The Writer and the Gun -- How the WGA Is Being Rewritten

A producer once told me that when the writer is working, the script is the gun that holds everyone else hostage. When the writer stops typing, he hands the gun to the producer and director and immediately joins the other hostages against the wall.

On November 1, 2007, The Writers Guild of America typed "Fade In" by going on strike. Last week, when the Directors Guild and the AMPTP announced that they'd made a deal, we watched as the WGA leadership handed over the gun and took their place against the wall, hands high in the air.

It's a cliché in Hollywood. The writer has an idea, structures a story, pours his blood and tears into it, only to turn in the script and watch helplessly as the studio finds someone else to rewrite him and take credit.

I'm not talking about the deal points here. I'm not talking about residuals, distributor's gross, or 17 free days of internet streaming. Those are all items for us to hash out in the coming days. What I'm talking about is the single most obvious failing of the Writers Guild leadership throughout this labor dispute -- controlling the narrative that they began on November 1st.

When the DGA and the AMPTP proudly announced their deal, the WGA leadership needed to swiftly and decisively grab control of the story. There should have been a press conference -- immediately. There should have been a membership meeting -- announced to the press. It didn't matter whether the leadership had any official opinions yet. It only mattered that they showed they were in control, that they were responding deftly, with agility and strength, and that they sent a loud and clear message to the AMPTP and the world that there is an intimate relationship between the WGA leadership and its members, and no one else is going to step in and lead them.

For much of this struggle, that relationship between the leadership and the members has been robust and authentic. But last week, instead of direct conversation at a critical juncture, when nerves are frayed and people are exhausted, we received a very polite, yet subtly terse press release that communicated absolutely nothing. And a day after that release, we received another, followed by a weekend of rumors of "back channel talks," guild leaders scrambling to see the actual DGA contract, emails shooting from writer to writer with petitions and letters to be signed expressing solidarity, another that threatens a strike for as long as it takes, another that says we should take the DGA deal now (though it hasn't actually been analyzed or even offered).

The DGA deal has elements in it that many writers I've spoken with hate immediately -- specifically the 17-day free window for internet streaming and the $1200/yr flat fee after that. Other writers feel that the phrase "distributor's gross" is significant enough that we should disregard the rest. Some screenwriters are rumored to be discussing going Fi-Core (though nobody seems to have met any of them yet). One showrunner asked me how the "movie writers would like it if their movies were offered for free for three weeks." A screenwriter then said that this has been "a TV strike from day one" and he's had enough.

Anarchy is defined as a state of disorder due to an absence or non-recognition of authority. While our leadership is hunkered down, trying to determine what the deal really is and how much to push that deal, the members are spinning their own narratives in the absence of any other. The type of thoughtful, behind-the-scenes work that the board is doing right now is vital, yes, but it's only one front in this war. The other fronts are the organization and galvanization of the members and the controlling of the story in the media. In just three days, we've come dangerously close to losing those battles.

There may be a deal to be made with the AMPTP in the coming weeks. I happen to think there is. But it's only going to happen if our leadership re-establishes that intimate connection with its members. It took this community of writers to type Fade In. It's going to take the same community to type Fade Out.

Read more strike coverage on the Huffington Post's writers' strike page.

Comments

[booknutcase]

Sadly, I think your screenwriter was right. This strike is all about television. By preventing reality show and animation writers from joining the guild, the networks will fill their slots with as many versions of American Idol, Big Brother, Dancing with the Stars, The Biggest Losers, Howie Mandel's goofy show with the suitcases, as they can. You get the picture.
The Networks' plan from the beginning has been to lose as much scripted content as they possibly can. Why else would the AMPTP refuse to meet, unless they're in no hurry to make a deal? They want to drop their high-priced pay or play deals like hot potatoes. The letters have already gone out to many writers, with more to follow.
Nick Counter and his junta left the table on December 7th and we're now halfway through January. It doesn't take a psychic to see that making a deal with writers is NOT a priority for the AMPTP.
What's the answer? I don't know, but I do think the writers were hoodwinked. This is NOT a fair strike. Where is the NLRB?

[MargotChanning]

Couldn't agree more. Why couldn't the DGA have met with the WGA and SAG to simply inform them of the deal they were about to accept? Not to get approval, but just to be inclusive of their sister unions. Why? Because Gil Cates is determined to be the hero here. His ego bristles through the LA Times piece in Saturday's paper where he guarantees an Academy Awards show. Wouldn't the DGA, the WGA, SAG and indeed the whole town have been served better if the DGA had chosen to be the tip of a spear, rather than a lone gunman? For that matter, why does the AMPTP insist on negotiating with the people who aren't on strike, instead of those who are? Frankly, from what I've read, the basics of the agreement would certainly have been an acceptable jumping off point.

[mheister]

Mr. Seitzman -

Are you sure you aren't the one blowing this out of proportion? One griping screenwriter, or even ten, out of an active guild membership of more than seven thousand, isn't a lot.

Check out Paul Haggis' column over at United Hollywood. Amongst the writers he knows and is in contact with, apparently there is no schism. Mr. Seitzman, are you absolutely positive you're not falling victim to stealthy PR move on the part of that PR firm retained at $100k/month by the AMPTP???

The comments I've seen here and at United Hollywood trend very heavily against taking the DGA deal provisions and towards continued WGA unity. Even SAG members like me have chimed in that if our guild handed us a like deal in June, we'd vote it down.

The WGA hasn't handed the gun to anyone, to use your analogy. Nor has SAG. Both guilds are going to take the time to meticulously evaluate the DGA pact. Pattern bargaining came into being by custom, not by law. If the DGA's deal isn't a good one, the WGA and SAG are under no obligation whatsoever to accept something similar. The goal of both guilds is to get a deal that's fair.

In the meantime, the WGA continues to walk the picket lines and SAG continues to have their back, and I'm sure I'm not speaking out of school if I add that both guilds appreciate the public's continuing understanding and support of this labor action.

[MrsWakely]

It seems to me that the WGA negotiators are dealing, under enormous pressure, with specifics, not public relations, and that the bulk of the so-called building dissent, comes from writers who don't seem to understand it is not the job of the negotiators to call you at home and say, "here's what just happened and here's exactly what we're going to do." Being a WGA member who voted for and supports the strike means you now have an obligation to hunker down and be patient. If the negotiators, with the full backing of the membership, make a shitty deal, the WGA still has the authority to vote it down. If the negotiators continue to be publicly heckled, questioned, criticized and vilified by their own membership, and THEN make a shitty deal, the membership will have no one to blame but themselves. It's the equivalent of the private in the fox hole bitching and moaning that the generals aren't getting you enough information. Shut up and do your job, which, for the WGA membership, is a lot easier than any private in any foxhole in the history of the world.You want a good deal? You may have to stay on strike my fellow privates. And another thing: the John Wells's of the world need to understand: at a certain point, you may find the vast majority of your fellow members in the WGA aren't particularly interested in YOU telling THEM why this is such a good deal, when it clearly isn't. You may find your fellow members have the authority via the vote to tell YOU you need to get YOUR obscene price down, so there's a little more to go around, that YOU are actually a big reason why there's NO MONEY left after they get done paying YOU, and that's one of the biggest reasons why the AMPTP is looking to break the rank and file.

[MrsWakely]

Jeff Zucker of NBC just announced he's looking to take advantage of the strike to fundamentally remake the television business, going heavier on reality, emphasizing overseas markets, and throwing out the pilot season as we know it. Seems they're tired of greenlighting pilots at 1, 2 million a pop, then finding out all of them suck after paying through the NOSE their star(s), and show-runner(s). Once again, I go back to earlier posts, the short version of which is, HUGE upfront and gross deals to our "union" actor, writer and director "brothers and sisters" whether a movie or TV show does well or not, has the AMPTP looking to blow up the business and get those costs under control once and for all. The translation of that is: "we're still ready to make a handful stupid rich, but we're going to screw everybody else or else we're going out of business." The WGA can't rely on the American people to turn away from reality television: it's like a car crash, they'll watch it all day long. We overestimate scripted programming at our peril: most of it sucks and the American people can clearly live without it. We need to get a handle on our OWN costs. We need to openly discuss and resolve the incredible inequity between what say, Kelsey Grammer and the guy who does a recurring role on "Back to You" gets paid.
We need to get a handle on a fairer distribution of compensation between what Adam Sandler gets paid and what the actress who plays his Mom gets paid in his next picture.

[MrsWakely]

We need to get some INTERNAL debate going about whether we should be looking to expand on the status quo, which is basically what this strike is about, or whether we need to tighten up these so-called unions, get some lean and mean muscle into who we are and what we need to do our jobs, and be PART of the discussion with the suits about how we, the creative community, and the producers can go FORWARD offering better product, at a much more sensible price, in a system where, if a tv show or movie does well, sure, the suits and the stars do best, but EVERYBODY does well if it succeeds, and NOBODY does well if it doesn't. Regardless of what Jeff Zucker is announcing today, he will most probably be gone tomorrow, WE however will still be here. We need to redefine what this business IS.