And here is a good run down on why there is a strike in Hollywood:
found by Rick Salsman
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
What is the significance of the 40+% unemployment? Is that a percentage of the Union’s members? If so, isn’t it indicative of (labor) supply being greater than demand? The Union wouldn’t accept unqualified individuals as members, right? Wouldn’t that mean the job is “easy” since so many people can do it… far more than are needed? Would those unemployed members gladly work for even lesser pay than their employed/striking colleagues?
Maybe the nature of the work means that such a percentage are “unemployed” at any given moment of time yet still earn enough on a yearly basis to survive without another job or something? I have plenty of questions but don’t know enough about the industry to reach a conclusion in understanding what’s actually happening.
>>Oh stop it, you’re breaking my heart…
Snappy rebuttal, abogado del mar. Should we assum that means you have capitulated, and have no more silly arguments to offer up?
#27Sea Lawyer
Yes there is a problem with your analogy and
If you cant see the business model difference then you are blind. Also when it is 100 + people working on a program it is more of a collaborative work and could not be done by an individual and could not be done without the resources the company provides to create the program. On a screenplay it is one sometimes two people and can be done without the studio or any of its resources. VERY VERY BIG DIFFERENCE. On a TV show you have a few writers but again most of the time it is 1 or 2 writers that contribute the bulk of the work and it too could be done without the studio and without the studio resources.
#29 Cursor_
You sound like an idiot. You have no idea what is involved in screen writing and you are just talking out your ass. Why don’t you go back behind the counter at Mc Donalds and deliver your views on life.
#32, My silly arguments? You were the one relying on a fallacy to make yours.
#33, Well you’ve certainly taken a wrong turn down the alleyway of irrelevance, I may not be the only one here who needs his eyes checked.
>>My silly arguments? You were the one relying on a fallacy
>>to make yours.
Sea Biscuit, it’s you who have certainly taken a wrong turn down the alleyway of irrelevance.
wtf are you talking about? What “fallacy”? I pointed out that writers get a cut of the action when their products make money, and that’s all they’re asking for – that the cut also include new-fangled ways the studios have found to make additional money off of THEIR work.
You been drinking that bilge water again, or what? Start making sense!
Please tell me what part of my post #33 is irrelevant and why it is irrelevant?
#27 – there is no problem with my analogy, and your response about what “usually” happens doesn’t do anything to show any significant difference between a screenwriter employed to produce a script on the one hand and a programmer employed to produce source code on the other.
There are many problems with your analogy, only two of which are:
A coder and a writer are two completely different things that do two completely different things.
Writing creative material for film or television is a radically different skill set, and a far rarer one, than writing lines of code that add all the figures in column B.
>>There are many problems with your analogy, only two of which are:
Another one is that writers are always paid a percentage of what the product of their labor creates (which is all they’re asking for here); staff programmers NEVER are.
Cripes.
Double Cripes
Well the TV networks spend millions putting shows on the air, and milions more buying scripts that never air.
Without the networks and studios, this writing would never yield anything.
#31
You are pretty much wrong on all accounts. Is supply greater than demand? Yes, if you were to treat writers like painters. In other words, if all writers were equal, then there should be no shortage of writers. However, that is not the case. The number of writers that can *consistently* write usable scripts is very low.
In order to be a member of the WGA, you have to have made a certain amount of money by selling one or more scripts within a certain time period. So, the WGA is made up of people that have actually been paid for writing.
It comes down to this: should writers get *any* money off residuals from their work? If yes, then there should be no issue with them getting residuals of the use of their work in any format.
They already get some residuals, and are trying to double that, and add some other types of residuals.
It’s all a moot point since most of the posters on this blog thinks people should be able to download their copies for free, at which point the writers will get some percent of nothing.
#24 – It’s hard to have sympathy for writers who arrive to work in Mercedes and limousines. Especially when they refuse to share the residuals with their fellow employees. This is going to be a long strike because the general public does not give a damn about the overpaid behind-the-scenes writers. Tough. Live with it, buddy.
#45 – Writers are not in the Mercedes / Limo class. They arrive to work in Toyota Corollas and Honda Civics.
And what do you mean by, “they refuse to share their residuals?” How do you think that works? Do you share your paycheck with your fellow employees? No. Why. They get their own paycheck.
And if any of you think writing is so damn easy, let’s see what CSI is like if the studios decide to just outsource writing to China or Pakistan. In fact, really, let’s do that… because that would be some damn funny TV.
And what does it matter to any of you?
These writers are negotiating a contract, they aren’t getting what they want (and they aren’t asking for anything outlandish – they aren’t all going to suddenly be buying McMansions in Malibu). So they said, well, we are going to stop working until we settle this. And, their contract was up… so it isn’t like they are just throwing a tantrum. Who among you, in a contract job, would work without a contract?
What is the problem? None of it affects you. I don’t get why some of you begrudge someone else collecting a paycheck.
#42 MikeN
Most blatantly ignorant and false statement award goes to MikeN for the following comment
“Without the networks and studios, this writing would never yield anything.” MikeN
Until I read jbenson2’s comment #45
How many writers do you know? None I would imagine. Very few writers can afford to drive such cars. Nice assumption but just isn’t true.
Why should they share their residuals? You want them to share their 4%? Why shouldn’t the Media conglomerates share their 90% + cut?
All the other behind the scene workers have unions. Some get residuals and some do not. It is up to their unions to get them what they are entitled to.
Why is it the job of the writers to split their amount or fight other unions battles? Just so you know this strike is supported by many of the other unions in the industry.
You in addition to many others here have absolutely no idea what the hell you are talking about. You seem to think you “know” what goes on but you have not one single clue what reality is.
#44
It does not matter. The concept is the same: getting a small piece when someone makes money off their work. Authors get residuals from the purchase of their books. Why should they get residuals when their book is made into a movie? Musicians get residuals for their albums. Why should they get more when their music is played on a different format?
#45
You clearly do not know any writers. I happen to know a few and a Prius is the fanciest car in the bunch.
#47 Just so you know this strike is supported by many of the other unions in the industry.
Big Whoop! The unions are a dying breed. Their greed has been their downfall. The support from other unions is meaningless. And the American public just turns a deaf ear to these Hollywood elites.
There is no sympathy from the general public as the movie industry continues to relocate to Canada and other less restrictive locations.
Correction:
There is no sympathy from the general public as the movie and TV industry continues to relocate to Canada and other less restrictive locations.
I have to wonder if the whole timing of this strike wasn’t contrived for some political purpose. All of our best sources for semi-unbiased political commentary of current events, are from these comedic Tv shows like The Daily Show, and Jimmy Kimmel Live. But with them all in reruns, because of the strike. The politicos are getting away with all kinds of crap, that we’re only now hearing about on blogs like this one. I’ve yet to hear on my local Tv news about Californians being arrested for volunteering to clean up the oil spill. But I’m sure the JKL show would have mentioned it. By the time the writers’ strike is over with, OJ Simpons could have been let off the hook, AGAIN! And we wouldn’t know why, because the Tv writers were cooling their heels. And the regular Tv news only tells you what their mega-corporate owners let them tell you. Like that story about NewsCorp having some reporter lie about Rudy Giuliani. Ah, see? It’s not so crazy a notion when it shows up here, as another item.
#47, J before accusing me of not knowing anything, you should read the columns I linked too. I’m curious how you would get a movie script turned into a movie without the studios, anything above the camcorder level of production? TV shows and movies scripts get purchased more than produced.
#14, You are 100% correct, Tina Fey’s stuff obviously sells.
I didn’t qualify my #13 statement. ” ’cause her stuff ain’t funny” with
‘to me.”
God Bless her (don’t stone me to death, godless Dvorkians!) that she can pull the mega-bucks in. I just don’t get her humor…like too many things these days, like Global Warming and Al Gore’s promoting the sale of Carbon Credits…via a company that he has a large vested interest in or, that he owns outright.
#39, the details of history employment contracts do not change the similarities of circumstance between the two groups and the products they produce.
#37, basing your position on the number of people “usually” involved in something is irrelevant. If two guys in their basement write a new and useful app and sell it to Microsoft who later sells a million copies of it, should they then be justified in demanding a residual? Under your standard they should. After all, if two guys in their basement write a script, sell it to Miramax who produces it and makes 100 million, they deserve them.
#52
Ever heard of films like Pulp Fiction, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Psycho, or Dr. Strangelove? They are all independent films. The technology available today makes it substantially easier to make a film without a lot of expensive equipment. There are three things that drive up the cost of films: expensive actors/actresses, special effects (which are getting cheaper), and marketing. Many times independent makers can get actors or actresses cheaply if the project is interesting and movies can easily be made without lots of special effects. However, it is the marketing that generally hurts independent films the most. That is the reason behind festivals like Sundance.
#54 Sea Lawyer
“If two guys in their basement write a new and useful app and sell it to Microsoft who later sells a million copies of it, should they then be justified in demanding a residual?”
You’re god dam right they should!!!
If they know what they are doing business wise they will get it too. Or they will get a very large amount up front. Depends on how they negotiate the deal and how badly the “Microsoft” needs or wants the software
Which leads to the issue of “upfront or take a cut”
If you have a product it has a value. In selling your product you need to evaluate it’s potential marketability. If you sell it you base your price partly on that potential. If a movie makes 1 billion in box office and DVD/online/pay per view then the value of the script, a part without which none of it would be possible, is worth at least 8% of that. Now a writer can either sell their script for that 8% upfront or it can sell it for a little upfront and 8% of the gross.
How many movies do you think would get made if writers asked for it upfront. I can tell you …….NONE!!!
What the writers are asking for is FAIR! They are not asking to get paid a percentage if the movie doesn’t sell. They only want their part of the profit from a collaborative effort. Why should they get nothing if others in that collaborative group continue to get theirs?
This discussion has made me think more about the subject of employers and employees. I am still trying to better understand the basic difference between a software company hiring a few people to write a software product and a production company hiring a few people to write a screen play.
They may be different skill sets (which is true when comparing most ocupations) but they are both creative endeavors. Anyone who has had to write a substantial amount of software can tell you writing software is not just the pure mechanics of stringing commands together. Just like anyone who has written a good screen play can tell you it is not just about stringing words together.
The biggest difference I see from an employment point of view is that the screen writers were much better at negotiating a deal that included residuals! Perhaps that is the bottom line.
I am just trying to understand the issue better.
>>The details of history employment contracts do not change the
>>similarities of circumstance between the two groups
>>and the products they produce.
You’re simply ridiculous, Shyster.
If you think programmers should get residuals on the programs they write, great. Tell them to go on strike. Guys stuffing burritos at Taco Bell should have health insurance, and investors in Enron and Worldcomm should get their money back, too.
The point here is that writers DO get residuals (and always have) on what they write, and now the studios are trying to gyp them out of their fair share.
Having earned a film degree many years ago, and having worked on several feature productions in the 1980s and 1990s, I’m familiar with the process and the industry. It’s a tough business, and I could not support my family by doing that kind of work, so that’s why I’m now an IT guy (and making lots more money than I ever made in the film and video business).
But I also know several writers (of fiction) who have occasionally sold screenplays (some ended up being produced, most did not). All of these writers are self-employed and pay their taxes that way. They are self-sufficient and most think “writers unions” are a ridiculous waste of time and resources. They see themselves as free agents, and they are in complete control of their careers.
Only one of them is in the WGA, and he couldn’t care less about the strike. He makes his money from his novels (though he still gets a nice check for residuals on the three successful feature films adapted from his books, the two screenplays, and the options sold on his work that are stil in development hell).
He told me that freelance writing has the lowest barrier to entry of any job in the world and the lowest overhead. All you need to do it is a typewriter, paper, envelopes and enough money for postage to mail out your manuscripts. Of course, he writes full-time, every day from 9:00 a.m. until late at night, and if you break it down, he probably makes less money per hour than I do. The real talent is being able to tell a great story and sell that story to a publisher/producer. And it helps to have a good agent.
I’ve only sold one article professionally (with some advice from this writer about targeting a publisher), so I can’t speak from a wealth of experience, but writing is a solitary pursuit that doesn’t lend itself to the usual union job and collective bargaining agreements. Most writers negotiate their own contracts with publishers and their agents, so “unionizing” writers is like mixing oil and water.
Maybe that’s why these kind of strikes are so infrequent (and messy).