Writer's Strike - The Writer's Perspective
My Beloved Grandfather was President (1945) of UAW/CIO Local 203 - he was a Union Man. I remember him telling me that prior to the Union, during the depression, if he didn't bring his boss a bottle of a scotch (each payday) that he would not keep his job in the Detroit auto industry.
I have been trying to sort out the impetus for the writer's strike and recently ran into a friend of mine who is a writer. This is what my (writer) friend has to say:
"The issues in the Writer's Strike are actually fairly simple and have been percolating over the last twenty years. When the issues of secondary distribution first came up in the form of the sale of programming and movies via VHS, the Guild was asked to help this (then) new technology grow by accepting a small portion of the sale price (about four cents per sale). This was regarded as reasonable at the time for two reasons: no one knew how much revenue would be generated by this new means of distribution and the physical production cost of making a VHS tape was fairly hefty. Since then, this post-first run programming has generated significant amounts of money. However, with the advent of the DVD, the production cost dropped enormously, to somewhere between thirty-five and sixty-five cents per DVD. Through several negotiations, however, the amount of participation by the writers who created the product in the first place remained stagnant at four cents per copy.
During this time, the concept of residuals remained in place. Residuals are what writers get paid when the producers re-use and re-sell, at a profit, programming that the writers created. This is much like what novelists get in the form of royalties when their books are sold. It has been an accepted form of payment for more than thirty years. And over that time, the producers have consistently chipped away at the residual formula.
The reason that residuals are important is the ebb and flow nature of show business. Very few people work consistently over the course of a career, and often there are fallow periods. During those times, writers (as well as actors and directors) often depend on residual payments to tide them over. And, remember, the residuals are based on the product being re-sold, at a profit, by the producers.
What has forced this strike is an unwillingness to continue residuals, and a position by the producers that includes little or no profit participation for the writers in the world of new technology. Their stated position is that nobody knows what kind of money there is to be made via the internet and other new distribution methods.
That is, their stated position to the Writers' Guild. The statements they have made to their stockholders is that there are billions to be made via the internet and that "every time one of our programs is shown, we will be paid." This has been stated by every one of the heads of the major distributors, including Les Moonves, Robert Iger, Peter Chernin, et al. So, either they are misleading the Writer's Guild or misleading their stockholders. One would be a lie, the other would be stock fraud.
New distribution technology has expanded to ipods, cell phones and assorted methods of downloading and streaming on the internet. And the producers don't want to pay anything for the use of programming in those arenas, preferring to call them promotional (thought they generate advertising revenue and other fees). When one considers that it is really a matter of moments before the computer and the television are one, this amounts to a massive rollback of previously agreed to commitments. To give just one example, an offer of $250 was made for original scripts produced for the internet. This is as opposed to, for example, the current rate of more than $20,000 for a half hour script. That's a cut of nearly 90%. Imagine what your reaction would be if the commission on a real estate sale was unilaterally cut from 6% to .6% and you have an idea what that means.
The issues in the strike are primarily economic, but there is more to it than that. The entertainment business, as well as the news media, is increasingly in the hands of multinational conglomerates. Sooner or later, if the current trend continues, most of the world's economy will be held hostage by these corporations. The decision was made by the Writers' Guild to object, in the most forceful terms possible, to this abusive monopoly. Thus the strike.
I hope this clears things up a bit. "
I have been trying to sort out the impetus for the writer's strike and recently ran into a friend of mine who is a writer. This is what my (writer) friend has to say:
"The issues in the Writer's Strike are actually fairly simple and have been percolating over the last twenty years. When the issues of secondary distribution first came up in the form of the sale of programming and movies via VHS, the Guild was asked to help this (then) new technology grow by accepting a small portion of the sale price (about four cents per sale). This was regarded as reasonable at the time for two reasons: no one knew how much revenue would be generated by this new means of distribution and the physical production cost of making a VHS tape was fairly hefty. Since then, this post-first run programming has generated significant amounts of money. However, with the advent of the DVD, the production cost dropped enormously, to somewhere between thirty-five and sixty-five cents per DVD. Through several negotiations, however, the amount of participation by the writers who created the product in the first place remained stagnant at four cents per copy.
During this time, the concept of residuals remained in place. Residuals are what writers get paid when the producers re-use and re-sell, at a profit, programming that the writers created. This is much like what novelists get in the form of royalties when their books are sold. It has been an accepted form of payment for more than thirty years. And over that time, the producers have consistently chipped away at the residual formula.
The reason that residuals are important is the ebb and flow nature of show business. Very few people work consistently over the course of a career, and often there are fallow periods. During those times, writers (as well as actors and directors) often depend on residual payments to tide them over. And, remember, the residuals are based on the product being re-sold, at a profit, by the producers.
What has forced this strike is an unwillingness to continue residuals, and a position by the producers that includes little or no profit participation for the writers in the world of new technology. Their stated position is that nobody knows what kind of money there is to be made via the internet and other new distribution methods.
That is, their stated position to the Writers' Guild. The statements they have made to their stockholders is that there are billions to be made via the internet and that "every time one of our programs is shown, we will be paid." This has been stated by every one of the heads of the major distributors, including Les Moonves, Robert Iger, Peter Chernin, et al. So, either they are misleading the Writer's Guild or misleading their stockholders. One would be a lie, the other would be stock fraud.
New distribution technology has expanded to ipods, cell phones and assorted methods of downloading and streaming on the internet. And the producers don't want to pay anything for the use of programming in those arenas, preferring to call them promotional (thought they generate advertising revenue and other fees). When one considers that it is really a matter of moments before the computer and the television are one, this amounts to a massive rollback of previously agreed to commitments. To give just one example, an offer of $250 was made for original scripts produced for the internet. This is as opposed to, for example, the current rate of more than $20,000 for a half hour script. That's a cut of nearly 90%. Imagine what your reaction would be if the commission on a real estate sale was unilaterally cut from 6% to .6% and you have an idea what that means.
The issues in the strike are primarily economic, but there is more to it than that. The entertainment business, as well as the news media, is increasingly in the hands of multinational conglomerates. Sooner or later, if the current trend continues, most of the world's economy will be held hostage by these corporations. The decision was made by the Writers' Guild to object, in the most forceful terms possible, to this abusive monopoly. Thus the strike.
I hope this clears things up a bit. "
Comments