that we use to get it.”
Oddly? Why does he say it like that? Seems like he’s poking fun at the WGA for just shooting from the hip. The DGA is clearly making statements that the WGA has lost its mind. Anyone dispute this?
Did the WGA also do a study like this? If not, why not?
Craig,
Will you send that post to the LA Times?
I’m hearing that the DGA held off their negotiating until after the holidays to give the WGA a chance to resolve this before it gets too ugly. Their delay is not a gesture of support as much as it is an act of kindness for a union in disarray.
Well, it sounds like no fun to get your message twisted (in a national forum) into something you didn’t intend and didn’t mean. Sorry it happened to you, thanks for setting the record straight, and see you on the line. Not to punch you in the face, but to give you a big-ass hug.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Craig,
This was pretty inevitable. I’m sure you’ve tried to do anything you can to avoid it…but trying to keep your balance on a soap box a lot of people are trying to kick…is a slippery slope.
I may not agree with everything you say, but will defend your right to say it. It’s just a tough gig to swallow when you are sooo visible to many writers and now especially non-writers. Their vision of you can sometimes gets clouded and believe that you are the voice of the WGA struggle.
For that reason I will pop champagne.
To me you’re a smart eloquent guy with a forum. I know a lot of smart eloquent people…and everybody has an opinion…but not a megaphone like the artful writer.
I would have been overly cautious…you threw more caution to the wind. Maybe as you said…that is the jerk side of you : )
I for one don’t think you’re a jerk. I think you’re a consummate artist, a businessman, a good Hollywood biz chess player and a dedicated family man. If I needed to know anything…having witnessed first hand how great you are with your family would be all I needed to know.
Having personally been misquoted and pulled out of context in the NY Times and the WSJ…I’ve learned my lesson.
No matter how bad you want to be able to champion what’s just…most of the time, to them…you’re still nothing but filler in the story. And it’s THEIR story.
So I’m going to pour some Moet White Star in honor of this occasion, because any lesson that can give you introspection, the conduit of a wise man, should be celebrated.
That…and I really like White Star.
Also…always, always always…trust your spidey senses.
Apology accepted.
In the vein of “if it bleeds, it leads,” the story of “fracturing union support for the strike” sells more newspapers than “despite tactical disagreements, Guild remains united on strike.”
Carig, I doubt you could get a retraction from the Times, but you may have the opportunity to take them to task in your Dust Up entry — or, if you prefer, you can tell them that distorting your comment in a news story relieves you of any obligation to finish the Dust Up. Either/or.
Is this really a big deal, considering Hollywood will shut down for 2 weeks leading up to the New Year?
Let’s face it, what exactly is the WGA going to resolve? Verrone and Young . . . sorry, I mean, the “guild” wants reality & animation. The AMPTP said, “Nope. Can’t have it.” Young screamed, “It’s an ultimatum!!!” Verrone said, Oh, wait, sorry, he wasn’t there.
For anyone who’s been in a negotiations, ain’t the term “ultimatum” semantical?
If a guy comes over to your house to buy your car, and you’re thinking before he shows up that you won’t go less than 5 grand. And so he shows up and he’s all, without even discussing price yet, “I want that ski rack you got in the garage.” At which point you scratch your head and say, “No, that’s not for sale.”
“What is that an ultimatum? No ski rack whatsoever?”
“Can we just talk about the car?”
“I want that ski rack!!!”
“You can’t have it.”
Guy storms off in a pissy fit. Just as he’s about to leave, he rolls down his window and shouts, “I’m going to get that ski rack, goddamnit.”
Then the motherfucker calls back a week later and says, “Tell you what, 5 grand for the car, and 200 bucks for the ski rack.”
“You can’t have the ski rack, man. I told you that alredy.”
“Ultimatum!!!”
“Whatever . . . weirdo.”
Suddenly, a much more calm, rational gentlemen appears in your driveway and says, “How much do you want for the car?”
“Five grand.”
“Will you take 4500?”
“Sure. Ah, hell, I’ll even throw in the ski rack.”
Moral of this fable: it don’t matter how many WGA members dissent or join hands; it don’t matter how many rants or apologies Craig Mazin writes. The cold hard facts are that the WGA has been negotiating like clowns. And now, everyone in town knows it.
I don´t want to portrait you as naive, Craig, but it´s Claudia Eller – what did you expect? What she does has as much to do with objective journalism as Michael Moores oeuvre (although the latter one has better intentions).
She´s equivalent to a studio voice. Not more. Treat her as such from now on, and stick to your site.
Good luck to you and kudos for that apology!
There’s an article in Variety today about how this strike is changing the TV business for good in ways that could end up helping networks but will not be advantageous when it comes to the work-for-hire writers. All those writers hugging each other on the picket lines, congratulating themselves for hanging tough might be hastening the demise of their professional opportunities.
I have a question that might be dumb: Has there been a DGA rep sitting in silently on our negotiations as an observer? I know this sometimes happens in other industries with multiple unions.
Ross,
In your situation here, “Guy” is the AMPTP, right? Because, the AMPTP walked away (twice), not the WGA.
Craig,
Very nice apology. Sincerely. Thing is, there was a way that you didn’t have to post such an apology. Like, not talking to a reporter. As someone here said (Glenn, I think), though, lesson learned — right?
Oh, and if Anonymouse was banned… can I ask: Why?
Appreciate the apology, Craig, but, re: being used… I told ya so. Lots of us told ya so. I realize this is not a gracious post. But the truth is, even though you apologized, you can bet the LA Times won’t mention it. Which means the damage is done. Very sad, indeed.
I look forward to seeing you on the lines.
The AMPTP, themselves, declared it an ultimatum in the negotiation session.
Nikki Finke’s secret sources to the contrary, the WGA negotiators did not unilaterally interpret the AMPTP’s demands (or denial of the WGA demands) as an ultimatum. An ultimatum is what the AMPTP negotiators, themselves, presented, very clearly and explicitly: “If you don’t take these items off the table right now, we will no longer bargain with you.”
As always, and very unfortunately, there’s only one side of this negotiation that is actually bargaining in good faith. There’s only one side of this negotiation that has never once walked away from the bargaining table.
I wish that were not the case. I really do.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Would you qualify Verrone’s statement that “reality WILL be in the next contract” (my emphasis) as an ultimatum? Any coincidence that the AMPTP acted mere hours after his statement?
This is very gracious of you to say. I also have to add that you are smart and thoughtful but having read your site for a couple of months now, I feel that many times your judgment can poor.
When you know your words are taken seriously, that you have a certain status and that this site is quoted regularly in the press (often with attribution) why would you say such powerful things that could obviously be twisted by management or the press to their nefarious benefit?
Dissent, discuss, contradict all you want — just know your audience. I’m sure you have the direct ear of many BOD and NegCom members — so by all means talk about any and all your ideas with them, in context, for the greater good of this negotiation.
Please don’t do it out loud.
I think you said you weren’t going to anymore, but don’t change your mind…
Scenario: DGA and AMPTP come to terms some time in February. AMPTP offers the same deal to the WGA.
Is the AMPTP still negotiating in bad faith? At that point in time, what is your new reason not to strike a deal with the AMPTP? Will you call the DGA stupid even though they have actually taken the time to research new media?
I want people on record now, because this will happen.
Craig,
You don’t need to apologize. What you did took a lot of guts and I for one am glad. You gave voice to a lot of us who felt we weren’t being heard. Anyone who is objective could tell your true motivations in the article and on KPCC.
So I still say, bravo!
No. That’s negotiation. “I have these demands and they’re very important to me!”
An ultimatum has an “or” within it, followed by a threatened consequence. So, for example, “give in on our reality demands right now OR we’re breaking off negotiations.” That would’ve been an ultimatum.
Stooge, the reality jurisdiction issues are important to some Guild writers, and not to others. There’s indisputably a division over that issue. But, mark it down, if the AMPTP offers a decent deal on new media, the Guild will not keep striking over reality. Wanna test that? Get your bosses to offer us a decent deal on new media in exchange for a dropping of the reality demand. Watch how fast reality demand gets dropped.
The Guild members and the BoD, and the neg comm… we all know what we’re ultimately striking over. Which is not to say that we’ll unilaterally surrender all peripheral demands and race all alone to our bottom line. But we know what we’re striking over. The BoD and the neg comm has been out at each of the picketed studios all day long (David K. Weiss was out at my picket, the Fox lot, at 5:30 this morning), fielding questions and addressing concerns, and for any writer who was there out at the picket line today to hear them, the message–what we’re striking over, and what we’re not–was made perfectly, perfectly clear.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Gotta know, of course, if it’s a good deal or a lousy one. If it’s a good deal, we tip our hat to the DGA for such fine bargaining, a few of us secretly suspect that the WGA’s 4-month-long strike helped soften the AMPTP up for the DGA to pounce on, and we graciously and gratefully accept the same new media deal and get back to work. Sounds pretty great to me!
If it’s a lousy deal, we do what we’ve been saying all along we’d do if the DGA cuts a lousy deal: refuse to go along.
I dunno. Is the AMPTP still saying, “Drop your demands immediately and unilaterally or else we walk away from the table”? ‘Cause if they are, then the AMPTP is still negotiating in bad faith. If they’re not, then they’re not.
Well, if it’s a bad deal being offered, our reason not to strike a deal with the AMPTP is that it’s a bad deal that’s been offered, and we won’t accept a bad deal, and we think the SAG walkout in June will give us additional leverage with which to secure a good deal.
If it’s a good deal that the DGA struck, and it’s being offered to us as well, then there won’t be a reason not to strike a deal with the AMPTP, and strike a deal we shall.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Lousy deal? I don’t get this. You think the DGA is stupid? Suckers? Why would it be a lousy deal? You think they just like it when the AMPTP negotiates with them in bad faith?
Demand v Ultimatums. I think you are parsing words, no?
Verrone is saying reality will be in the next contract or they will continue to strike. The AMPTP is saying take it off the table or we wont do a deal. I don’t see what the difference is.
By the way, you should check your labor law. Including non-mandatory topics (such as jurisdictional) in a labor negotiation is by definition negotiating in bad faith.
Stooge,
Depends what the deal is. Since the majority of DGA members don’t get residuals, and — as Working AD illustrated — many of those who do are basically getting coffee money rather than anything that could reasonably be described as “income,” they have less of a stake on those issues. What’s acceptable to them may not be to us.
I imagine the DGA does recognize, however, that jurisdiction over made-for-internet production has as large a bearing on their members’ collective future as it does on ours. So I’d trust, or least strongly hope, that any deal they struck on that point would at least be in the ballpark of what we’re seeking.
As for the “in good faith” question, well…if the AMPTP doesn’t engage in bullshit stalling tactics, staged hissy-fit walkouts, and personal attacks on the DGA negotiators, then I’ll be the first to concede that they’ve bargained in good faith with them. Has very little bearing on how they’ve been bargaining with us, however — starting long before the day we went on strike.
P.S. Left you a long-ass question about TV residuals and the network/studio dichotomy over on the “How to Get There…” thread, if you have the time or inclination….
Feel for ya, Craig.
Took guts.
You got my support.
Patrick, if the AMPTP offers a decent deal that includes new media but doesn’t include reality and animation jurisdiction, what do you say at that point to those WGA members (one hopes, a small minority) who insist that the Guild should hold out for reality and animation?
Pseud -
But that kind of strikes right at my point.
Why would they possibly deal in good faith with one group and not the next? Isn’t it very possible that the difference is the strategy of the DGA v WGA? The DGA sure as hell is making all kinds of public statements that it is exactly that.
I’ll check out your other post and definitely respond.
I can ‘t see the future, and for all I know, the DGA will strike a very good deal on the issue of new media residuals.
Obviously, I very much hope they’ll strike a good deal on new media residuals.
And, no, I don’t think the DGA are stupid or suckers. It’s just that their bargaining priorities may not happen to match the WGA’s exactly, and they may choose to seek other concessions in place of new media residuals… which is, of course, the primary issue the WGA is on strike over. That’s the DGA’s right. They’re in charge of their own negotiation. Just as it’s the WGA’s right to prioritize new media residuals over other issues that may, theoretically, be of import to the DGA.
In any event, as a WGA member, I’m pretty grateful to the DGA for today’s announcement.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
That’s ’cause you’re willfully misstating what the AMPTP is saying. The AMPTP is not saying take it off the table or we won’t do a deal. The AMPTP is saying take it off the table or we won’t even negotiate with you.
You knew that, right?
You see the difference, right?
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Wow. Because pretty much everyone I talk to seems to believe that the DGA just slapped the WGA.
That sounds like a pretty bold defense of the AMPTP (“alliance” = AMPTP) and an obvious mocking of the WGA’s preparation. Certainly how we read it here.
Again:
“We all want a piece of the Internet; the difference is the tactics that we use to get it.”
Who do you think he’s talking to?
Um, in a way, I’m one of that minority. And what I say to myself, and to the others in that minority, is that, well, we’re in the minority. And a strike that’s taking place over a principal demand that’s not prioritized by a healthy majority of a union’s membership is a strike that is doomed to fail.
By contrast, the issue of new media residuals is prioritized by not just a healthy majority of the WGA’s membership, but by pretty much all of us. It’s the one issue that can make Craig Mazin and Patric Verrone put aside their many differences and make out in the back seat of a car.
That’s this strike’s principal demand (which, again, is not to say that we should drop all others unilaterally).
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Patrick, do you have minimum numbers or deal terms in mind in terms of a deal you will vote to ratify? How are you going to decide what a ‘good deal’ is? Will you vote to ratify whatever the NegCom recommends? I ask because I’m trying to decide these issues, myself.
I see no difference in being willing to sit at a table and talk about issues that you aren’t supposed to be negotiating and not sitting at the table. Same thing. Neither is at all productive. At least the AMPTP is bringing this to a head.
Look, you strike…the AMPTP storms out. Everyone is playing hardball. I don’t see how it’s productive at all to keep proving what you already know…the AMPTP are assholes. How does reaffirming this every day get you anywhere? Is the idea that you wont do anything until the AMPTP stops being assholes? Isn’t that virtually impossible since that’s what they are?
You can keep acting like you have an equal bargaining position with the AMPTP. That’s going to get you nowhere. Or, you can realize, like the DGA is saying, that there is a better approach then full frontal confrontation.
Since this fight is so high school…let’s use an example:
The big bad bully, Nick Counter, tells David Young to give him his lunch money OR he will beat the crap out of him. David Young goes “no ultimatums!” Bully beats the piss out of David Young.
I don’t think arguing with the bully that it’s unfair that he’s so much bigger than you is going to help much.
And, Patrick, thank you for sincerely tackling these issues and debating on the merits.
Stooge,
Sorry, man. I’m just not offended by Gil Cates’s statement. It’s certainly appears to be true that the DGA and the WGA generally and historically pursue different tactics. Doesn’t, necessarily, make us right and them wrong (or vice versa). It just is what it is.
In any event, I read Gil Cates’s statement as another (modest) delay in the start of talks with the AMPTP, along with an assurance (to your bosses) that they’re not gonna allow the AMPTP to play the games they’re playing with the WGA (“…the DGA will not schedule our negotiations to begin until after the New Year, and then, only if an appropriate basis for negotiations can be established.”)
And that’s how most of the other writers are interepreting it too, Stooge.
Maybe we’re wrong and you’re right. I dunno. I ain’t omniscient. But, like I said, I’m not offended by the statement.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
This may be one of those things where I’ll know it when I see it.
I already know that nothing close to .3% is gonna cut it for me.
I also know that the universal right (of the studios) to unilaterally declare a show or movie “promotional” (and thus exempt from residuals) ain’t gonna cut it for me.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Where’s Working AD when you need him. AD, will you tell us your thoughts on the DGA’s position and letters/releases?
Craig,
That LA Times article seemed so stenchy to me on its face, it seemed obvious your quote got cherry-picked to fit the odor. Anyway, good job above.
Side note of thanks to Patrick Meighan for consistently doing the Lord’s work here.
Yeah, except the WGA negotiating committee was actively in the middle of formulating a counter-proposal to the AMPTP’s ultimatums when the AMPTP walked away from the bargaining table. In other words, the WGA was willing to sit at the table and, yes, actually negotiate several of those very issues. That IS productive. The AMPTP, by contrast, was not willing to sit at the table and negotiate any of those issues, because they were much more interested in using those issues as wedges than in actually bargaining at all (good faith or no). That is NOT productive.
Sorry, Stooge. Facts is facts. The AMPTP and the WGA could be negotiating right this very second, but your guys walked away from the table. For the second time in a month, it was your guys, unilaterally, who broke off negotiations. And I really am sorry about that, ’cause it’s just making this whole thing that much longer and more painful for everyone.
If you have any ability to influence your bosses to return to the negotiating table and bargain in earnest with the WGA, I think you owe it to the many hardworking folks reading this board (who are currently jobless) to exercise said influence. The WGA is still sitting there, as we speak, just waiting to talk.
Just waiting!
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Stooge,
You’re not trying to help foment or heighten some sort of divide or discord between the WGA and the DGA, are you?
I mean, that’s just not something you’d want to see, is it? Right?
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
I like the fact that almost everyone has taken the high road and held off on the tiny penis “I toldja so!” retorts regarding the article and Craig’s role in it.
That’s encouraging. Hope it lasts.
Craig,
You stepped up to the plate on KPCC – bravo for not letting the erroneous statements from others go unchallenged. That’s a clear example of when TO engage the media, especially as the WGA didn’t get someone on to rebut the AMPTP guy. The live radio format leaves you in control of your own words.
Unfortunately, that’s not the case with print reporters who have their own agendas – you give up all control to selective quotation. I understand the desire to to never get burned again, but please don’t close the media door completely.
Funny enough when I read the LA Times article the first thing I thought when I read Craig’s quote was, well that was taken out of context.
I find the reality issue to be a total waste of time. It’s understandable why the WGA would like control of reality, but I can tell you, as someone who works on a number of the top reality shows (including that one), the people writing the shows are producers and have zero interest in being represented by the WGA.
What’s more the only resemblance writing reality shows bares to episodic television shows is that they both employ the English language. Most, well all, reality shows are so formulaic that once the template is set literally anyone with reasonable command of the English language could write them. And if the truth were told, I’ll bet there isn’t an episodic writer in the WGA who would consider writing a reality show anything but a humiliating demotion.
I think Craig was right a couple of days ago. Drop all the peripheral crap and cut to the chase. If Verrone’s goal was to teach the AMPTP a lesson, remake the WGA and get respect he’s delusional. All the negotiating committee should be focusing on is getting a fair deal on new media. I think the WGA yanked the DVD issue a little too early in as much as it was the best legitimate bargaining chip the WGA had. (i.e. the WGA will agree to live with the existing DVD formula, IF the AMPTP agrees to give the WGA a fair cut of new media revenues.) No doubt it was a sincere and bold attempt to show good faith to the AMPTP in order to get a deal done before the strike, but I think in retrospect they shot their best bullet too soon.
Stooge, Patrick is a cut and dried fanboy of the WGA. in his eyes they will/have never made a mistake. don’t waste your time.
{holds up a lovely herring} Patrick, who walked away from the table? i’m sure someone, somewhere, hasn’t heard the answer yet…
That’s note Verrone’s goal, nor is it the goal of the negotiating committee. The AMPTP would like us to believe it’s their goal.
Their goal, however, is to negotiate the best deal possible for the membership of the WGA. And their principal demand is for a fair share of new media residuals.
However, unilaterally dropping all fringe demands is a lousy way to secure the best deal possible on your principal demand.
We already learned that, once, on the DVD issue. We’d be foolish to repeat the mistake.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
66sputnik:
Easy there. That’s tiptoeing pretty close to the line. Engage Patrick on the substance of his arguments, please.
I think this got lost in the switchover, so I’m reposting. If not, well, sorry (as the topic goes).
I’ve been mulling over what happened in my head last week. Patrick’s news from his boss on the state of negotiations in reality jurisdiction fills an important gap.
I wondered what was being discussed if not the new media proposals (as both sides have said).
I’ve come to the conclusion that the NegCom got played.
The AMPTP held a carrot of reality out and instead of staying on target, they bit. I think Patric’s speech was a result of the “progress” he was seeing in that arena. I also think that the AMPTP never intended to give on that jurisdiction, but saw an opportunity to drive that wedge and took it. I think it was planned (hence the hiring of a new PR firm).
Now, there’s doubt in the moderate’s minds of whether the simple message of new media isn’t covering a more comprehensive power grab attempt. In other words, the AMPTP check raised and the WGA bet into the pot (for you poker saavy people).
And it worked. I’m not 100% sure reality/animation isn’t a major goal. Haggis and others writing essays on the topic didn’t help. And the DGA legitimately believes there’s an impasse and pushed forward with their own negotiations (something the AMPTP has been desperately wanting to happen).
Could this have been foreseen? I don’t know. Wasn’t in the room. Probably could have been avoided if the main topic remained new media. And Patric’s public comments put him in a pickle as he can’t just take it back.
It was very well played by the AMPTP, Stooge.
Well, you’re wrong. We in the WGA bloody well have made a mistake. A big one, too: we trusted the AMPTP when they told us that if we withdrew our demand for a bump in the DVD residual, they’d give us a fair deal in new media. And so we did… and they didn’t.
The AMPTP lied to us, and we believed the lie, and that was, most assuredly, a mistake.
Shame on us if we make the same mistake twice.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
It was, in fact, very well played by the AMPTP. Stooge, if you had anything to do with it, congrats. Y’all are the kings of not-negotiating.
The good news (or bad news, depending on your perspective) is that this is a long, long, long battle. They won this round. It’s on us to win the next one.
I think we will.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
EXCEPT….there were already negotiations taking place on new media issues. each side had put something on the table and there was room for a settlement somewhere in the middle.
the demand for reality, animation, sympathy strike rights did nothing than unify a decidedly non-unified AMPTP. and now they’ll be more than happy to wait until jan 1 and make a quick deal with DGA, who actually did their homework, actually studied new media, and actually wants to make a deal.
That’s because Craig has banned most of the people who have taken aggressive positions against him on this blog. He has done it quietly, but quite thoroughly.
Craig was blindsided by the LA Times, but it’s difficult to rustle up any sympathy for him. He’s no blushing virgin. How many people on this blog alone have been trying, week after week, to tell him that the interests against the WGA are looking for any and all possible ways of weakening the striking writers?
Now he’s astonished to have found himself used and misquoted by one of their tools? So it is either stupidity or naivity that has led Craig to this point, I suppose. Neither is a rousing endorsement of his ability to continue to act as the voice of “loyal opposition.” I hope he keeps his word.
Very well, but what do you make of this from the New York Times? (I keep repeating it, because it’s a direct quote. And I know this thread is all about cherry-picked quotes in newspapers, but…)
Brian, you say that as if you negotiated contracts for a living.
Oh, wait… you do. wink
What the WGA president says to a reporter 8 months before a negotiation can be categorized in the same field as what Nick Counter says to a reporter 8 months before a negotiation: spin, intended to intimidate, massage, cajole, flatter or manipulate the other side.
Ditto for what Nick Counter leaks to a reporter today, or what Patric Verrone says at a rally on Friday.
I hope we’re all sophisticated and savvy enough to know the difference between a negotiator’s public spin and his private objectives.
[Add on to that the fact that, as Craig learned today, reporters can cherry-pick quotes to fit their pre-conceived angle on a piece... whether the angle is to make the subject of the interview seem like a treasonous member of a fifth column, or an unhinged radical divorced from any pragmatic sense.]
In any event, Stuart, I assure you, if you’d been on a picket line today and heard the neg comm and BoD folks field questions and address concerns, you’d have no doubt whatsoever about what the Guild is really on strike for. None.
Maybe you should’a come by.
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
That these other items were on the table at all surprised the crap out of me. The sooner the WGA can focus on new media the better off it will be.
EXCEPT the Alliance hadn’t put its EST proposal on the table. They said they would. Never did. Just left the WGA sitting there waiting, and waiting, and waiting…
It’s hard to come up with a number between X and Y when the other side will never tell you what Y is.
Also, the AMPTP never responded to the WGA’s counter on fixed-residuals for ad-embedded streaming. Never said yes, or no, or how ’bout a different number instead. Just… nothing. And, again, the WGA was just sitting there waiting, and waiting, and waiting…
In short, you don’t seem to be particularly well-informed about what occurred at the negotiation table.
In any event, I assure you, the WGA does, very much, want to make a deal with the AMPTP. They’re still sitting at the table, right this very moment. Waiting, and waiting, and waiting…
Patrick Meighan Culver City, CA
Supporters of Craig, friends of Craig — they’re all saying the same thing:
A. He’s a really nice guy in person (I believe one person called him a “pussycat”).
B. He’s got great intentions but is incredibly naive (this is from a number of his “good friends”), and doesn’t really understand what he’s doing here, or how his posts could be viewed as anything other than he intended.
That said, I met Craig, and I thought he was quite affable. But, I don’t get why some of his friends talk about him as though he’s their slightly mentally challenged 2 year-old. Because I’m pretty sure he’s neither.
And… I’d still really like to know if Anonymouse was banned, and if so, why?
Except, according to you, that’s not true. You said your boss said they were negotiating about reality jurisdiction. They were not waiting and waiting and waiting. They should have been, but were not. Unless you got it wrong.
I really am not. Patrick, I show you the respect of assuming you are acting in good faith (I assume you really believe that the AMPTP is only acting badly and the WGA is just innocent in all things). I’d like you to do the same for me. It’s really easy to just go to the well and, instead of arguing the point, attacking my motives. This pisses me off. I make good, rational points. I can be wrong like anyone else, but I am NEVER disingenuous.
Frankly, I am trying to break through your defenses here. Everything that reflects badly on the WGA you kind of dismiss. The DGA has very clearly and publicly said that the WGA is not prepared for this nor are they behaving rationally. I was hoping that having a similarly situated labor union telling you that your leadership is acting a little crazy and were unprepared would have some effect. Instead you chose to spin it. Is there anyone else other than Patrick that wants to argue the DGA didn’t say what I said?
You NEVER trusted the AMPTP. NEVER. EVER. You don’t for a second believe anyone did. The truth is that the WGA is playing “the game” just like the AMPTP. Shame on you for claiming that you ever did. You all went in eyes wide open. You had your strategy and the AMPTP had theirs. Your strategy does and has stunk. The AMPTP, on the other hand, is playing this very well so far. And I’m saying this knowing full well that the AMPTP playing it this way puts my job in jeopardy. I just have a problem faulting their position given the way the WGA is behaving. I find that the DGA’s statements support my previous held beliefs.
So you sit and you wait. For what? A group that you don’t trust and you think are scum to “do the right thing?” I don’t get how this is a plan. Sitting and waiting in hopes that SAG doesn’t do a deal is your strategy to win the next round?
Again, you are going to have to accept that you are not in an equal bargaining position.
And what’s gonna happen is the DGA will do a deal on New Media and you will be offered that deal. The leadership will have a really tough time, given the recent events, to say they can’t take that deal because it excludes reality/animation jurisdiction. Those barter items are effectively GONE. For good (that’s what “winning this battle” means for the AMPTP). If you think you can get a better deal than the DGA, then you need to act NOW. Otherwise you wont.
So you flat out admit that your side uses the very same tactics that the AMPTP uses!
My head is gonna explode SCANNERS style.
They were waiting for you to drop the points listed in their ultimatum.
Priya – Class. Real classy. Craig was on the NegComm like 3 years ago. He knows more than anyone posting on here (well, I think I have him in areas that are in my personal expertise). Shame on you. Craig is anything but naive. Unreal.
Pseud – I responded on that thread.
Appreciate the apology. But you did walk right into it.
Priya:
Yes, I’m a really nice person…in person. Yes, I’m a pussycat, generally speaking. I don’t have too much invested in the identity of “angry guy.” I’m rarely angry. Usually I’m just depressed or anxious.
There’s a word for when you have both of those at once.
Jewish, I think.
I think I did ban Anonymouse…and I think it was for a comment, the content of which centered around the word “cunt.”
Simple rules, here, Priya.
Signed,
Your Favorite Retarded 2 Year-Old
Sorry you got used Craig – I kind of felt like that was going on in an oblique way, but apparently it crossed the line this time.
And good of you to recognize your part in playing into the hands of those who would use you.
Keep up the good posts and rebuttals of late.
I’d have to say, though, that if Patric Verrone’s objective was to get the AMPTP right where he wanted them using the spin of his public statements, he’s been badly out-spun.
And if he was telling the truth — even if this was cherry-picked from a larger context — I sure hope he’s realized since then that reality and animation jurisdiction are not issues that his membership want above all else and would refuse a contract without.
If I lived in Southern California, I would love to have joined the picket line, at least for a shift. If I were a WGA member, I would have flown or driven down expressly for the purpose of fulfilling my obligation to picket. And I would certainly have taken advantage of the opportunity to learn first-hand from the Board and the Negotiating Committee whether there was any chance that they would allow reality and animation jurisdiction become the sticking point that scuttled any prospective deal.
Craig,
Thanks for responding. I can understand that a comment centering around “cunt” would be cause for banning. Please take into account the rest of Anonymouse’s posts. Civil. Well-reasoned. And fairly intelligent. The heat of the moment gets to us all. Some of us more than others. But, generally speaking, Anonymouse has been a great contributor to your site — as I’m sure you can agree. Also, it should be noted: I do not know Anonymouse outside this and Kay’s site. I have no personal interest in getting Anonymouse back here, other than I believe that their measured past should influence their one mis-post.
Also note that I did not call you a slightly mentally challenged 2 year-old. I said that your friends speak of you as if you were one (that totally could have been phrased better). I also said that I thought you were neither (as in neither mentally challenged nor a 2 year-old).
Amptp Stooge:
It’s just getting comical at this point…
Priya,
Were you not the one involved some time ago in an argument with Craig and others on this board for their use of derogatory terms against women?
I’ve been lurking a long time, so it could have been as long as a year ago. It’s difficult to remember.
In any case, if memory serves, I believe Craig took exception with you for defending a woman on this blog who had voiced her opinion about the derogatory comments. I believe his argument was against “political correctness nazis” and anyone who didn’t like what he and his fellow blog-mates said about women just couldn’t take a joke.
I believe the C-word and the N-word came up at that point, as well. Was anyone banned for using those words? I don’t remember Craig’s final ultimatum on the use of those words or their context.
I used both those words in that argument as illustrative points. Or, at least, that’s what I was attempting. I was neither banned nor told off. I believe. I’m pretty sure I’m not banned, at least.
Any thoughts on the NLRB charges the WGA filed today? I get the feeling this isn’t exactly lighting up Rudolph’s nose for a Merry Hollywood Christmas.
From the WGAE website:
“Today the WGA filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board against the AMPTP for its refusal to bargain in good faith with the WGA. It is a clear violation of federal law for the AMPTP to issue an ultimatum and break off negotiations if we fail to cave to their illegal demands…”
Is the NLRB much more than a corporate rubber stamp these days?
WGA Files Complaint With National Labor Relations Board Writers Allege that Producers Violated Federal Labor Law By Linda Haugsted — Multichannel News, 12/13/2007 4:50:00 PM
The Writers Guild of America filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television producers violated federal labor law the day negotiations to end the writers strike broke down on Dec. 7.
The unfair labor practices complaint, filed with the federal agency Thursday, refers to a letter presented by AMPTP negotiator Nick Counter to WGA negotiator David Young on the last day of active negotiations.
The letter states that the AMPTP asked that six issues be withdrawn from consideration in order for negotiations to continue. In subsequent statements, the two sides confirmed that such issues included whether the WGA will have jurisdiction over writers for reality and animation series.
The WGA complaint asserts that the NLRB has long held that an employer may not require a union to resolve specific proposals as a precondition to discussing other subjects.
“Such conduct frustrates the bargaining obligation and, as here, effectively stalls negotiations preventing substantive discussion from taking place,” WGA wrote in the letter to NLRB Region 31 regional director James McDermott.
In announcing the complaint, the WGA reiterated its demand that the AMPTP immediately return to the negotiations.
And we all know how fast the government moves.
How about NOT living in American either?
Craig is being 1) a writer, 2) American, and 3) thoughtful. Are country’s being run into the ground by a baboon who’s the opposite of all these qualities.
Okay, I obviously have no concept of the union mentality. Okay, so let take a swing . . .
Union gets their members to vote a global issue of sorts, yes?
Once they vote on a majority to, in this case, strike, NO MEMBER, no matter what the leaders do or say or how they act or fail to act or how they negotiation, NO MEMBER, while people are losing their homes and jobs and such, NO MEMBER is allowed to voice any consent whatsoever?
In other words, once you vote, you’re fucked?
Hmm, so a union is a dictatorship. Okay. Thanks, guys. Don’t bother answering. Figured it out for meself.
We had a solid hundred-fifty people out at Viacom in NYC today in a snow/sleet/rain storm who knew exactly what we’re on strike for. You know who else does? The AMPTP. I don’t care what Verrone said where, they know what makes this deal and so does everyone else.
is the WGA’s members and stances so weak that they will fall like a house of cards with a few sentances of dissent? god have a little faith in yourselves. you pulled the trigger and went on strike, have the balls to defend the fact you did and not blame it on the AMPTP. get some personal responsibilty and quit being god damn victims. it isn’t appealing.
What the hell did I do?
Obviously a sex maniac. Best to ban him before he commits a vial act, gets arrested for it, chooses war over jail, and then either dies during said war, or goes on to live a happy life.
Patrick,
What do you say to all the writers who are suffering now and will continue to suffer because of the inept leadership at the Guild? Stop blaming the AMPTP for the deadlock.
“There’s an article in Variety today about how this strike is changing the TV business for good in ways that could end up helping networks but will not be advantageous when it comes to the work-for-hire writers. All those writers hugging each other on the picket lines, congratulating themselves for hanging tough might be hastening the demise of their professional opportunities.
anonymous | Dec 13, 2007 | Reply”
Wow, the studios plants have thrown all subtlety out the window.
Given the way the studios have acted — how in the world could WGA members not be united? The studios/conglomerates are the ones that UNITED US with the way they acted. In the article, they wrote, “…the negotiations with the major Hollywood studios that broke off Friday.” This makes it sound like there WASN’T one party that walked away from negotiations. There was! The studios walked away. In fact, if you read Robert Elisberg’s recent article, he sums up the only conclusion — that the studios NEVER had any intention of negotiating.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/wga-strike-primer-spin-b76640.html
As a WGA member, I’m not mad or upset with our leadership, I’m furious with the studios. And I can assure you that is the consensus out on the picket line.
I’m furious in particular at this:
Even if they agreed to our highest demand and then matched it with SAG and the DGA, it would only cost them $131 million extra a year. This means pennies for the studios a piece. I believe the highest any individual studio would have to pay (extra a year) is Fox at $6 million. 6 million!!!!!!!!!!!
Let me put that into perspective, Les Moonves signed a new compensation package worth, on the low end, $30 million dollars per year and on the high end $56 million!!!!! For one person at one studio.
I can assure you that the WGA is more united than I’ve ever, EVER seen them. And it has nothing to do with our leadership and EVERYTHING to do with the disgusting way the studios/conglomerates are acting.
Ok, I think I get it, you’re in love with him already!
I think it’s not so subtle way to try to denegrade someone by saying even his friends think he’s “mentally challenged” but he’s a big boy, I’m sure he (and this is his blog, you know?) can handle it.
And I’m all for banning use of the C word. The B word has become commonplace and I’m pretty sure the C word will be reclaimed one of these days too. Although… cyuuunt! doesn’t quite have the same ring to it.
I hope to god this latest move with the NLRB works, it just might. I personally thought the AMPTP’s response was incredibly childish. I mean, both sides sound like children at this point, arguing, bickering back and forth — but since when do you slap someone with a legal move and their response is: “nah-nah-nananah.” This AMPTP release did nothing for me and hopefully bolsters the guild’s stance.
If, fortheloveofallthatisholy, they go back to the table, please, oh please, WGA have a STRATEGY planned out this time and possibly think ahead a few steps in this chess match! In other words: be willing to compromise and drop reality and/or animation.
my 2 pennies.
Perhaps because, no matter how much some disagree with the WGA leadership, the AMPTP is more to blame for where the negotiations are now than the WGA. They’re not exactly asking for the moon, here.
Uh, yeah, of course it is. You think some writer’s going to start blasting his brethen on the pickets line? He’d rather walk around and around and around and around, chanting, making friendly chatter, soliciting honks, etc.
Then, later on that night, when he’s all alone, sitting in the comforts of his own home, he logs onto his favorite blog and then anonymously bitches and moans about the WGA leadership.
Sorry, ’tis the digital era. Sucks, don’t it? Unless, of course, you work for Google.
So what if the LA Times chooses to manufacture a story about dissent and disagreement among writers?
Is our unity so tenuous that we fear the mere expression of the idea of disunion will somehow reify it into reality?
Is the AMPTP’s opinion of the guild so weak that they’d believe the strike will collapse from within?
If so, let them be deluded.
JP Wolff
… do you guys have any comment about the breaking news (WGA complaint w the National Labor Relations Board) which I posted earlier or do you just care about razzing Craig and not actual movement re the strike.
Like nearly every other institution in Washington the past seven years, the top echelon of the NLRB has become politicized.
Walking out on negotiations, however, can be interpreted as a violation of the National Labor Relations Act.
The most likely outcome here is that both sides will be ordered back to the table, and I’d assume that’s all the WGA is after.
Works for me.
Ah, but when? Before or after a deal with DGA?
The breaking news demonstrates the error in Craig’s assertions about the utility of the strike vs the threat of the strike. There has always been another bullet in the gun, and there remain more to be fired. It doesn’t take a ballistics expert to figure out what those bullets are, or how hard they can hit. The question really falls to the AMPTP: how many bullets would you like to eat before you make a deal?
Any other topic of discussion is, on some level, bullshit.
simonjester,
I’m no ballistics expert, so please explain. Aside from the economic leverage writers exert over the companies, what bullets remain?
Thanks,
JP Wolff
In light of this latest piece of theatre -
Not meant as a post – just a thought for you to consider late at night – at what point do you consider leading the 40% or so who are becoming increasingly restive? Legacies aren’t made from weak knees – that being said you – as I’m sure you know – would be putting everything at risk.
People have starting saying they are waiting for SAG to go out but with the demise the pilot season and most TV and soon movies not filming SAG will have virtually been on strike since January – I don’t see them choosing to actually go on strike come June. The situation calls for cool headed adults.
Again, not a post, just a thought.
Sorry, but the above facts really cannot be repeated enough for me.
3 union contracts = 3 Les Moonveses
Anybody want to trade?
Craig–
Are you serious? No one who read that article with anything like a clear head could’ve taken from it what you fear was taken from it.
What are you apologizing for? As that great writer said, “Screw your courage to the sticking place.” You’re on the side of the angels, my friend, don’t sweat it.
Many, many of us — the silent majority of readers here and those not brave enough to give their names, like me — admire what you are doing. Better to have places like this blog to blow off steam than to sit around with other outraged friends and create a “Union Blues” type of group.
Peace. Tis the season.
Josh: Who cares if the AMPTP surfs the web and pulls points from Craig’s blog? I don’t. Right (or Write) will out and win in the end.
Everyone knows the writers are right. At times, I’ve disagreed with the leadership’s methods, doesn’t mean anything other than that.
So, what? You’re advocating some form of censorship?
Yes, I will trade you one Larry David and half a Matt Groening.
Their writing money or their producing money? Cause I know which one I want.
OK, so the WGA filed a complaint with the NLRB.
The obvious question is, why didn’t the Guild do this on 11-31, the FIRST time the producers walked away? If the NLRB has the power to compel the AMPTP to negotiate, shouldn’t we have availed ourselves of this power BEFORE we went on strike?
Sheesh.
>
I’m being very careful about what I post now. I’ve seen how quickly what I say can turn into me being called a liar or a troll. Even when it’s a difference of interpretation or opinion. And I see this as a WGA-oriented site, and I post here as a guest, not just of Craig, but of the rest of you. And to be fair, I view Kay’s site the same way, and tried to hold to that when I posted there.
To answer your question about the DGA, I’d say the intentions are clear. If the WGA and AMPTP are somehow negotiating again by the beginning of January, the DGA will agree to wait. But if we’re still in the current impasse, the DGA will open talks. At which point, any WGA talks will be sidelined until the DGA talks are concluded. I think that’ll take at least 2 months, given the materials and the tangled nature of the whole thing. If the DGA gets a good deal out of it, then that’s good for everyone.
The NLRB move is an interesting one. I don’t know what it will lead to. It would be nice to think that the NLRB would force the AMPTP back to the table, but my gut tells me that won’t happen. I think I’m too pessimistic by nature to think that government would actually try to deal with this issue, and particularly an enforcement body coming from the current Presidential administration.
As for Michael Apted or Gil Cates’ opinions, I wouldn’t presume to know them. The reference to tactics could easily be their way of saying that each guild does things its own way. I don’t see that as an attack on the WGA. At the same time, I think we’re all aware of the history of bad blood between the guilds. I’ve seen it firsthand at an annual meeting five years ago. And we all saw it in the fight over “A Film By” three years ago.
I agree with what I think Patrick has been trying to say – if there’s a good deal on the table that works for the “healthy majority” of the guild, then that’s going to be the contract. Or something like that. And Patrick, I still want to see both my guild and yours institute the conscience clause that the Teamsters already have. We know it’s a really tiny umbrella, but it’s a strong moral point.
And regardless of what the man thinks of me, it’s good to see Josh posting on this site again.
There have always been several bullets in the gun. Most of them have been discussed widely, including going to the NLRB and filing a complaint (that went around the lines quickly at the start of the strike). We have several ways forward, all of which are escalations from simply walking out.
1) Divide and conquer. With the AMPTP membership feeling the pain disproportionately from one another, there has been a lot of talk about negotiating separately. Pick off the weak link, force the hardliners to the table. This strategy works — just ask the UAW.
2) Divide and conquer II. Present proposals to a number of smaller players, allowing their projects to go back into production. This is probably best applied as a component of option 1, offering the weak links political cover to sign side deals.
3) Go to the FCC. Not my favorite option, and probably the longest and most difficult way there from here. However, even the explicit threat would pressure the companies to come to terms. The last thing they want is a federal speculum up their collective hoo-has, and let me assure you: a government bureaucrat positively LIVES to use that speculum.
4) Go to the SEC. Weakest possible bullet, but credible enough in concert with other moves to motivate good behavior. There may even be a case. We’ve all heard it — if the companies tell their shareholders one thing and tell us another thing, they’re lying to someone. Proving that there was no lie will force the companies to open their books. See: speculum.
5) The Peter Jackson Gambit. File a class-action lawsuit on behalf of every feature writer ever promised a piece of the back end, only to receive statements every year demonstrating that his/her movie has somehow managed to lose another six hundred million dollars. The discovery process alone would be terrifying.
Do we see a pattern here? What the AMPTP most wants to avoid is opening the books. To anyone. For any reason. I’ve worked in the real world — the studios’ accounting practices would land the officers of any other corporation in jail. You know it, I know it. The American People know it.
Up until today, I was concerned that the leadership may lack the intestinal fortitude to pursue these options. Not anymore. The AMPTP made it clear to them that we’re locked in an existential conflict, and now the WGA has made it clear they intend to treat it that way.
Hopefully, it won’t come to all of this. Hopefully, the AMPTP will come back to the table and behave like adults. Who knows? Maybe they even will. But to say that we’ve run out of ways to fight this thing if they don’t come back is to admit that you haven’t really thought about the problem.
Judging from the fact that they are such altruistic defenders of middle class writers (they even picket!), I would assume that their ratio of writing to producing money would be consistent with their value at each of those positions. To suggest otherwise might mean that they are complicit in allowing the studios to avoid paying WGA health and pension fringe on the majority of their salaries, which would only hurt the less fortunate.
I mean, they would still get paid those exorbitant sums to produce something where they had no involvement in the writing, wouldn’t they? You know, like a wedding video? Please tell me I’m wrong Brian – I am not sure I can handle this on the same day that I find out Clemens is a ‘roidhead.
simonjester:
Bullets 3-5 would take years. All chest beating aside, do you really think the Guild can last years (plural) with no income coming to their members?
The NLRB takes 60 days to decide anything. I’ve dealt with them before (it’s how I got a license). One i not dotted, one t not crossed and it’s back to square one. And that’s without a major holiday impending. When it gets around to doing something, the AMPTP will already be in negotiations with DGA. NLRB is not going to stop that. At best, they demand a return to the table after those negotiations are done.
Just look how many years it took Buchwald in his suit against Paramount.
Brian, two questions:
1) Does the WGA turning to the NLRB constitute a tacit admission that it lacks the intrinsic clout to get the AMPTP to bargain with it, much less win any significant gains in that bargaining?
2) Could the AMPTP file a cross-complaint asking for a 60-day cooling off period, forcing the writers back to work under the old contract for that time (and if they did, would the request be granted)?
LOL, MLBPA.
Sorry the Rocket disappointed. But as an avid Sox fan, couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.
What, for fun, or just to polish their radical cred?
You couldn’t be more right. This is the fundamental problem with the AMPTP member studios and I will never understand why the WGA et al hasn’t focused all their resources on ending it. All it would take is one studio CFO being perp-walked for their criminal activity (which is SOP by all of them) and these labor agreements would be a piece of cake for the next 50 years.
Stuart,
I’m not sold on either of those prospects. The first doesn’t really mean anything. I don’t think the AMPTP wanted to negotiate to being with. They wanted the DGA and manuevered the WGA into allowing that. On the second, what’s more interesting is that Craig mentioned something about the government being able to impose the AMPTP’s deal on WGA. Would really like to hear more about that.
Because their leadership is crazier than even yours is puported to be. Doug Allen’s first two actions were to start a jurisdictional war with the co-bargainer, AFTRA & rebuffing any sort of help from the ATA, prefering to focus on how to get us all franchised again.
flickdog,
Stooge hasn’t posted in hours. What are you talking about?
Brian,
I think years is an overstatement. You’re right that the NLRB is probably not going to make any decisions this week (or probably before the end of the year) but consider two things:
1) The AMPTP freaked out. They know they’re in the wrong and in violation of the law. Whatever internal pressure there may be to return to the table will increase, whether its from the parent companies who don’t need the headache, or from the “moderates” who want this nightmare to be over.
2) Lawsuits get filed all the time, and yes they take forever to resolve. That’s not really the point. However, don’t forget that one of the reasons why they take so long is the discovery process. Again, that’s what the companies want to avoid — and if we had any brains, we’d never give them a way out and let them settle.
3) Note the shift in the DGA’s tone earlier today before this hit. I strongly suspect they were warned and modified their position to compensate. Unless it looks like we’ll get no movement whatsoever, I’d bet they intend to hold off sitting down at the table with the AMPTP for a while longer.
Stuart:
Isn’t your first question like asking a man if he still beats his wife?
MLBPA:
Preach on, brother.
No. I was asking Brian if the WGA resorting to a government authority was an admission of weakness, or was it really a smart move aimed at using a greater force to get the AMPTP to do what the Guild wants. My first impression was the former, but Brian actually negotiates deals for a living, so I wanted his opinion.
As for the second question, I was always under the impression that a cooling-off period was mainly reserved for strategic industries… but I think it can be imposed in any labor dispute. I seriously doubt it would be imposed here, though.
simonjester:
I saw no signs of the AMPTP “freaked out.” Can you point me to those? And as far as discovery goes, I’d like to introduce you to the makers of cigarettes.
And, I stand by my “years.” I’m not one given to hyperbole. Look at Peter Jackson. His case is already a year old.
I’d also argue that one year is enough to bust any union.
OK, but wait a sec. If the AMPTP was able to maneuver the WGA into this situation, what does that say for the relative power of the WGA to get what it wants from the AMPTP?
flickdog if you don’t like the stooges post, don’t read it. learn2interwebs
Brian,
“Stooge hasn’t posted in hours. What are you talking about?”
You’ve got to be joking, right? The Stooge has probably posted about a thousand times. Check out the numerous threads he’s totally dominated. I guarantee he’ll be back with 30 more tonight after he gets his finger therapy. So he took a few hour break. Whoopie! Gimme a break!
Hmmm… Seems like any demand followed by “or we’ll down tools” meets your qualifications for an ultimatum. It’s certainly less pleasant to be on the receiving end of an ultimatum, but that is the risk one runs in a labor dispute.
flickdog:
I know he posts a lot. I just wondered what prompted the sudden outburst as I haven’t seen anything by him in a long time.
Stuart:
WGA needs to get AMPTP back in the room. It needs to do while saving face. A grand gesture is needed. I don’t know what it is yet. Just spitballing, but maybe reach out to the big agencies to talk to the Clooneys and Cruises of the world. If a major star let it be known that he would ask for endless rewrites on their projects unless negotiations restarted…maybe.
I guess that is the root of my question: does turning to the NLRB for rescue constitute a loss of face, or a perfectly reasonable tactic?
As for stars and rewrites, hasn’t some of that already happened with a few of the film projects that have been postponed? Can enough of it happen to make a painful enough dent in film production, quickly enough to make a difference in the timetable?
Classic moment at Paramount 3rd shift – Jesus Guy with vinyl banner picketing the line:
“Write scripts for Jesus. You could have a good job with Jesus. Jesus will always give you a fair deal.”
I just want to say go WGA!! I am more hopeful than ever before with this big kick in the a-s blls to AMPTP! They did NOT see that one coming and their PR statement was LAME.!!!
Let me tell you about my friend Craig. The man is opinionated, no doubt. He certainly has the courage of his convictions. I’ve known him for many years now and we’ve discussed these issues at length, both leading up to and since the strike. And let me tell you, Craig will argue his point till your ears bleed, but it’s never to hear himself talk. It’s never to puff himself up or put on a show. It’s because he cares deeply about the Writers Guild and has heartfelt and, frankly, valid concerns. I’m always amused when I hear people criticize Craig of being power hungry or narcissistic on this site. I think, no, he just really gives a shit and this is who he is. He’s just being Craig.
Craig, apology accepted, of course. It’s a rarity, so part of me wants to savor it. But I won’t, because I know that the only reason the LA Times was able to take advantage of you is because you’re willing to put yourself out there in a way others aren’t. For the last six weeks I’ve been working my ass off for United Hollywood and the reason is because Craig said “get involved.”
Thanks Craig. It was good advice.
Ya, but would Jesus fork out $100 million to make a movie?
And Craig, even you have to know Claudia was at Variety for long enough to perfect the misquote and spin.
Damn, Mr. Mazin, you shouldn’t be apologizing. You should be demanding apologies from those that twisted your words.
But I think yer instinct is right – just be quiet and let the DGA make its deal, cuz nothing anyone says is gonna change where we are right now. We gotta dance with the ones that brung us, and that’s Patric & his crew.
Keep yer powder dry for analyzing the DGA deal.
Jesus don’t need no $100 million. He goes no-low indie and posts on YouTube.
The AMPTP didn’t maneuver the WGA into any situation. So far said situation is all pseudo ‘word on the street’ perpetuated by the media (owned by AMPTP interests). They manipulate the media as they did with Craig here. That’s what they do. That’s all they do. You don’t hear about any splinter factions in the AMPTP. You even hear any of their hallowed names murmured. They don’t have the WGA by the balls. But they’re putting that word out to convince everyone they do, including the WGA and you guys are eating it all up.
Dear Craig,
Someone on here said that writers never apologize. I’m sure he’s half-joking. But I do think there’s truth to that.
Fuck it, man. You’ve voiced the truth. That’s all that matters in this godforsaken world. And a majority of writers — see the comments in Nikki Stinke’s “journalistic” site — are cowardly in their conformity. What’s shit, in my eyes, is all this WGA talk of “writers” who struck in the past for all of us and “writers” who strike now for the future . . .
Ho-hum.
What about the long-dead writers who sacrificed their souls for the literature we now have today off of which to learn about humanity; off of which we educate our children. And no, I don’t meant the jacks who work on The Riches or whatever. I’m talking about “writers” in the pure sense of the word.
Fuck it all! Craig Mazin, if anything, should receive an award for SPEAKING HIS MOTHERFUCKING MIND.
Shame on TV writers who say otherwise! Shame on writers who try to censor their fellow brethren.
Hold your head up proud, my man. Because guess what . . .
In a few months when this strike is history and no one in America gives a fuck about its ramifications much less remembers it, all those guild-thumping loyalists will be well . . . back to work. Hustling. Trying to get scripts bought. Trying to get TV shows picked up. Waking up in the middle of the night and questioning this psychotic career choice.
The studios will still hold the checks. A million Patrick Verrones David Youngs ain’t ever going to change that.
And not a soul in Hollywood will remember the comments Craig or any other mofo on this or any other blog muttered. You know why?
They’ll be too busy narcissistically worrying over their next gig.
Cheers to Craig: A man. An artist. A writer!
Thanks for your well-reasoned, persuasive post, Simonjester. We need 5 more just like you around here.
Ian:
Thank you.
For those of you that don’t know, Ian is one of the principal members of United Hollywood, which has done a tremendous job filling the PR gap for the WGA during the strike.
To those of you who bucked me up in here, I thank you as well. Writers arguing against public dissent? God, that’s depressing to me.
Anyway, I’ll be back tomorrow or maybe Sunday to talk about the latest developments.
Infiltrating Carson Daly’s s audience was neither constructive nor funny. It’s unprincipled, douchebaggy behavior and it’s this kind of bullshit that has entirely evaporated my support for the Guild.
The NLRB doesn’t allow Unions to negotiate Jurisdiction. Why is everybody insisting on ignoring this issue?
Brian, are you aware that when the writers will get more money on residuals and less money upfront (because this money has to come from somewhere) it won’t be as good for agents?
Studios are already gearing for it. They are going to trim the fat from Development (and I won’t be surprised if next they’ll tackle the real culprit for their profits loss — gross participation)
Also people like Patrick (low ring writers) and Pryia are going to get screwed: staff writing positions will diminish and people outside the Guild will have a tougher time snatching a job in a shrinking market. And by “shrinking market” I mean the market of writing jobs that pay highly upfront — because you can always write for Zwick, upfront pennies and higher residuals.
I hope you guys get what you want, what you think is fair. But it ain’t gonna be pretty.
Remember that your real enemies are not the Studios — they are the ones that give you secure money to buy your houses in the hills — but the free-for-all-open-wide Internet: the pie will be divided amongst way more people, resulting into a smaller piece for everybody. Advertising money is not going to grow, it will just migrate. Audience is not going to swell, Timmy is already distracted by his videogame. And Timmy soon will get bored of being just the consumer — nobody wants to watch, everybody wants to make the content.
The pie is not going to get bigger. Certainly is not going to get bigger for the Studios. They are struggling to keep their market share as it is.
You kill the fat cow, you kill the big jugs of milk.
I have no idea what you’re referring to. Anyway, while we’re here, does anyone have an interest in purchasing some jewelry with traces of blood on it?
“Writers arguing against public dissent” is right.
I’m choking on irony.
The very people who demand, denigrate, yell, insult, disparage and attack, all in the name of OWNING YOUR OPINIONS, DAMMIT – those people are banging the war drums that Craig got quoted in the paper. They would stab him in his sleep for his actions. And they know where to find him.
Craig Mazin. Not anonymous. Well, thank heavens he has sack. He needs it now.
Because were he, like so many other dissenters, to have hidden behind anonymity, sure as shit Claudia Eller wouldn’t have been able to find him.
Moral of the tale: If you’re going to dissent, do so anonymously so that others can’t find you and quote you. That will keep the see-no-evil-hear-no-evil crowd happy. Except that they won’t be, because they fucking hate anonymity. So you must post with your own name. But then someone could find you and quote you. So you CAN’T post with your own name. If you’re going to dissent, do so anonymously… Repeat.
Own your opinions, but only if their ours. If not, tell ‘em to yourself in the bathroom.
Well, here’s a gut-checking newsflash to the see-no-evil-hear-no-evil crowd: You can’t quell dissent. Not now, not ever. Not in this country. Not in this century. No, not even in the context of a strike. Fighting that battle is to set yourself up for failure. Whether I understand where you’re coming from (and in the grand scheme of things, I do) isn’t relevant.
You can’t quell dissent.
So you might as well get the fuck off folks’ backs for doing it anonymously.
Has anyone broached the subject of post-strike depression?
More important question –
When David Young’s left the WGA to rally the hot sauce packagers in Latin America or wherever his San Diego State University degree will take him, and the studios and the writers will have resumed what will be a rather tumultuous, contemptuous working relationship, where will all the vitriol and anger and contempt and backlash against writers like Craig go exactly?
Will writers pour that anger into Two And A Half Men scripts? Will Desperate Housewives reek with anti-corporate subtext? Will the writing staff of The Riches implement anti-AMPTP, we-hate-Craig-Mazin metaphors into the season finale?
Call me cynical and anarchistic or what you want, but let’s face it . . . this whole strike is just a little fucking silly. The idea of lashing out against the very hand that feeds you.
And by silly I don’t mean to take away from all the picketing and energy, but the truth is this:
YOU ARE WRITERS. NOT FACTORY WORKERS. Some of you will NEVER write for hire again. It’s a thought that is beyond depressing. I know, I know, that’s why you need residuals . . . I understand, I do.
But ONCE THAT DEAL IS MADE, FOLKS, all this group hugging will crumble, and suddenly these magnanimous, bordering-on-fascist guild supporters will be at each other’s throats again, vying over the next TV gig or re-write job or whatever so as to feed their family. And guess what, Craig, who’s a successful writer knows this. He knows goddamn well that a year from now, while he’s toiling on his next movie, not a SINGLE person in town will so much as raise an odd eye at him. NO ONE WILL FUCKING REMEMBER. Just as no one gives a shit about this post I’m composing . . .
I’m sorry, but it literally makes me laugh. The idea of writers supporting one another. We’re talking about one of the most competitive fields in American business.
Then again, what do I know? I’m but a literary character in a novel written by a dead gambler.
Everybody may, in a daydreamy way, want to make the content. But 99 percent aren’t going to. The fact that the barrier to entry is much lower than it used to be is irrelevant. Timmy also wants to be a rock star, but that ain’t gonna happen, either.
See, I’d never read it, so I had to look it up to make sure I recognized it. And then I found a link to a paper on the importance of the room, with its peeling wallpaper and oversized couch. So now I have to read it. So thanks for ruining my holidays, forcing me to lock myself in a room with a book.
You’ll be glad you did.
Oh, man, it’s a beautiful, powerful book, but oddly enough, there are passages — like the 20 thousand word letter (maybe not that long, but close) from Roskolnikov’s mother — that are dated in the sense that, were that novel written now those chunks would have been severely edited. I believe this is a fairly controversial subject in the literary world, as some want to trim the classics; but as brilliant and vital and glorious as Dostoevsky writing is, at times there are sections that you’ll find yourself saying, “Are you fucking kidding me, man?”
So my suggestion: Enjoy the book! Enjoy the holidays. And if you ever feel as though you’re coming across a rather boring section, fuck it — move on.
1) So far the situation is that the WGA members are on strike and the companies they are striking against are not deigning to sit down with their negotiators. You may have confused this situation with a vacation at Disneyland.
2) The WGA has explicitly stated that they feel there are splinter factions in the AMPTP, and said that they look forward to concluding separate deals with individual member companies of the AMPTP. From the statement “Where We Are Now” by Patric Verrone and David Young on Dec. 12:
3) I certainly hope that the AMPTP doesn’t have the WGA by the balls. It would be swell to see some proof that they don’t, like the WGA being able to get the AMPTP negotiators back to the table using something other than an appeal to a government body.
I hear you Aaron, and I agree that Timmy will never make a decent movie or be a rockstar.
But he will infiltrate the market and corrode it.
Ask the record labels. Music consumption hasn’t vaned, but the big purveyors have ceased to exist.
The Internet will be the end of big paychecks.
I think you could make the case that the big record labels hastened their own demise by ceasing to fund the continued development of quality artists, dropping them in favor of the next mediocre, one-hit wonder band and essentially lowering the bar nearer to Timmy’s level.
Whatever the reason is, I don’t cry for the demise of record labels.
I cry for the artist that won’t get a big advance anymore.
Sorry, apparently I’m not making my point clear.
One thing people need to remember when they’re demanding Mazin’s silence is that EVERYONE gets misquoted. Doesn’t mean you’re getting used.
David Young and Patrick Verrone’s words have been used against us by the “enemy” repeatedly.
Repeatedly. In fact, David Young’s “rockstar” comment and the “there will be no deal without reality jurisdiction” are worse than what just happened to Mazin.
Bottom line, you’re GONNA get misquoted.
So why should Mazin and Verrone continue speaking out?
Cuz every single thing that Craig or Verrone has said to the media that you approve of is attached to shit that gets misquoted.
Can’t get the good without the bad.
Ian, good of you to chime in.
Right. Record labels are dying because they no longer control the means of production, they no longer control the means of distribution, and they no longer control the means of promotion.
There was a certain point in time when the studios had control of a vital infrastructure without which a “major motion picture” could not be made.
Now, it’s possible for an amateur to make a motion picture that looks pretty high-end. Case in point: I went to an indie film festival recently, and the most impressive entry was a sci-fi short about a cyber-crime SWAT team. Fifteen minutes, decent special effects (quite a lot of very good CGI), professional (though unknown) actors doing a excellent job with an excellent script.
So after the screening, the director asks us what we think the budget was. The lowest guess was $50K — tuurns out it was $15K. The inside of a shuttlecraft was the director’s mom’s basement with a plywood set; the CGi post took about a year for him to do single-handed.
No one got paid upfront. If he had $100K to do it feature-length, he’d have an asset that could generate deferred income for the participants and a good return on investment. While collecting that income would be a slam-dunk if he could sell it to an existing theatrical distributor for a big one-time payment, there’s no reason he couldn’t self-distribute over the Internet.
The continued improvement in CGI tools (concomitant with their continued reduction in cost), coupled with the socialization of audiences to the CGI-generated look and feel on the screen, means that the need for big soundstages and huge art departments and armies of location crews continues to dwindle with each passing month. On the one hand, that means feature film writers won’t have to depend on selling their work to the same set of big companies (or small companies tied into deals with those big companies). On the other hand, it also means that there’s likely to be a shift away from large upfront payments to more deferred compensation.
Television has another set of challenges as it goes from “Monday, 9 Eastern/8 Central” to “any damn time you feel like it.” But the notion that an audience will want to see a consistent set of characters in an ongoing “skein” of stories does give the writer a little more stability and negotiating power.
Now, I am open to correction if my facts or interpretation are wrong. Who wants to completely decimate this line of reasoning?
Holy crap. All these unprovoked attacks on me have got to stop. Besides, I’ve never had aspirations to be a rock star. Okay, that’s not true, but not in a very long time.
I’m sorry — maybe I misunderstand you. You are saying that during a strike, you are refusing to scab? And that is somehow a greater sacrifice on your part than on the part of any other union member?
Wow, for someone who’s got a “massive studio gig” you sure don’t understand much about power in this town. You honestly think Ellen gives a flying fuck about the strike? It means nothing, as her career will outlast scores and scores of writers. Someone at her level worries about the next 10 years of her career; about her legacy; about her next book; her next Oscar hosting. This strike is but a blip on her radar.
First rule on being a true writer: REALIZE your words or actions will not affect the world.
Then again . . . your imagination certainly runs free, which explains your “massive studio gig.”
Just curious, it’s not the sequel to the Departed, is it? I heard Monaghan’s script wasn’t cutting it, and they’re out to some dude named “Josh.”
Rumors. What’re you going to do?
Craig,
Read the LA Times article. Felt betrayed. Read your apology, felt better.
There are complications and qualifications, but I’ve never had the patience or the stamina to debate anything here.
Bottom line — I appreciate your apology. Just wanted you to know.
David:
Thanks. For what it’s worth, I don’t have the patience or stamina to debate anything here either. My comments section is, well…
…it’s special!
What if Craig is right? You never address this. No one does. It’s not beyond the realm of possibilities that any group’s leadership could be, even if in good faith, acting against its constituents interests. We see it all the time. Aren’t you all by nature skeptics anyway? Why so blindly trusting now?
Regardless, how the hell can you really expect to shut up writers? They have chosen to publicly express themselves for a living. It’s as pointless as shaking your fist at the AMPTP and saying “you are so unfair!” It’s in their nature.
Dissent exists for a reason. Not because of the ridiculously clever AMPTP has fomented it, but because people actually disagree. Unless you can get rid of the root cause for the dissent, the dissent will exist. You kind of have to solve the problem.
It’s kind of like treating the symptoms of a disease and not the disease itself. Right?
More to the point, God knows that we’ve heard this line of thought enough. For 2 straight stinking months (and then some I’m sure) we’ve heard you about not questioning your leadership publicly…blah blah blah. I swear that more than half the posts on here deal with whether or not you should be allowed to publicly disagree with your leadership. Your efforts are clearly failing (unless really your goal is to just punitively punish Craig and other dissenters).
Some would even say you are actually hurting your cause and creating more dissenters (especially given the way you chose to tell people to shut up…not exactly diplomatic). Maybe people don’t like being told to shut up. Maybe when you say “shut up” that emboldens some other strong minded people to do the opposite. I know when I’m told to shut up that only encourages me. So even if you are right, your tactics stink.
By all means, Josh, continue to miss the point. I tell you what, you explain to me how anything written here is causing dissension in the ranks. I don’t care where it’s quoted. Show a person that has read anything related to Artful Writer that is now actively spreading a sense of unease. Even the people that are questioning WGA tactics aren’t questioning the importance of getting new media in the next contract. I haven’t seen hide nor hair of the “damage” you constantly worry about.
What I do see is that your lashing out demonstrates fear. Fear that the message is being heard and listened to and adopted.
There are only two groups of people that matter: members of the WGA & members of the AMPTP. If members of the WGA are firm in their resolve, it does not matter what others say. If members of the AMPTP want to believe there is a crack (where there is not) does that harm the WGA?
To re-iterate, it only serves a purpose and is effective, IF YOU LET IT.
Agents get a piece of residuals too. If you want, I can tell you exactly how the guilds are similar to the studios.
“So even if you are right, your tactics stink.”
The core argument in the dissenting voice, I believe.
Brian:
The AMPTP clearly freaked out. Read their press release. Incoherent posturing and failure to stay on-message generally signals a breakdown of discipline. Our side certainly suffers from this at times, but it’s significant coming from the AMPTP — heretofore, they have always been coherent and on-message. When Chris Lehane can’t control your spin, something is definitely up.
Someday, someone is going to write one hell of a book about all of this.
Stuart:
I think it’s a combination of the two. A smart play, aimed squarely at maintaining the initiative in the negotiations w/r to the DGA. I don’t think we would have done it if the DGA hadn’t issued their first statement about going back to the table soon. So yes, we were in a weak position but appear to have wisely played a strong card. Time will tell. Watch Apted.
The Carson Daly show outburst was a BAD idea. It looked like a dumb high school prank – not funny at all. If you want to be taken seriously, act like adults. Picket outside the show, talk with people holding tickets and let them know the issues of the strike. There are better ways to get/keep people on your side. I seriously think that was one big score point on the board for the AMPTP, not the WGA, in the minds of the general public.
Does this mean you were there? If so, I defer to your opinion, because I thought it seemed hysterical, from what I read about it.
Can I ask what everybody thinks the picket line is for? I always thought it was to prevent anyone from exiting or entering a place. To effectively shut down a place of business.
I’ve only been to the Paramount line (and then only to the Bronson & Main gate). The picketers stopped for the light and allowed vehicles to enter. I don’t know if it’s different in other locations.
So, I’m asking legitimately for people’s take (includes you, Olson, but please try to only call me a moron once).
Can you post a link? I’m looking at main page of AMPTP and not seeing something that strays from message. Thanks in advance.
Okay, I rephrase that. It sounds like a dumb high school prank ( I have read the quotes of what was yelled) and I’m sure to the audience members, it looked like one. You are free to think that it was hysterical. People find all sorts of different things amusing. In my opinion – and others here on the board – it was not funny at all.
I find it ironic that the people here that think Craig is doing so much damage by encouraging healthy adult debates at the same time think that the Daly prank helped the WGA case.
Which press release are you referring to?
Oh, sorry, I thought you were saying you were there (I would have loved a firsthand account!). I don’t pretend to know what those 20(?) people’s motives were, but I can’t stand Carson Daly, so I found it funny.
Natalie:
Explain how the action against Carson Daly is effectively any different from the actions taken against any other production to date. Are you arguing that the WGA should not send flying pickets to shoot locations and attempt to disrupt or shut down production?
Well, there’s always the informational picket — the kind meant to tell people about what’s going on inside the picketed location.
At this date, since apparently almost every scripted television show is shut down, it doesn’t seem critical to close the place of business of television production. Films are a different story — apparently, according to the film permit office in L.A., there’s a whole lot of new film activity going on.
But I share much of your confusion, Brian, as I was always under the impression that a strike’s purpose is to force a company to shut down production, thus cutting off its revenue stream and disrupting its cashflow, to prove that the cost of denying the union its demands is higher than the cost of granting them. Most industrial strikes are preceded by work-to-rule actions and other production slowdowns to prevent the company from stockpiling inventory that it could use to cushion itself from the strike’s impact.
Stuart:
“The WGA’s filing of a complaint with the NLRB reminds us of the old lawyers’ adage: When the facts are on your side, argue the facts. When the law is on your side, argue the law. And when you don’t have either the law or the facts on your side, you pound the table. The WGA has now been reduced to pounding the table, and this baseless, desperate NLRB complaint is just the latest indication that the WGA’s negotiating strategy has achieved nothing for working writers.”
That was the AMPTP’s public response to the WGA’s filing. Not only is it defensive when it doesn’t have to be, the “old adage” is misquoted.
If they were on their game, they would have simply reiterated that they are perfectly willing to return to the negotiating table when the WGA demonstrates its willingness to treat the proceedings seriously and focus on the issues that matter. There would have been some drippy verbiage about all the BTL folks who’ve been hardest hit by the NegCom’s amateurish response to the AMPTP’s serious efforts to end this strike, yada-yada. This was an unforced error on the AMPTP’s part… I suppose it’s what happens when Chris Lehane offers you a discount rate.
I would also submit to you that painting your leadership as incompetent and your enemies as invincible is not the same thing as loyal opposition. I have a number of issues with how this entire situation has been handled by the Board and the NegCom, but that doesn’t mean I think they are always wrong or always stupid or always weak. It also doesn’t mean that I have to aid and abet the other side’s efforts to convey a public perception of their inevitable victory.
Many people on this forum have rightly defended the need to dissent freely with the leadership. I agree, we should be able to make our opinions known and have it out in digital ink. We’re writers. That’s what we do. On the flip side, I suggest that everyone take a step back and ask themselves how much of what they say is motivated by real disagreement over shared goals, and how much is motivated by entrenched, emotional involvement in the debate over the strategy.
I’m not just talking to you, and I’m certainly not trying to pick a fight. I’m throwing it out to everyone: intellectual honesty is important. Free and open discussion cannot survive when it becomes personalized and decoupled from the substance of the issues.
As always, your mileage may vary.
Because when a group of people are wearing red shirts and holding WGA signs outside a gate, their intentions are clear. A group of unidentified hecklers that sneak into a taping is a different matter.
And I’m sure that people “on the line” think it is funny. I’m talking about the perception from non-writers. And if you say you don’t care about that perception, than why do you care what Craig says?
This place is hilarious.
I think the greatest harm Craig has caused with this site is giving WGA writers a central place to show themselves to be juvenile, whiny, ignorant of the English language, and playground bullies.
And I’m not talking about Josh. His posts are none of the above. Uncivil, sure, but none of the above.
The rest of you… Jesus Christ.
I’m a fucking writer. And you guys make this union look like a bunch of jackasses. A bigger bone for the AMPTP than Craig can throw them any day.
Well, I disagree on the reading of the AMPTP statement (and by the way, that is exactly how I’ve always heard the old adage, except when it’s been, “When the facts are not on your side, argue the law…”).
Second, I would offer the following thought exercise: if the AMPTP had been the first to run to the NLRB and ask for, say, a 60-day cooling off period to force the striking writers back to work… would the WGA have characterized that as a stunning admission of weakness on the AMPTP’s part, or would they have seen it as a bold counterstroke?
Since intellectual honesty is important, I will honestly say that I believe that both Patric Verrone and David Young personally value reality and animation jurisdiction more than anything related to new media. I believe that anyone who honestly evaluates the backgrounds of the two men, their careers, their public statements before and during the strike and their actions would come to the same conclusion. I think the rest of the Negotiating Committee will have to choose whether to follow their lead and fight for reality and animation, or to rein them in and direct them to fight for an economic deal centered on new media instead.
First of all, I have been there. Not everyday, not yet. I still have a financial responsibility to my clients to find employment for them. And before you jump all over me, yes, some have turned down auditions out of respect to the picket lines. And I respect their opinions.
Second of all, wouldn’t weekly or two a week rallies accomplish everything you said above? WGAe seems to be moving the whole picket from one location to another. Wouldn’t that create more unity?
I’m not blindly questioning the value of picketing. I am trying to understand why it’s being done the way it is here in Los Angeles.
I will check out your post on Kay’s site.
As to the propaganda question, you still fail to point out the target of the propaganda. Are you afraid that public opinion can shift against you? Who cares? Again, only two sides matter: members of WGA & members of AMPTP.
Hah! Riiight . . . I ain’t anonymous, tho’, like you are, and for some of us there’s nothing better than taking the stuffing outa an overweight ex-jock who thinks he’s still BMOC . . .
There are more dangerous sports / physical activities than football, bub, and I can guaran-fucking-tee ya it wouldn’t be nearly as easy as it was for you when you were pushing band nerds around at State . . . it would be you’re the one not know what you’d be stopping into.
But I will take Josh Olson’s advice that you’re simply not worth going to jail for.
I’m out . . .
What pointers?
simonjester:
Thanks for the reprinting. I guess I can see what you’re saying. I think, however, they stay on point. Their message right now is that negotiations are being held up on jurisdictional issues. It’s a message directed right at DGA.
Funny, that’s what my sisters says of prayer meetings.
Long time lurker, first time poster.
If this is the case, does the AMPTP’s ‘ultimatum’ effectively equal a way for third party removal of the question of jursidiction? I find it hard to believe that the AMPTP would put this ultimatum in writing unless they wanted it to part of the bargaining history should the WGA go to the Board.
I truly understand your post. All I’m saying is that I read a lot of the shit on Defamer, and this particular item made me chuckle. It’s entirely possible that I should take things a little more seriously.
Speaking of being serious, Jane Espenson wrote something on her blog which should really get out there, because it’s pretty awesome.
“Nothing to Sneeze At — by Jane Espenson
Oh, Gentle Readers, I am weary. I’m also footsore and frustrated. There is a corrosive new message oozing across the cyberlandscape. Is it true that we’re fiddling while jobs burn? Well, in an effort to make the issues clear, and out of a compulsion to do what we know how to do, we’ve made the strike entertaining. Is that cavalier? I’m sure it can look that way.
But know that we’re not dancing as lightly as we seem to be. We’re cold. We’re tired. Our feet hurt. We’re concerned about the future — the future of our shows, the future of our careers, the future of the business, the future of the whole darn American middle-class, and the future of any personal sense of security we might have built up. We’re concerned about our relationship with executives whom we like, who aren’t really part of the mogularchy. And we’re greatly concerned about those people who find themselves affected by the strike although they never even got a vote in this action. We may look like we’re laughing, but we’re serious.
So, yeah, we’re tired. But that doesn’t mean we’re weak. And that doesn’t mean we’re divided. And you know what’s keeping us strong and united? You. Fans and aspiring writers. Fans appreciate what we provide, and would like television writing to remain a viable career so that we can keep providing it. And aspiring writers know that we’re doing this so that there is a career here for them to step into. Thank you so much for understanding that. You’re entertaining us too, you know — those masses of pencils made me smile heartily. And I know that doesn’t mean you’re taking this lightly either.
If I were a “bless you” sort of person, I’d say that. But I’m not. So… gesundheit. Gesundheit to you.
Lunch: leftover Persian food. Crispy rice with lamb stew. And Faloodeh for dessert. Do you know this stuff? Frozen noodles with lime juice and rosewater. It’s the childhood favorite your childhood was missing.
P.S. If you’re that guy I almost punched today, the one who claimed that we writers weren’t sacrificing anything, I direct you to, get this, the actual AMPTP website. Even they agree that we’re sacrificing a lot. They think that number will scare us? Take it as a measure of our resolve, and I think it should scare them.”
http://www.janeespenson.com/archives/00000487.php
Fair point. Hasn’t been my experience on the line, but certainly a fair point.
On this, I hear what you are saying. You simply refuse to hear what I’m saying. So, I too am done with this topic.
Sorry it took so long to get back to you, but I was reading Kay’s site. I saw that you were copying a post from there. I misunderstood you.
Happily, your opinion is in the minority on that.
As opposed to Carson Daly’s highly principled, entirely non-douchebaggy decision to use the strike to save his show from being cancelled?
If any late-night talk show hosts were considering giving into the pressure by the networks to get back to work, after the Carson Daly prank, I guarantee you, they’re thinking twice about it now.
That certainly strikes me as constructive. That it was funny to boot means double bonus points to the Pranksters!
I got new for you, they’re all going back in January. And trust me, they’re not losing a wink of sleep over the thought of a few hecklers in the audience.
Or maybe you didn’t make your meaning clear. I am not sure how it is that doing what every other union member (including Craig) is doing — namely, refusing to work during a strike — gives you special dispensation to determine who may say what during the strike. I understand you feel what Craig says is counterproductive to the strike effort, but your doing your basic duty by not scabbing doesn’t have a breaing on your case for feeling so.
Non sequitur.
I have to say, I disagree with Josh Olson about plenty, but he’s completely right about this point.
If Jane is so concerned about the American middle class, picketing solely for the continuation of a payment delivery system that serves to pretty much eradicate it probably isn’t the best place to start. And no, anecdotes like “I am middle class and I live off of residuals” are not empirical proof that this system isn’t designed to cause the exact kind of wide disparity in earnings that destroys the middle class.
No — no, I won’t have that!
Jimmy Kimmel is staying out.
My first reaction to the Carson thing was to laugh, but this was replaced by a feeling of justice and then hope that it shook his conscience, as much as his cool (or uncool, as it were).
I read several accounts of the confrontation. None were pro-Daly.
Er, no.
If I had I would’ve addressed you by your name…Quill.
And now you’re putting words in my mouth “in a roundabout way.” And I’m not the one still shooting bullets.
Actually, my friends call me Quilly.
I would note that one of the reasons the blog is so successful is because of a mention in the Los Angeles Times and that I’ve become a regular reader of the blog because of that. I don’t think anyone will mistake your views from what appeared in the Times from what you’ve written in your blog.
Riiight… still not seeing teh funny, tho.
But maybe that’s because I see with the cold eye of a killer (still trying to figure that one out, Josh).
IF IT ISN’T TRUE THEN WHO CARES!
It’s honestly more than a little pathetic that Josh and anyone else taking this line think that they “know better” and that they are “protecting the innocent, stupid, dumb as rock, sheep writers from falling prey to the wily AMPTP.” We get it, Josh, you think you are smarter than everyone else. You know better. You are super clever. Great.
Seriously, does anyone else have a problem with another writer thinking he needs to be your daddy? That he can very clearly see all the lies and spin, but you can’t? That’s exactly what these people are saying.
New thread, fyi.
The short answer:
Regardless of the reality, the WGA would have characterized filing for a cooling-off period as a stunning admission of weakness. We would never say anything about our adversary’s moves that make them look as strong or stronger than they actually are. It’s safe to say the same is true in reverse. Consequently, characterizations of one side by the other side are irrelevant.
The long answer:
Clearly, the AMPTP didn’t make that move. Going with the prevailing assumption that they’re evil, infallible masterminds, this can only be because in their dark fever-dreams of world domination, the move was unnecessary. If they actually had gone to the NLRB, it could only have been because in their dark fever-dreams of world domination, such a move was part of their master plan.
Now let’s assume they are neither evil nor infallible, but intent on winning. If they made such a calculated move, it would be because they believed a work stoppage would harm them more than it harmed us. If so, they had far more congenial options available. For example, they could have offered just enough to keep us at the table without giving away their bottom line. Indeed, they would have acted differently from “go”. The rollback proposal never would have been submitted. History would be completely different from what it is now.
All we could reasonably conclude in this scenario is that the AMPTP acted willfully and repeatedly against its own best interests, and filing for a cooling-off period would have been a Hail Mary pass to save them from their own previous missteps. That’s not just weak, that’s dumb. They’re not dumb, so… here we are.
The other possible motive would have been to somehow weaken us by forcing us to work. This might have helped them to weather a strike with more original product, save their TV pilot season and the 2009 movie schedule. On the downside, it would have given working writers a chance to save more money. That’s not much of a downside.
So why didn’t they do it? Because they’re dumb? Have I just created a paradox or a Schroedinger’s Idiot, who is both stupid and not stupid until observed? No.
An organism will take the most conservative action it believes will yield a desired outcome. The AMPTP is no different. The risk of filing would be to communicate weakness in a moment when they didn’t feel weak. Also, it might not have bought them much… if anything. Can you imagine if writers actually worked to the rule in response? The town would collapse under the weight of invoices for “free” drafts.
To conclude: the action would have been weak or bold depending on the strength of the AMPTP’s hand. Events give us insight into their beliefs about their position. They believe they’re strong, or did when the strike began. Under the circumstances, asking for a cooling-off period would have been bold but characterized as weak. It also might have backfired.
I’m sure your point will be that the WGA’s action admits weakness and was therefore a mistake. You would be half-right: the guild was in a weak position (with respect to our ability to control negotiations). However, going to the NLRB for intervention remains the correct play. It was even a bold play.
I quote Ferdinand Foch: “Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking.”
The outcome remains in question obviously, but let me put it to you: what would you have advised the Board to do instead? Or next? “Never getting into this position in the first place” is not an answer. Neither is crying “DON’T TAZE ME, BRO!” while waiting for the other shoe to drop. I am looking for an honest strategic assessment based on where we are now.
If you want to be the loyal opposition, that’s where it starts. Looking forward, what do we do to win?
They are pointing out that you shouldn’t just take their word for what they say. That they aren’t crazy. They also know he knows his shit.
Given that they quote him and yet Craig very publicly says that they are scum also says something, no? Why do you think they quote a guy that calls them all sorts of nasty names?
I gots a problem with it!
By definition, a “writer” is one who views the world through a questioning, hyper-intelligent, thoughtful lens. More importantly, a “writer” understands that the river of life is constantly moving, and to lay claim that he “knows” anything about any thing in life — especially something as complex as absurdly complicated as a strike — is to wear his ignorance on his sleeve. (See our president for example of unilateral thinking.)
I think Josh is intelligent, however, I also think he’s gets a little pleasure in his rather unabashed self-proclamation thereof. Which is, let’s face it, annoying; and leads one to actually ponder the said intelligence.
As for the AMPTP verses the WGA:
First off, NO one’s going to win. Y’all will resume intermingling in a process that mostly yeilds failing products. It’s like an irrational business to begin with.
Secondly, to quote Henry James:
“The whole of anything is never told.”
Amidst the info flow and dissent and threats and knucklehead analogies involving the First Amendment, we have this gem.
For that line alone, I’m happy to see Olson back.
simonjester, this is what I suggested in a post a couple of days ago on an earlier thread here:
I don’t know if this gambit can still work, or if the AMPTP’s response at this point will simply be, “Hey, you’re the ones who filed with the NLRB. We’re content to wait for their ruling.” In the latter case, the WGA membership will be in limbo — stuck on strike, but with no hope that the strike will induce the AMPTP back to the table. That seems to me to be worse than Limbo — more like Purgatory.
simonjester -
Here is what Quill Me Now suggested in that earlier thread — I think it makes sense:
OK – by the way, I’m working now too, just not in the entertainment industry. I bet there are a number of striking writers who are also working — at other jobs, to pay the bills during the strike. (Of course, there are always some Guild members working at day jobs even when there isn’t a strike.)
So, to return to the main point that got us on this topic: the mere fact of not scabbing isn’t enough to give one striking union member the moral authority to tell another striking union member not to gripe out loud.
I’ll tell you what, though: I would be less inclined to complain about that appeal to moral authority coming from someone like, say, Kay Reindl. By being on strike, she’s not giving up her “hookers and caviar” money, she’s giving up her rent money.
simonjester: By the way, kudos to you for the reference to Schroedinger.
Your reward is here.
Yes, I bet Carson Daly is now aware of the writers’ strike, thanks to the hecklers! I bet he now knows that the writers are unhappy that he’s back on the air without his writing staff! He’d never have known that without their timely and humorous intervention! I wonder if their actions were edited out of the tape that was aired so that none of Carson Daly’s fifteen viewers even knew what happened! And it all means that the WGA is just that much closer to an equitable deal with the AMPTP!
Josh,
I get paid very well and I too have worked hard to get where I am. You’re not special in that regard. So your breaking point is hookers and caviar. Though clearly that was meant to be humorous the reality is we all have out breaking points. Who are you to dictate what is an acceptable breaking point and what isn’t? You conduct yourself on this site as if you’ve been blessed with moral authority. Who did the blessing? Verrone?
This might be the greatest quote in the history of all mankind.
Thanks, SimonJester!
Olson is only ok redistributing someone else’s hard earned wealth. When you start talking about his…well…back off!
Josh, you have confused me with someone else, I think. I fully support you getting as much money as you can get in any negotiation for your work, and the more power to you. If I am ever so fortunate to be in your position, I won’t have any compunction about taking every penny off the table that I can, and I’ll let the folks on the other side of the table worry about whether they can still make money off my work.
If you recall, I was responding to your post:
And my reading of that is because you have made an enormous personal sacrifice to go out on strike, you feel Craig should stop griping in public. I simply pointed out that you made the same sacrifice that Craig did and that all the striking members of the WGA did: you stopped working for the struck companies.
For you and Craig, it’s a big sacrifice in absolute dollars; for someone like Kay, it’s a huge sacrifice in terms of bread on the table and a roof over her head. In any case, however, it doesn’t confer on you or Kay or any striking union member the right to decide whether Craig continues to gripe publicly about the conduct of this contract cycle.
Now, where in any of that did you come up with these gems:
As heavily as these things seem to weigh on your mind, I assure you, none of them are MY hang-ups.
Not at all. You can tell Craig anything you want — that’s your right. You shouldn’t expect him to comply with your advice — you don’t have any moral authority to compel him to. The fact that you are giving up gigs of whatever magnitude during this strike doesn’t put you on a higher moral plane than Craig or Kay or any other striking writer.
I don’t have any disdain for you as a writer — A History of Violence was one of the few recent movies I actually saw, and I truly enjoyed it. I don’t have any disdain for you as a high income earner — I admire your ability to earn it and I certainly aspire to it (more like daydream about it, since the odds aren’t good that I will ever pull down seven-figure paychecks). But I’m not a big fan of your shtick on this board. I bet you could tell. And I bet you could give a rat’s ass.
In other words… no. The action against Carson Daly wasn’t substantively different than shutting down or obstructing any other production in town.
Look, I’ll be the first to agree that targeting productions will not end this strike or bring us a fair deal… each on its own. On the other hand, small battles can win big wars. Variety indicates the Last Call commando-picket made an impression on the “big 4″, and I would hardly describe that rag as a shill for the WGAw. So if the acrid stench of urine emanating from Daly’s drawers delayed the return of Jay Leno by even a picosecond, it was worth the effort.
Bottom line: whether writers shut down “Seventeen” or scare the hell out of a no-talent, inexplicable pseudo-celeb like Carson Daly, our actions have meaning and consequence. They communicate our state of mind to the AMPTP. They remind the AMPTP that we are committed, resourceful, and nowhere close to ready to lay down and die.
That’s a message we need to send as often and as forcefully as we possibly can.
To all,
It’s been a true honor to be part of this blog: thrilling, nerve-wracking, educational, enlightenting, etc.
One thing we can all agree on is that this godforsaken strike has spawned this public, semi-anonymous forum; and whether you’re on his side or against, we have Craig to thank for it. Now, before I permanently step away, I’m going to out myself. My name is Juan Carlos Gonzalez. As some of you may know, I am the federal negotiator that at one point in time mediated these strikes. I hope you believe me when I say that, with your best interests in mind, I was kickin’ some serious mediating ass until . . . shit, I even showed up to the hotel on that infamous Sunday wearing an official NBA referree uniform. My father, you see, had been a federal negotiator, and he likened levity in a negotiation room to a sprinkle of paprika on a hearty meal: a little never hurt anybody. Verronne got a kick out of my uniform; Counter smirked at me when he saw me walk in, only to resume his usual, pre-talks yoga ritual. If you ever get a chance to meet Nick, ask him to show you his yoga. He’s quite malleable, and his downward dog is to die for. I assure you that collectively these are intelligent men, but their eccentricity runs wide. I swear at one point I entered the WGA room to find Verrone on the floor while hoisting David Young in the air in what I believe parents refer to their children as “the airplane game.”
To make a long story short, as I know the writers are critiquing me as I scribe, I think my whistle had begun to grate on the nerves of both sides. When I saw Verronne and Counter huddled in the corner, I’d grown warm in my chest, and I was all but thinking I’d finally managed to bring the sides together when they both rushed at me, and before I could muster the strength to fight them off my whistle was jammed down my throat and I found myself bound and gagged in the closet of the hotel room. Needless to say, it was a rather traumatic experience, and I’m ashamed to admit I was too terrified to leave; and it wasn’t until that following Thursday when I gathered the gumption to exit the hotel, at which point I got in my car and drove to Las Vegas, where I’ve been holed up with a hooker named Veronica at an undisclosed location. Please, members of the WGA, AMPTP, the writing staff at Variety, Nikki Finke, please do not look for me. Without going into it, Veronica has not only helped me get in touch with my inner child but she makes a mean Spanish tortilla. (Kind of like a frittata without all the bullshit.)
So we’re off to Europe, Veronica and I. When I return to the states I’m hopeful the strike will have ended in a way that all of you, for the most part, will be pleased.
Adieu, comrades, I bid you!
Warmest Regards,
JCG
Hell no. By all means, you rich people can engage in a fight over proper compensation with the AMPTP all you want. Also, as I have said before and will say again, I believe they consistently engage in accounting practices that border on criminal (at best) and I would love it if you put an end to it (can someone explain why that isn’t on the table?). But that being said, it’s still like you are telling the lower and middle class writers to buy lottery tickets…fight for us because some day you might become us! It’s kind of the reason why we market the shit out of our state lotteries to poor and middle class citizens but still have terrible public schools.
My main issue with your collective is when you proclaim to fight for the middle class. It is pretty clear to me that compensation in your occupation is somewhat determined by luck. All I am saying is that the moral thing to do in that type of situation is to try and reduce the cruel disparity of luck by sharing those gains that you agree are mainly due to luck. In fact, I would hold you up as an example of this. You are clearly a very talented writer and I don’t think it would be fair if you had to go a year or two without health insurance just because you wrote what ended up becoming a crappy Casper Van Dien movie. However, I would be very interested to hear what ratio in a screenwriter’s career you ascribe to talent versus luck. I assess it at 60/40 in a given year, but you might know better. Anyhow, I think it is disgusting that a collective that makes over $1.3 billion (not including “producing” fees etc.) is only willing to cover health insurance (or fight for coverage) of less than half its membership (7,000 or so people).
My other main issue I have explained pretty clearly elsewhere. It has to do with taking advantage of asymmetrical information in order to align other union members with your cause to their detriment, with no hope of reciprocation. I think it is unethical.
Finally, Pseudonymouse and Eric, I have said nothing that states that “everyone in this business, and possibly the world, should be paid exactly the same amount as everyone else, regardless of variations in their individual talents, levels of accomplishment, or any other relevant factor.” In fact, I find that notion abhorrent. But I also find it abhorrent to pretend that a wealthy writer has no obligation to help a fellow writer (and guild member) get health care just because they only made $29,000 that year when there is no other mechanism in place to do so, especially when they acknowledge what a large factor luck has played in their success.
The funny thing is, even though I’m not in the Guild, I’m still honoring its strike rules. Fortunately for me, it doesn’t mean bread off the table, just lost opportunities to market my work.
So I guess I don’t (yet) have skin in this game, but I sure do have a dog in this fight. And so far, it seems to me that my dog is not doing so well… and the reason for that is not Craig Mazin.
I’m sure you have to assume that. Indeed, I’m sure you start each day by believing at least six impossible things before breakfast.
That’s a nice turn of phrase — “acrid stench of urine….” The thing is, I doubt very much that Code Pink tactics in a studio audience at a taping really did scare Carson Daly or Jay Leno. Carson Daly did not run to his dressing room and lock himself inside, and Jay Leno is still reported in that same Variety article to be contemplating a return to the airwaves just after New Year’s. It seems that the whiff of Daly’s dirty drawers will be overpowered by the reek of rerun ratings.
I’d think it would be a lot more effective actually to shut down Carson Daly’s production. That would let the other hosts know that their return will be greeted with more than just live studio hecklers.
Your girlfriend give you that name?
And Psuedonymouse, since this is the second time you used a blatant strawman argument to call me a communist, I am going to take a more direct approach to keep you from putting words that I didn’t write into my mouth. Here you go:
Pretty fair, huh?
Ross Colnikov:
Awesome.
Oh lord, here I go again….
If you ever said anything remotely resembling “a small part,” I will freely confess that I missed it. Please direct me to the example, or repost it, and I’ll acknowledge my mischaracterization. Really.
The thing is, although you bandy this number about a lot, it’s irrelevant to your argument. If the threshold were $10,000, you’d be agitating about the people who only earned $9,000. If it were $1,000, you’d point out that some people only made $999. And even if the threshold were one dollar, that would still exclude approximately half of the Guild’s membership in any given year.
If you were simply saying that this specific formula was flawed, I might very well agree with you. Maybe the threshold should be lower. Maybe, given the feast-and-famine cycle inherent to this job, especially for those of us at the lower/newer end of it, we should be looking at people’s incomes across two- or three-year periods rather than just one. But it would still be an arbitrary formula, and it would still include some people while excluding others.
I don’t believe you’re unhappy about the specific formula we use to qualify people for health insurance, though. I believe you’re unhappy that they have to qualify for it at all.
The bottom line is that somehow, whatever the formula, the health plan needs to take in more money than it pays out. The Guild’s solution is to limit those payouts to people who are paying in sufficiently to cover them, in aggregate. Your solution is “soak the rich.” Either plan might work. The problem with yours is that, as 80 years of ever-more-creative tax-sheltering in the U.S. has demonstrated, the rich have options, and can generally afford to seek out new ones when necessary. Like, say, taking lower writing fees and shifting the rest of their income into producing fees. And the consequence of trying to prevent that — as you would surely do next — is a spiraling arms race of increasingly complicated rules and reporting requirements whose main effect is to make life a burdensome red-tape nightmare for the “little people” you’re trying to help in the first place. Does this sound at all similar to any real-world circumstances you may have heard about?
Perhaps little Timmy’s dad could do what the rest of the world routinely does in these situations, and get a fucking day job. Ideally, one with health benefits; less ideally, one that will at least provide some money to help pay for them. How few weeks does the guy have to work before the rest of us aren’t obligated to pay his medical expenses during the remainder of the year?
And frankly, I’m still having trouble seeing how this scenario is somehow Olson’s responsibility…
Sorry you had such a hard time having a rational discussion with me, Eric. Next time it might help if you tried. But don’t worry, as soon as your guild stops being hypocritical and exploitative, I will have nothing left to say. When do you think that will happen?
This is fucking excellent.
Not pertinent to this discussion.
I am going to make a counter-assumption here that I understand money better than you.
If that was true I might kill myself.
Actually, it’s the opposite. I am saying because you don’t need the residuals that much, slightly more should be allocated so that slightly more freelance TV writers can have health care.
Mainly was probably the wrong word there, but below it I asked you for an estimated percentage of how much (or little) you think “luck” has played in you success (or lack of success). Are you telling me that percentage is zero?
Well, lucky for us Ben Franklin and John Hancock opted for Plan B. Although I don’t know if they had basements at the time.
Olson, man. I read TWO LINES of your post and knew it was yours. There’s only one writer here with your style and vendetta vs. Craig.
It’s ironic that you’re even more warlike in your fanatical critiques of Craig’s posts than you claim Craig is fanatically critical of the WGA’s leadership and strike strategy.
The latest evidence:
Craig lets you back on Site – so you go straight on the attack for – for his APOLOGY, for Christ’s sakes.
It’s not enough, you say: he must atone for his sins.
You will decide the ways in which he should.
Can I ask you something?
Are you wearing a beard and black robes right now?
Good luck to you my friend. I’d like national health care, so this wouldn’t be an issue. Then my friends cleaning hotel rooms and my friends picking corn and my friends setting dolly track and I could all share in (comparable) good health.
As to how this Guild works please refer back to your and my conversation (albeit brief) that ended with an exchange on the premiums available to hotel workers versus writers.
I am not trying to insult you nor I am interested in engaging you on this issue which as far as anyone can tell is inexhaustibly fascinating to you – but entirely beside the point to this strike.
Perhaps you’d like to debate which Guild sits on a nicer piece of real estate. Its equally relevant.
Funny, in the world of writing that’s actually a compliment.
That might be because you are acting like a Republican. In fact, I would say that you are more the old school, natural born conservative, unlike the “Democrats who don’t pay their credit card bills” type of Republican we have now. What exactly have I done to force you into this position?
That’s my point Josh. Like in many of these debates (abortion is another), we have to pick a line. The line we are talking about here is where society feels comfortable in reallocating resources from individuals for the good of the greater whole. I am saying that the line that your guild has chosen is way out of whack with the ideals you are claiming to be marching under. To make matters worse, you are purposefully using propaganda and lying by omission to take advantage of this misconception.
I would say that would be somewhere around 70%, but that’s just from a quick rough analysis of the world’s population broken down by living standards. Ethopia would suck, but Paris might be pretty sweet. I am sorry that trying to figure these things out his hard for you Josh, but it’s actually how you make society work best. Can you even hazard a guess, maybe for your luckiest and unluckiest year? I won’t hold you to it.
Why wouldn’t you take me seriously? And I am not sure what kind of equality you mean. If you are talking about the Marxist kind, I think it is a phenomenally stupid and naive pipe dream. If you are talking about the kind of equality where everyone who makes a living wage (pro-rated)in your guild gets health care, then yes that is my attempt. I am sorry I have offended you.
MLBPA,
Here’s the core problem with your argument: residual payments for internet use will very quickly become a fundamental component of our compensation model. Why? Because the internet will soon be the primary distribution medium for the entertainment industry. The fight over how writers are paid for the use of our work is THE strike issue. Not reality, not animation, not even DVD (which would be like striking over wax-cylinder residuals, sooner than you might think).
You must understand that the average writer — even the working average writer — spends a shocking chunk of his career unemployed. Residual payments are what even out the income spikes, and make it possible for this labor pool to exist at all.
Another thing to remember: residuals are deferred compensation. Period. Forget Craig’s magic cake analogy (not shooting at Craig, I just think we need to be more direct about this and less clever). The studios and the writers agree to this deferment based on the expected future value of the property. For the studio, it protects them against paying more upfront for a loser. For the writer, it protects them from being left out of any participation in a winner. Lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math — that’s not what residuals are at all.
I could actually make the argument (and have) that residuals should be eliminated and fees doubled, but that’s only good for the writer who bangs out a freelance script or two a year and harms the people with the largest creative stake in an entertainment property. You cannot pay Peter without taking something from Paul, and when Paul creates something of value, Paul deserves just compensation. Paul is the guy who gives Peter the opportunity to bang out those freelances in the first place. So really, Peter has no call to be a greedy, ungrateful prick about the whole thing.
I could argue that the other way, but after a long one-man meeting of the Edmund Burke Society attended, moderated and featuring myself, I’ve personally come down on the side of preserving a fair version of the residual model. I’ve more or less convinced me. There is perhaps some happy medium between the two, and maybe if the studios won’t agree to everything we’d like on the residual front they can close the gap with upfront fees. I don’t know — I’m not a psychic.
You also need to look at the whole picture. The hilariously named NEP (oh the irony) also included some truly hilarious provisions that amount to 90% rollbacks on our upfront fees. Look it up. They left themselves room to cut our fees 90%. Not residuals. Fees.
Any way you cut it, these are existential issues. As I’ve said before, we don’t all agree on the way forward but I think we do all agree on the important issues of the day. You’re clearly a very smart guy and I don’t think you’re a communist, but I do think you a) make some assertions that look good on paper but don’t jibe with reality and b) really need to think through your hypothesis from the other direction.
Residuals aren’t compensation for good luck, they’re a hedge against bad luck. Without them, we would set the clock back to the days of the studio system, de facto or otherwise. It’s the only way most writers would be able to survive.
Eric, I also have no desire to engage in a wonkish policy debate of a guild to which I don’t even belong. What I do want to debate, and I find infinitely more interesting, is the question you still didn’t answer above. Which is when will the guild stop being so hypocritical and exploitative in how they are representing their cause? Of course, we can talk about appropriate amends later.
I like that. I also like, “Norman, please coordinate.”
MLBPA,
I work in an industry that takes me into public schools a LOT. I’ve been a teacher in some of them, good and not so good. While I’m not saying we don’t have some terrible schools, I think many of them are not as bad as you may think. In fact, some of them are good or even excellent. But, here’s the real point. Whether or not our public schools are good has nothing to do with lottery funding. Nothing. School funding is only one part of successful schools; the money from lotteries is a small part of that one part. If you are really concerned about our terrible schools, get involved on the local level and influence decision making there.
Susan p.s., yes, I know this was off-topic.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that luck is no more or less a factor in this industry than any other. In my shall we say… eclectic… career as a human being, I’ve done a lot of work and been very successful in more than one field. I’ve learned that what’s true of one is true of the others: half of life is showing up. The other half is preparing yourself to recognize and respond to opportunities when they present themselves.
Believe it or not, sociologists and psychologists have studied people who are considered “lucky”. This is their defining trait. They don’t get more opportunities via some cosmic random number generator, they’re just better at identifying an opportunity as an opportunity.
Beyond that, the rules for continued “luck” as a writer are simple: be good at what you do. Work hard. Don’t be an asshole. You should strive to exhibit at least two of these traits. If you can only pick one, choose the third. People will not work with a mediocre asshole, no matter how much midnight oil he burns or a lazy asshole, no matter how good he is.
I’m not saying that fate can’t be particularly cruel or particularly kind, but that applies to any success in life. Am I lucky that I married a beautiful, smart woman who doesn’t hate me after fifteen years? Or did I do something right? Is Josh lucky that he got to do A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE with Cronenberg? Or did he write a truly fantastic script that attracted and kept the interest of an equally excellent director?
I’m sure Josh would consider himself lucky, and on some level… he is. We all like to count our blessings when good things happen to us. But we make those things happen. We make choices in life that determine what those things could be. Life is not a lottery.
(BTW, I could say the same things about Craig. Or Ted Elliot. Or any number of writers who have enjoyed real success in this town. I’m just calling out Josh because he seems to be your favorite sparring partner at the moment).
I really didn’t mean to get on a soapbox about this, but it always sticks in my craw when someone suggests that someone else’s success is based on luck. Tearing down a person’s accomplishments and ascribing them to pure mathematics is both petty and (more damning in some respects) bad math.
Oh gaaawd… I was waiting for this line of argument.
Well, there is a pretty easy way you can find this out yourself. Next time you are marching with the SEIU or keeping a Teamster from entering the lot, hand them this information sheet I have made up for you.
Dear other Union member,
There are a few facts I would like to clear up for you before you make your decision to join us.
First of all, my guild only covers about 35% of our membership’s health care. In fact, we aren’t even for asking for more in this negotiation. If you were in our guild and some asshole studio exec thought you sucked and decided to go in a new direction, your sick kids might not get adequate medical care the next year.
Also, did I mention that a lot of us are really, really rich? Here is a chart that shows all of our yearly incomes. It looks like half a “U” with a long, small tail. It starts right at the $50m a year number on the left. (chart goes here)
Finally, for you Teamsters etc. who have fought hard and sacrificed for the ability to help other unions, I would like you to know that we are probably only using the ability to reciprocate as a bargaining chip to help us keep the chart above.
Yours in the brotherhood,
Josh
Let me know how it goes.
I am not ever going to get my luck percentage estimate, am I? How about 2002? Please?
I am going to go out on a limb here and say that you care more about your contingent compensation system and/or “union solidarity” than health care. Call me crazy.
I couldn’t agree with you more (and I will clarify the lottery analogy later), but let me ask you something. How many of those other industries did you not get health care? Because that is my point here.
Jesus.
I believe Craig’s apology is already out there for all to read on LAFishbowl. For me his need to say anything has been fulfilled, if indeed there was ever any need at all.
Also, what is worse than walking around in little circles (although the comparison to a plumber plays right into the seeming arrogance that so many of us display, lots of very smart, well educated plumbers out there and if you buy into the whole union thing then you buy into picketing which may be a jumping off point for a discussion about writers having a union, but that’s a whole ‘nother thread)is having writers post on other blogs (highly uniformed, biased blogs which I don’t find this one to be, conversation is good you know, ah, there I go again) – here at last is my point
It is unseemly for writers to complain about pulling a short shift in bad weather (be it the cold in NYC or the rain in LA) when there are old people who can’t pay for heating oil and soldiers carrying 100 pound packs in Iraq, makes us look like a bunch of cupcakes.
Let me clarify the lottery analogy. First of all, I am not saying that all of a writer’s success is due to luck in a given year. I am still waiting from Josh for that number, but it’s probably at most 40% or maybe even less, otherwise we could all be writers if we got lucky. I know I couldn’t unless Josh’s brain was put in my head. Also, Susan, I apologize for calling all schools terrible. I should’ve said “public schools still remain woefully underfunded.”
State lotteries, which often began as a pretty smart attempt to decimate the ability of organized crime to run illegal numbers games, have now spiraled into a heavily marketed revenue generator for the various states that engage in it. They say that this revenue is being used to pay for our schools, and who doesn’t want to support a good cause like that? What they neglect to mention is that it’s not like school funding has gone up. They just use this revenue to replace other revenue (sales tax, income tax etc.) that had previously been used by schools. So now we have a system in which a disproportionate number of poor and middle class people (richies don’t really buy lottery tickets) are being taxed to pay for schools that are being funded at the same rate as before. Therefore, the rich get richer and schools aren’t any better off. Which is too bad, because maybe if we had better funding in public schools, the next generation would understand why playing a state lottery is such a sucker’s bet next time they are bombarded with the marketing propaganda.
Basically, what I was trying to say was the WGA is acting like state lotteries by telling people that they are fighting for a middle class benefit, when that clearly isn’t the case. Probably could’ve been an easier way.
NYT is reporting that David Letterman may have a deal in place with the WGA.
In any Union – you have to work a certain amount of hours/days to qualify for their group coverage.
Writing is – fortunately and unfortunately – not a gig where you clock a certain amount of hours that register in some big book in the corporate heavens. You are ‘on the clock’ when you land a gig and turn in a piece of work. That’s when your health coverage comes into play.
We all know the rules here and we’re willing to bet our lives (both figuratively and literally) on our abilities to have the machine work in our favor. Sometimes it does. And sometimes it doesn’t. The Union covers the business issues once you are working. There are no guarantees around here. But again – this is known to everyone except apparently you.
If a steel worker was ‘on the clock’ for a month out of the entire year, he or she wouldn’t qualify for health coverage either.
And to this idea that the Guild is misrepresenting itself – its just madness. The demands are what they are stated as being. And then comes the bargaining – as is done in any labor negotiation. When this all gets settled the contract will include some of those demands while others will be conceded. Like the auto workers did, and the hotel employees did and the teachers did, etc..
As to which Guild proposals you think are the most salient – I couldn’t care less. There is obviously plenty of lively discussion around here about which ones writers are most concerned with. So to say that a particular position is merely a bargaining chip – from YOUR position – is self-aggrandizement.
Not that that is anything new to a comment section.
Simon
Yes. Now all we have to do is figure out a formula whereby single guys get to spend a little time with her.
How hot is she?
You act like I am arguing whether a line should exist or not between those who get health care and those who don’t. I am not arguing that here. I am arguing that you are misrepresenting the line your membership has chosen to the general public and fellow union members to your benefit.
OK, prove me wrong. Take my informational sheet to your next rally. Because I am betting their reaction would be a lot different than if you and I went to the hotel employees’ rally and got handed the same type of information sheet about their cause.
Huh, I thought it was about reciprocal altruism. Or you know, “morals.”
I don’t know about Josh, but I think I can answer this.
I have invented a new method to replace lethal injection – a method that involves no poison, no invasive procedures, and no force or physical trauma to the condemned person.
I think this will solve all the WGA’s contract negotiation problems in one swift and painless stroke.
Who’s with me?
This is about altruism?
Yes, the implied relationship between you and the Teamster who invokes his conscience clause is one of reciprocal altruism. It’s kind of what all of society is based on. Apparently, you just aren’t interested in holding up your end of the deal.
The idea of unions taking on their corporate counterparts is a universal one.
But… every union faces different challenges for THEIR SPECIFIC industry, my friend. The WGA is in the film business. Let’s not reinvent the wheel here.
I’m starting to look wantonly at my frayed cuff again.
And film Teamsters – they know exactly what’s going on here.
They know exactly what’s going everywhere as a matter of fact.
Josh,
The formula depends entirely on how long the strike lasts.
Uh, no shit. That is kind of my point. Can someone in the WGA show me the chart or is that a secret too? And I would probably ignore me too if I was you..it’s called cognitive dissonance.
Is it any more insane that calculating the price of a human life? Because unfortunately we have to make those types of decisions too when we look at allocating resources. Sorry life doesn’t come in a nice clean package for you. C’mon, little Timmy is depending on you…we just need a percentage.
God, I hope so. We can join forces like Luke and Darth. I wish I could access the secret WA archives so I could see your early work on guild health care…I bet it’s very inspired and passionate.
MLBPA,
Let me say that I would absolutely, without question, believe you if you told me that your standard response when someone asks you not to cross their picket line is, “Well, before I make a final decision on that, could you fill me in on some of the specifics of your union’s health plan?”
No trouble whatsoever picturing that conversation. None. Trust me.
But I’d hesitate to make too many extrapolations from your own decision-making calculus and apply the results to the rest of the world.
If I am understanding you correctly here, you are saying that it is OK that your union is basically lying to everyone (including other unions) because you work in the film business? That actually might be the most sound argument yet.
Let me know how many total “whatever, who doesn’t know that entertainment people are full of shit” answers you get with my informational packet from the SEIU etc., but I am not sure that qualifies as a win either way.
Josh,
But how large a dosage?
Be specific, please.
Pseudo -
Don’t engage!!!!
OK fine, we can make an experiment. Let’s have 500 SEIU members fill out a blank information sheet (no numbers, charts etc) like the one I described above on the WGA, but have them make guesses and then chart the answers. Then we can do the same with 500 WGA members on the hotel employees blank information sheet. Whose do you think is going to be more accurate and why?
Ummm… No. That’s not what I’m saying at all.
The film business is not like the automobile industry.
Or the NBA.
Each has specific parameters as to how its business makes money, operates its day to day operations, distributes products, hires employees, whatever. And again – you obviously don’t know what these are for the film industry or the unions that make up (some of) its workers.
That’s what I was saying.
Fine, I disagree but whatever. So what is your secret plan to get little Timmy guild health care then? Or is too dangerous to bring it out in the open right now during the life or death struggle with the AMPTP, especially with all of the fertile minds reading Craig’s site?
Just remember to keep your windows cracked open a little ways to get some oxygen. In fact, are you sure you’re not a bit oxygen-deprived as it is?
Since you BELIEVE in luck, why not just assume that little Timmy will eventually GET LUCKY?
Actually, I understand these differences intimately, which is why I find the fact that your guild consistently pretends to be the kind with the other “specific parameters” so galling. I mean, for fuck’s sake, writers are supposed to be the good guys.
Trust me when I tell you the same thing your agent will about the spec you are pounding out: that anti-hero shit does not fly.
Well, no. It matters. You not only believe there is a magical force controlling our destinies, but also that it can be quantified.
So where do you draw the line when it comes to imposing magical thinking on other people? If I believe that Chihuahas are tools of Satan, does that mean you’d support legislation to destroy all Chihuahuas, or is it only your own kookie beliefs you want to enforce?
And how tall IS God?
It’s not a line of argument, Johnny. It’s a question. Given that the WGA is on strike, that there are no negotiations scheduled, and that the goal of the strike is to negotiate a contract with the AMPTP that the WGA members can ratify, what steps can and should the WGA and its members take at this point to get to that goal?
Or do you believe either that the goal is not worth reaching, or that there are no steps the WGA and its members can take to initiate progress toward that goal?
Because luck in this situation is zero sum. For you to have a great year means somewhere there is a writer who is having a bad year. And Timmy might not be doing so hot by the time that luck shifts (if it ever does).
So let me get this straight, you deny that luck exists? Because once we get past that, we can talk about quantifying it. But you seem pretty unwilling to give in on that one. Would it help if I called it randomness?
MLBPA,
I would actually guess they would estimate both our income distribution and our health benefits to be much higher than they actually are.
I would further guess — and here’s where you and I differ, perhaps — that the former item would weigh far more heavily on their support for us than the latter. The “You’re just a bunch of rich, greedy pricks trying to grab even more money than you’re already making” school of thought is not exactly nonexistent, or even all that sparsely populated.
I think the members of other unions who do support us are doing so largely for one reason: because they see a union that’s holding its own against a much larger, better-funded corporate adversary, and that’s something they like to see. Period.
Plus it turns out that we’re kinda charming, in a nerdy-little-brother sort of way, and we post funny videos on YouTube, and while we aren’t necessarily the first people you’d invite over to help you move, you still hope things turn out okay for us. ‘Cause you don’t just let some asshole come along and fuck with your little brother. Even if you happen to disagree with some of his health-care decisions.
How is this being so cleverly perpertrated, exactly?
“anti-hero shit”?
Dude. Your level of being offended is becoming more and more outrageous.
No one is pulling anything over on anyone. Especially the players involved on every level of this business (the exact people who matter here).
Why don’t you take up your complaint to another industry. Baseball would gladly welcome your type of cyclical inane distraction.
Well, I think we could all get behind this initiative, magical thinking or no.
This is flat out wrong. Writers having good or bad years have no correlation to other writers’ fates.
The jeans, Eric! The jeans!
Timmy’s fate rests with the unlucky Chihuahas.
Its a beautiful day here in Southen California. Its time I go make the most of my current health and exloit that!
I find it makes my coverage work so much better than waiting for a rich benefactor to take care of me.
Well, points for being upfront about not caring about other unions and the general public, but points against for dishonesty.
Fine. Show my information packet then. What do you have to hide? Let’s find out how they really feel instead of pontificating.
BTW –
I support Universal Health Care in America . . .
Now that is an economical principal I would like to hear explained.
Well, I don’t believe in anything magical either, or fate, or god, religion, superstition or any of that bullshit. But there is pretty clear empirical evidence that randomness exists. I just prefer to call it luck. That might have not been the best choice.
Uh, because this situation is pretty much zero sum. If we had one apple and you and I drew a card, either I would get “lucky” or you would get “lucky”. I am not saying that writing is like drawing a card, but it doesn’t hurt to catch a few breaks to accompany your inherent talent.
Yes.Depends.
No it doesn’t. Maybe you got to the executive’s office in the morning and they spent all of their money for that quarter on your pitch and then Josh came to pitch them a similar idea in the afternoon and his was better, but too late. That damn agent’s assistant is purposefully trying to make him lose health care! Or you know, you got lucky.
Eric,
Lucky you!
OK, say hi to Ron Paul for me!
Oop – 3:33! Time for my daily gratuitous knock on lax24.
MLBPA, I’d take you over that guy any day.
Really? You mean “exists” as in it’s a provable entity, as opposed to a hypothetical concept used to explain the inexplicable? Shit happens, God Boy. Sometimes it’s what you call Good, sometimes it’s what you call Bad, and sometimes it’s up for grabs.
You want to penalize me for the “randomness” you say is responsible for my success, but you don’t want to reward me for the “randomness” that caused my local grocery store to be out of milk when I need it yesterday, or the “randomness” that led to the car I owned in 1986 being defective, leading to my missing an important meeting.
In that this concept of yours isn’t, actually, provable, what’s say we get back to compensating people for the work they do, and leave issues of “randomness” up to Zeus, or whatever deity I wish to believe in this month.
And when do we start killing Chihuahuas?
PS: To whoever warned me about this dude….
I apologize. Next time I’ll listen.
We already do to a certain extent via taxes, which is why if your crappy car caused you to crash and have brain damage, you would be eligible for disability pay. And I never said randomness was responsible for your success. It could just as easily be partially responsible for making you write crappy Caspar Van Dien movies and eat Ramen noodles while Mazin was knee deep in hookers and gin. Or vice versa.
The whole point of this is to get you off of your high horse with your “my fellow writers don’t deserve any of my money for health care because they aren’t as talented as me” bullshit. It is a horrible stance to be defending.
a) I can tell you exactly what will happen in this scenario: They’ll buy the guy’s script and then ask Olson to rewrite it. Win-win, sort of.
b) Since you’re big on surveys, perhaps you could survey a random sample of development people, and ask them whether they agree or disagree with the following statement: “Our real problem is that we’re getting inundated with high-quality scripts and pitches all day long, and we just don’t have enough time or money to pursue them all!”
A great script, and I’m speaking here in the studio-suit sense of “great,” can be worth millions or tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars to the company that acquires it. On the very rare occasion someone genuinely believes he’s holding that particular hard-to-find item in his hands — especially if it comes courtesy of a writer low enough on the food chain to be sweating about staying eligible for health coverage — he will find the money. Count on it.
Otherwise, “It’s great, but we just don’t have the budget right now” is simply a polite way of saying: “It’s not great.”
Neither case is indicative of a zero-sum game.
So you don’t have an answer to the question, “Given that the WGA is on strike, that there are no negotiations scheduled, and that the goal of the strike is to negotiate a contract with the AMPTP that the WGA members can ratify, what steps can and should the WGA and its members take at this point to get to that goal?”
I have. I’ve stated it on this board and even in this thread. I even reposted what Quill Me Now said, because he stated the same ideas better than I did — to wit:
A compelling argument based in reality. Do you agree with it? Do you have any suggestions for alternative steps that the WGA and its membership can and should take?
Riiiiight. What if the other guy is Akiva?
I already know that they will answer some days yes, some days no. But, if you’ve ever been around at the end of a development cycle when there is still left over cash, they can have quite the opposite feeling.
What if Josh wrote the exact same idea and it’s on the front page of Variety that day with Will Smith starring? Would that affect the price? Also, if the studio got 10 of those “rare” scripts on the same day, would that affect the price? What if they had just spent their quarterly development budget and don’t have any more slots left until 2013? Sorry dude, there are something called market forces here that are preventing writers from being paid 10 gazillion dollars and studios releasing a zillion movies.
I am shocked. No one I know in this town would behave in such a manner. Besides, they all have endless budgets…they get them from one of Josh’s magical animals, right?
Where did that zero-sum go again?
Well, you all are forgetting about TV staffing which really often IS a zero-sum game. You’re up for three or four jobs each against three or four people at your level, maybe you get one, maybe you don’t. Repeat every staffing season.
In terms of selling movie specs, it’s true that a great piece of material is always going to sell (pretty much) but if one studio just bought something in that genre with a similar premise, they may well not bid, and one fewer bidder can dramatically bring down the selling price. So maybe it sells for 150K instead of 600K. Not zero-sum exactly but one specific person’s success can dramatically impact someone else’s prospects.
Stooge wrote (paraphrased):
“Any strike that goes longer than 6 weeks is a failure”
I’m reading a fascinating book right now called “The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable” by Taleb. One of the main tenets of this book is that one cannot make dogmatic predictions on the future based on past performance.
The classic example given is of the turkey who, every day, has his belief reinforced that he is will be fed every day by humans that have his best interest at heart. Every day he feels more secure and sure of their kindness — until the day before Thanksgiving when they slaughter him.
Any catchy little sound byte about what makes a strike a success or not is just a bit of dogma but not really truth at all.
Now, another important point about this book — and Josh, this is for you — is that I don’t agree entirely with everything Taleb has written. However, instead of this upsetting me, I am continuing to read it while having lively debates in my head with the author’s avatar.
Honest debate allows one to clarify one’s own position and strengthen it.
If Craig had not written that striking should stop, would you have been inspired to compose and share your compelling clarifications about what good effects the act of striking has? The power of walking the picket line was never so clear to me as now.
As for your fears of openly voiced debate being used by the opposition as talking points or the planting of dissenting voices on blogs such as this one — these are valid concerns…BUT:
1) From what I’ve seen, those who are dirty enough to try to monkeywrench the meaning of actual statements into twisted tools they can use; are also dirty enough to just make stuff up and present it as real.
The audience who is inclined to be taken in by the first is just as likely to be taken in by the latter. Audiences who are NOT as inclined to be taken in by the latter are also insightful enough to avoid being fooled by the first.
2) When the Internet was still shiny and new, marketers and shysters were all over it, creating “false” grassroots campaigns, putting plants on blogs, and et cetera. This abuse came with consequences for the abuser though. These games still go on but they are much, MUCH less effective now. Most everyone who has been on the Internet more than 2-3 years has developed a very discriminating “stooge-dar.”
fwiw.
Shit man, I thought you were relentless. Or is that only when you are beating Craig up over some dumb-ass thing he wrote on his blog?
Excuse me, whaaaa? I have never, ever written that “striking should stop.”
I said picketing should stop, and only as a means to attempt to restart negotiations.
Karen, have you read Taleb’s other book, Fooled by Randomness, as well? If not, I highly recommend it. It presents some of the ideas in The Black Swan a bit more clearly, and I think the two books complement each other well.
His basic idea — that just because it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean it can’t happen — is pretty powerful, and yet it’s hard to live one’s life according to that principle, because we prefer the illusion of certainty (“Mediocristan”) to the challenges of randomness. I think Taleb’s bout with cancer gave him a pretty unique opportunity to think very deeply about his subject and how it truly impacts how one lives.
(By the way, I think the “six weeks” quote was by the Stooge Translator, not the Stooge himself.)
Indeed.
Which is why I’ve never taken the stance, or defended it.
Yes, but box-office failures in one time period can depress the market for similar screenplays in that period and the periods following. In that case, a screenwriter who succeeds at getting paid but fails (whether through his fault or that other members of the filmmaking enterprise) in winning a big audience for his work can have an impact on other writers. And the same is true in reverse — a successful film can create surging demand for similar material and lift many writers on that surge. This effect is the opposite of a zero-sum game.
Karen,
Fantastic. Thank you.
Of course. But it’s a lot easier on them when they don’t have to make it up OR twist it.
I disagree on both counts. I’m far more concerned about statements made by high profile WGA members who undermine the stike than I am about fake statements, because fake statements simply don’t carry as much weight. And the second part of your argument sounds like Brian’s previous comment – propaganda exists for a reason. The AMPTP is spending time and money spreading dissent and demoralizing message for a reason.
Craig wouldn’t have felt the need to apologize for the LA Times piece if he bought into that notion. He understands the power of propaganda. He just thinks that because his position is sincere, it doesn’t matter that it feeds into the AMPTP’s position.
Uh, you’ve also never agreed with me and I would say that we have been writing about this for a decent amount of time now. And as you know, our kind host does not allow censorship of any kind (well at least of this kind). So excuse me, in the absence of you actually saying how you feel, from making inferences on statements like this when we are talking redistributing your wealth towards higher health care coverage for your brethren:
Oops, sorry Craig. “Picketing” was what I meant. In my mind, they tend to be synonymous even though I DO know the difference. I was careless and imprecise and I apologize.
Completely off topic:
Stuart – I haven’t read his other book yet although I am sure I will.
Where I tend to quibble with him is I actually DO believe in divine intervention and that things aren’t as random as they seem. For me, it is all a matter of perspective & noticing. Last Tuesday, a branch came through our roof like a spear aimed for the futon where we sit to watch TV. One’s first reaction might be “how awful!” BUT my intention for that moment in time WAS to be watching TV but instead I was downstairs, out of harm’s way. If I had been doing what I intended, I’d probably be missing an eye, a limb and/or a lot of blood right now. Taleb would say that this story is indicative of the stories we tell to reassure ourselves — but this isn’t a one-off — I have many hundreds, thousands of such stories, all from my OWN life. That is too many to be random, imho.
I didn’t write this to start a debate as there is no way I know to empirically prove my belief to the satisfaction of a skeptic, it is just a statement about where my worldview differs from Taleb’s.
Interesting anecdote there. I would only say that from the perspective of human beings, it is awfully hard to tell what God is thinking at times — some experiences seem like Divine intervention in the protective sense, others seem like Divine indifference. But we don’t have a vantage point that lets us clearly see the causes of each in a way that satisfies our very curious intellects — hence, the existence of both faith and skepticism.
MLBPA:
Does it occur to you that you’re no longer actually making a point?
Okay, fine: In this scenario, one writer or the other will probably lose out. Then that writer will be faced with the blood-chilling prospect of either being Akiva Goldsman trying to find work in Hollywood, or being Josh Olson trying to find work in Hollywood. Something tells me they’ll probably be okay in either case.
Oh, and they’ll both still get health insurance.
Given that you don’t much care what happens to either of them anyway, beyond keeping careful track of what they each get paid so you can relieve them of “a small amount” of their income at the end of the year, it seems kind of irrelevant to this whole conversation, though. But since I’m a good sport, I’ll help you out a little. The relevant scenario would be as follows:
Josh sells his script/pitch/whatever in the morning. Then, they read my script that afternoon, which is substantially similar to his, but — let’s assume for the sake of argument — better. Then what?
Short answer is, yeah, Josh probably wins. Partly because proven talent is more valuable, when placing bets on an unknown future, than less-proven or unproven talent. Partly because Josh’s name on the script will make it a thousand times easier to attract a director and some viable stars (assuming he doesn’t want to direct it himself) than my name on the script. Partly for some other reasons, but they’re all in that same vein.
But it’s still not a zero-sum game. If I’d had the morning meeting (and they’d signed a deal with me on the spot…this really is a highly contrived scenario, but let’s say they did) and Josh’d had the afternoon meeting where he pitched the same idea, then I repeat, we would probably both get paid in that case. Either they’d ask Josh to rewrite me, or they’d shelve my script and go with his.
But in any case, the problem here isn’t money; it’s that two writers are trying to sell fundamentally the same scripts to the same buyer. Take that stipulation out of the scenario, and Josh can make his sale in the morning and I can still make mine in the afternoon — provided mine is really good.
(Which, needless to say, it is. Of course it is. These hypothetical development execs are going to cry, the damned thing’s so fucking great. And since we’re hypothetically not on strike on anymore, my financial worries are hypothetically over at long last. Hooray, hypothetically.)
But… I thought it was a comedy?
Stuart,
Shh…..
Re: The Letterman & Leno deals–
Congrats to David Young and Patric for realizing their goal of driving a wedge in the alliance. I speak not of the alliance named AMPTP, but the one called the WGA.
Yep. They finally were able to make some of us pissed off at others of us.
Come on. Who in their right mind can look at these deals and not see them for what they are: not a “wedge” in the AMPTP, but a face-saving measure by the WGA, since these late-night shows were going to go back on the air whether the Guild liked it or not. These deals are bull shit — the people who will be doling out the monies on the Internet, in thiese cases, are NBC and CBS, not these little companies.
How are we supposed to strike NBC now? Will Jay’s people wave their red shirts out their windows so we can tell them from the Daly people? (What the heck, since they won’t be picketing, any more, what do they need those shirts for anyway?).
So some rich writers now get their jobs back. And guys like me have to pinch pennies during X-Mas.
Fuck it. No more picketing.
Fuck it. I’m calling the Guild on Monday and striking an independant deal between my loan-out company and the Guild. Then I can go back to work.
And, just so nobody gets bent out of shape here, I’m going to give the WGA much much more than World-Wide Pants on internet. It’ll be raining pennies over on Fairfax.
Dividing writer from writer — Yound and Varrone are truly the Guys Who Can’t Negotiate Straight.
Yes, these are the only two writers this could happen to in all of Hollywood. Certainly not you and Timmy’s dad. You caught me.
On what planet are you selling your pitches in this scenario? You both get paid equal market rate for the same idea? You are telling me that the studio decides, fuck it, fair is fair and we will pay them each as if the other one doesn’t exist for the same idea?
And do you care to respond to any of the other many arguments I made previously to you as to why it actually is a zero sum game or are they also not relevant on your magical planet? Because I can come up with these scenarios all day. Or at least until we all get too busy when your magical planet’s magical studios start making a gazillion profitable movies a year.
No, actually it is the definition of a zero sum game. Just ask a drama writer about how sweet it is to go pitch an idea the Monday after Judd Apatow blows the windows out. The only way you could create an increase in the aggregate amount is if every movie all of a sudden became a hit because they were all so enticing and good that no one stayed home anymore. I am not quite sure I see the mechanism by which that is going to come about.
Well, there is one other way that you could increase the aggregate, but that would involve letting those smelly reality and animation writers into your guild so that they can receive basic minimums too. But who wants to do that?
It’s possible that the drama writer loses a deal to a comedy writer that Monday, one that would have gone to the drama writer a week earlier. It’s also certainly possible that two drama writers see their pitches fail on that Monday, while five comedy writers cut deals they couldn’t have made a week earlier. It’s also possible that the drama writer still gets his deal because his material is good, even though the executives are also looking for the next 40 -Year-Old Virgin. How closely do you hew to the definition of a zero-sum game?
As for reality and animation writers, I don’t see your point. Unless you’re just being facetious about the WGA’s insistence on getting them into the Guild because you think the Guild’s only motivation is using their contributions to the health plan to make up for the contributions you think wealthier Guild members ought to be making but aren’t.
Not equal. Me: my price. Josh: his. And not to brag about how scrupulously I’ve remained in touch with my working-man roots or anything, but mine isn’t gonna put much of a dent in his.
Has nothing to do with fair. Has everything to do with “A more appealing business opportunity came along.”
Which is why I said we wouldn’t both get paid if he was the one who pitched first.
As for your other points, they all assume that there’s only one company in town that I can sell to — or that all the companies have exactly the same needs, and all decide to buy or not buy a particular kind of material at the same time in response to any given event. It simply doesn’t work that way.
For this to be a zero-sum game, there must be either 1) a fixed number of scripts that will be purchased in a given year — which there isn’t, or 2) a fixed amount of money that will be spent, industry-wide, to acquire scripts in a given year — which, again, there isn’t.
This isn’t like buying batteries. The buyers don’t know what they’re looking for. They only know whether the particular pitch/script you’ve presented to them is or isn’t one of the things they’re looking for after they’ve heard it/read it/read the coverage on it. You can’t possibly draw straight lines with labels on them like “The actions of Writer A caused Writer B to lose a sale that we know he would have gotten otherwise.” Your earlier theory of randomness was far closer to the point than this.
Except this isn’t random, either; just chaotic. You seem to have a preponderance of education, so I’ll trust you understand the distinction between the two.
“Letting.” What an interesting choice of verb.
If I had the opportunity to let reality and animation writers into the Guild, that permission would be granted before they had time to say “please.”
This is so far removed from the actual situation at hand, of course, that it’s not merely hypothetical but downright imaginary…but nonetheless, they’d be in. That day. Morning of that day.
Making that statement isn’t quite the same as saying that I’d be willing to remain on strike for the years it would take to actually bring that situation about, however. And if the only reason you can come up with for that is…what, snobbery?…then your grasp on certain core realities of life is even more tenuous than I’ve been assuming thus far.
Let them in? Are you fucking kidding me?
So, Warren Comics is back in business. Anyone here an old-time fan of CREEPY and EERIE?
I would disagree on number two. Where does this unlimited supply of money for scripts in a given year come from? Or is it “fixed” by the market?
Sorry, I should’ve said “invited” them in. Which you could do if you were willing to sacrifice for them, but we can debate forever if it would be years or days of striking to do so. And what core reality other than snobbery explains why these writers shouldn’t be in your guild?
Nope, that’s not it. Let me explain. There are two things that YOU, being writers, can do to increase the amount that studios are willing to pay you in this system.
The first would be for writers to collectively write “better” scripts on the whole that then collectively translate into more profitable movies on the whole for the studios. This way they would have more money to spend on writers, and this competitive marketplace for your services would cause the water level to rise for all of you. However, other than mandatory Robert Mckee classes for all members and/or a guild-wide ban on “passion projects”, I don’t really see the mechanism by which this could happen.
The only other way for writers to increase this aggregate would be to bring more people under your umbrella of protection. See, right now some of these reality and animation writers are getting exploited. By setting minimums for them, you protect them from being exploited and it also then raises the aggregate amount earned by working writers. And just to make your intentions even more suspect in not doing so, the added bonus of more leverage might even pay for the cost of getting them in. Hell, you might even turn a profit!
But tell me more about the WGA’s “insistence” on getting them into the Guild. There may be hope for you yet.
Pretty sound arguments?
I don’t think so – far from it.
Your avatar would be of a straw-man, if you had one.
I’ll pass. There may be hope for me, but I’m not so sure about you. (That is, whatever else you may be, and from your posts I assume you’re a successful participant in the entertainment industry, you seem very committed to a couple of ideas about the industry and the role of the WGA within it — so committed that it’s pointless to discuss those topics with you.)
Stuart –
And then you quote QMN.
What Quilly did there is bathrobe quaterbacking. Fun, sure. Compelling? Hardly.
It kind of baffles me that in an attempt to make a compelling argument you cut’n paste someone else’s opinion. But I’ll level with you… Which post of mine gave you the impression that I have any interest in discussing wga strike strategies in a public forum?
As a matter of fact, my sole objective has always been to convince craig NOT to discuss strike strategies in a public forum. He did. It blew up in his face. And yet he marches on, practically unfazed by the damage he has caused – Oopsydaisy, here I go again! See, he apologized, but remorse does not equal redemption. Where are the ACTIONS to make up for his mistakes?
Brian -
Maybe you missed this: http://artfulwriter.com/?p=296 It is Craig’s version of why the WGA should succumb to the AMPTP’s demands. He even drops “stop picketing” as a cherry on top (curiously, at a time when his busy schedule finally allows him to join the picket lines – not a morning person, I guess). Anyway, you can skip to the last part, anything after A NEW GOAL reads pretty much like it came from a pamphlet left at the latest amptp negotiating seminar.
The Red Gang and the Blue Gang face off. Their leaders step up.
Red Leader: You suck
Blue Leader: No, you suck.
Red #1: You can’t even come up with your own insults. That’s lame.
Red #2: Yeah, that’s lame.
Blue #1: Shut up, Reds!
Blue #2: Well, it really was lame. He could’ve done better than that.
Blue #1 slaps his forehead.
Red leader: You and your buddies better turn around, now, or we’re gonna kick your asses.
Red #1: Yeah.
Red #2: Yeah.
Red #3: Yeah.
And so on. And so on.
Blue #3: Whoa. Wait a minute. This wasn’t my idea. I was outvoted.
Blue #4: Dude, can we talk about this later?
Blue #3: I’m entitled to disagree!
Red Leader: Yeah, let the man talk.
Red #1: Yeah.
Red #2: Yeah.
Red #3: Yeah.
And on down the line.
Blue #4: (whispers) Just wait ‘til we’re out of earshot, please.
Blue #3: I won’t be silenced!
Blue #5 makes the telephone sign and mouths to the Red Leader “Call me”
Carson Daly is an easy target. Whoever did that, did it because they felt comfortable he has no allies in this business. They’d never do that to someone who had any power.
It was lame and self-righteous. Daly’s not even in the guild and doesn’t even employ guild writers.
I support the strike 100% — but that was just lame.
I mean — there’s a war going on, with people DYING for our country and these people feel that TV residuals is worth making a public display about?
Acts like these is what will turn the general public against the writers. Regardless if it really was writers anyway.
And anyone who feels comfortable laughing down at Carson Daly, I can’t stand the guy, but I’m not about to get off on it and attack such an easy target — because he’s a non-threatening target.
Stuart -
I should have warned you re my relationship with Johnny. But I do have to credit him with more restraint than I would have predicted. Saves me from temptation to do a little bathrobe bitch-slapping. I don’t even wanna fight with him, really — I kinda like the guy — it’s Lax24 I wanna throw down with.
Almost time for the daily gratuitous knock!
Gotta warn against that. He’s existed since the dawn of time. He’ll do far worse than kill you. He’ll bury you in movie cliches.
How dare you say things like this in a public forum, Stuart? Can’t you see that you’re playing right into the crayon companies’ hands?
I guess if people like you ran the world, all the crayons would be “Burnt Umber.” And that would be just fine with your colored-wax-peddling masters, too, I might add.
Hope Crayola paid you a nice bonus for this so-called post of yours, Judas.
All I can say is, watch your back, pal. ‘Cause the sign I tape onto it the next time I see you ain’t gonna smell like strawberries.
Pseudonymouse, you are right, I apologize profusely for not making my actual agenda clear. I meant to say: “And I really don’t have a compelling argument why Crayola(tm) scented markers are better than traditional Crayola(tm) crayons. Other than Crayola(tm) scented markers make your work both visually appealing with their vibrant colors and wedge tips that allow you to create fine lines and bold strokes through repeated heavy use, as well as exciting to the sense of smell with their rich palette of pleasing and long-lasting odors. While Crayola(tm) crayons are an American tradition and are available in a bright rainbow of colors, tones and hues, and their high-quality wax make them suitable for a variety of fun and educational products, and while the new Crayola(tm) Crayon Maker toy allows you to reuse crayon stubs and scraps to make your own brand-new crayons, providing hours of entertainment while reducing ecological waste — although, I hasten to add, Crayola(tm) crayons are, and always have been, completely safe and non-toxic — I find their appeal a bit retro and passe for my more sophisticated tastes. I would only recommend Crayola(tm) crayons to people who aren’t jaded effete aesthetes like myself, people who instead have preserved a fresh outlook on life, a sense of childlike wonder, and an all-American reverence for tradition. But, hey, whatever. [Crayola(tm) is a trademark of Binney and Smith -- all rights reserved.]“
Big words, Stuart. Big man always likes to bring the big words. Well, I’ve got two words you don’t want to hear:
Forest Green, motherfucker.
And would you like to know what I’ve got here in my left hand? Step a little closer, and I’ll show you.
That’s right — it’s Leaf Green, for filling in some of the finer detail areas. Specular highlights and whatnot.
You’re about to step into my deep, dark woods now, Stuart. With a little squirrel I drew on the side of one the tree trunks, too. See the eyes? Oh, yeah, you see the eyes.
Still think your six primary and secondary colors, plus brown and black, are going to be enough to get you through this? Your markers may smell like every flavor of fruit on the produce aisle, but that still won’t be enough. ‘Cause I’ve got 64 crayons here, and every one of them smells like whup-ass.
Throw down!
Crying.
Oh, yeah, tough guy?
Well, say hello to my little friend!
You’re lucky. I lost bladder control.
“Specular highlights and whatnot.”
Oh, God, there I go again. brb
I hope your little friend is prepared to bring the high heat!
[Note: In truth, I would prefer that your little friend not be prepared to bring the high heat, as that would be entirely more advantageous to my interests in this matter. Please do not confuse my boastful hyperbole with any lack of clarity as to actual means or goals. I am united.]
In surgery now.
Let me just say, this site has degenerated in EXACTLY the way I always hoped it would.
That settles it. I am prepared to concede that the development guys will, in fact, be crying, whatever genre of material you put before them, because it will be just that good. And not just hypothetically.
Crap! Does that mean Pseudo won’t owe us money based on luck?
I think he pegged the figure at 67.2 percent. Hey, I’ll take it!
(Or was that the percentage of bugfuck in the daily dose… oh, shit, now I’m just confused….)
Here is an artist using simple tools to make a real statement: Banksy in Bethlehem.
I hope this is the kind of work WGA members will turn out after this strike is settled. I am not sure I agree with Banksy’s politics, but I sure am impressed with how he expresses himself, and the underlying nature of his message.
Better put the paramedics on speed dial. I almost passed out reading that one. Dying! Dying!
Fortunately, I now have my code words. Pseudonymouse, promise me that if you ever run into me from this day forward, you’ll mutter the words, “Forest green,, motherfucker,” and I’ll give the countersign, “Specular highlights and whatnot.”