Rigor & Reason & The Ticking Clock

We are several days into the WGA strike as I write. When are the studios' negotiators going to be sent back to the table by their bosses? The WGA position has been quite clear. We are waiting. We are here. Whenever you are ready.

But sadly, I have been told by far too many close observers and interested parties that the toxicity and rancor between the WGA and the AMPTP teams is so high that even the behind-the-scenes shuttle diplomacy is not making a real dent in the stand-off. When players describe the thing to me, it sounds like they're all waiting for a nuclear reactor to cool down.

According to someone close to Governor Schwarzenegger, this just isn't the time for him to be effective. It would be futile at the moment. One shakes one's head in wonderment at a level of vitriol that seems more tribal than anything else. And it begs the question, have these men gone mad? This isn't war -- it's a dirty fight over money, respect and identity -- but it's not the Sunni triangle. It's time to come back to the table. To take a deep breath, drink some ice water, and pray to whatever God you worship, (I will resist the temptation to name the AMPTP's god) and sit down and pick up where you left off.

For the actors, not the stars -- the working actors who are being crucified -- and for the crews who are affected every day, it is time to start the talks again. They are owed the respect of good-faith negotiations that continue until this is resolved. They are being laid-off, and their families are paying daily. Period. That simple. If the studios now wish to backtrack from their fool-hardy CEOs' collective bluster about profits from new media, (as seen in this video clip), then they should have the common bloody decency to suck it up and be men enough to order their team back to the table. If Sumner Redstone and Les Moonves, and Bob Iger and Peter Chernin and Rupert Murdoch now wish to clarify their optimistic assessments of the take from downloads, etc., then by all means, do so, but send your guy back in. And explain yourselves to your shareholders.

Of course, the open secret is that this is not a negotiation at all. Everybody now knows perfectly well that the studio position is to grimly let the clock run until they can push the "go" button on their force-majuere provisions, so as to clear-out fat producer deals handed out to schleppers from Brentwood who wear baseball caps and sagging 300 buck jeans, etc. Not to mention series commitments that now look like hideously expensive mistakes in underestimating the public. It's a way for them to press the reset button. The giant media corporations make money on the strike. We know that. A contemptible approach, and in school terms, an F in civics. Maybe a C in business school tactics, post-Reagan.

And in the interests of total clarity, we in the WGA must apply the same standards to our leadership. There are those amongst us who feel that the Guild was baited and goaded by bullies into this strike, a position I find somewhat reductive but can't ignore out of hand. God knows I hear it enough. It is the responsibility of the WGA membership to pressure the leadership - to insist that they do everything possible - as much as it is the responsibility of cooler heads in the AMPTP leadership to be heard within their own ranks. One hears stories of swanning and puffery and negotiators describing themselves as being greeted like "rock-stars" at rallies while this business goes on. Not good enough. Not while crews are being laid off. Sorry, team. Not good enough.

And the longer this goes on, the easier it is for an under-informed public (who already demonstrably despise most of what both parties produce), to view this merely as petulant, over-paid hacks in a bloody street fight with their grinning avaricious bosses while innocent workers suffer on. The clock is ticking. Memories will be long, and wounds slow to heal. Very slow to heal. Writers have long memories. And growing lists of options in this brave new world. And we are unlikely to splinter. Very unlikely. So... time to get back in the room. Find a "third-way". ( A small joke, forgive me.) Or start looking elsewhere for deals to be made. Anything to get people back to work.

Update - (Via Nikki Finke) Friday - 11 PM - Both sides just announced that they will resume talks after Thanksgiving. Reason for hope.

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

Comments

[ChezAtreus]

Just one point on the quality or malignancy of television.

There's no doubt that much of what's offered is putrid, puerile crap. And there's also no doubt that an insidious deference to the marketplace is one of the culprits.

On the other hand, there's not a notable improvement of overall television in countries where the medium is not dependent upon commercials.

Yes, some of the Brit imports are fantastic (the original version of The Office is quite possibly one of the greatest version of the half-hour comedy ever produced) but oh my God, you wouldn't believe some of the stuff that passes as entertainment overseas.

So, in the end, it's just too easy to blame the medium or the market. Apparently, people enjoy shit.

But fortunately we live in a society where you're not FORCED to like it.

[grappolo]

Ego, puffery? You seem shocked. Really? It has always existed and always will and this IS show biz after all.
Do you think the early labor organizers were not the Rock Stars of their time?

[RedWhiteandBlueState]

Yes, perhaps I should not have included you in the uber class of writer / showrunners. However, as the "creator / exec. producer" of a hit network show you are no longer an off-broadway playwright, you are now amongst the top 3% of the union. And so I ask you, did you even ask for the clause? I live in L.A., love many people in the biz, it's just this "helpless" or "nervous" feeling writers have, so grateful to make a sale, you think the buyers don't propagate this idea? And respectfully I disagree, if writers did have a "leader" or "leaders" willing to bypass that deal on principle perhaps things would be different. Who knows? Perhaps the network would have wanted your show to the extent where they did make this individual deal? That is the key, the first time, caused by a writer with a show they really want. The rank and file matters not. But the way all these unions work is precedent. I'm not blaming you, Mr. Baitz for taking the deal. However, it would have been powerful, and yes prescient and precedent setting, if you at least ASKED for the clause.

My main point has been this one - writers in the new media age need to break away from this paradigm of "nervousness" and powerlessness - so many of my mid-career screenwriter friends spend hours staring at the phone waiting for their agent to call. I'm saying TAKE ACTION - You are the commodity - find investors, pool your own money- create your own distribution network - put 'Brothers and Sisters' on the net and give your staff whetever YOU feel is right. People love your show - and will find it - YES - I know its easier said than done but it takes the courage of being willing to sacrifice to make a change.

I do hope the writers are successful but I fear it will be phyrric. In just a few years the networks will be another channel on a massive, easily accessible broadband internet. Control it, don't be slaves to it. And thanks for your response.

[Blackspeare]

This whole business is a fiasco built on archaic copyright and licensing laws that have created a source of never ending income through the concept of residuals. The original intent of copyrights was to protect intellectual property from plagiarism when it took considerable time to create such works and not just a week or two!

In light of today"s information and communication technology, writers and composers can turn out works in days and for this should they receive a lifetime of residuals? The prime example of this distortion is Merv Griffin, who in about 10 minutes, composed the theme song for the game show, "Jeopardy." Every time that theme is played he received a royalty. Even he couldn"t keep a straight face when he related, during an interview, that 10 minutes of work resulted in several million dollars of income over the years. Another good example is Jerry Seinfeld and he makes Griffin look like a poor boy! No doubt he worked hard for 9 or 10 years, but should that entitle him to a lifetime of income for doing nothing. He did get paid a pretty good salary during the show-----ain"t that enough?

What"s wrong with this picture?! I may be old fashion, but I believe you get paid when you produce not stay at home.

[wondering]

I need something explained to me:

Why are so many articles being devoted to THIS strike?

It's not like it's going to disrupt the flow of food from America's breadbasket, or shutdown transportation in a major city, or effect the education of our children.

And yet, there is an entire page devoted to the WGA strike here.

I am a member of a union. I strongly support the idea that the people who actually produce the goods should be fully compensated.

But is THIS strike more important than an auto industry strike, a teachers' strike, a transit workers' strike? If any of these strikes occur in the future, will they have an entire page devoted to their coverage?

Where is the page devoted to the Broadway stage-hands strike? It also marks a disruption in the entertainment industry - is it any less important?

My problem is simply the IMMENSE number of articles being written about this strike. It seems way over the top - way out of proportion to the importance of the strike. (Of course, I do notice that most of the authors of these articles seem to be members of the WGA.)

Is this the "Great Labor Struggle" of our times? Or will it be forgotten in a month?

I'm being completely serious when I say, "I don't get it."

The only explanation I can come up with is the fear of an epidemic of eye-bulging, spittle-flying TV-withdrawal that is about to grip this nation from coast to coast. The collective screams and sobs will probably bring down mountains.

[skeptique]

The quip of the 'third way' went a bit over my head. I assume Mr. Baitz is not alluding to the politics of Israel, though I GUESS that would be funny. (Peace for the Golan Heights just might be a bit too much for the AMPTP, those of the god whose name we do not speak, to accept.) No, I guess by third way, the most esteemed writer (and I'm not being sarcastic) is referring to some sort of centrist position? A compromise of sorts? I would certainly hope some kind of smiley happy corporate common sense could rule the day, however I have seen the way a producer siphons a cigar, and it ain't no homage to Tennessee Williams. But then there is the 'growing list of options in the brave new world', which would suggest a radical alternative to any laissez-faire settlement. Could solidarity really be maintained if the relation of writers to management were radically transformed? Or would a new class of Star Writer emerge, separately negotiating with producers, demanding fees commensurate with the competitiveness of their work, while the rest fend for themselves, hoping to break through with a triumphant script? Like musicians, or graphic designers, or painters, or actors... wait, omit actors...

[PE]

Jon,

Thank you for keeping the crews' and others' story out there. I appreciate it greatly. I really don't care who did what in negotiations (they all suck), just get back to it. I can't say it any better......

"One hears stories of swanning and puffery and negotiators describing themselves as being greeted like "rock-stars" at rallies while this business goes on. Not good enough. Not while crews are being laid off. Sorry, team. Not good enough."

And the AMPTP, not nearly good enough either.

[LightningJoe]

Ooh, gimme a break! This whole strike is kinda like Joseph Goebels hitting up the Furer for a bigger percentage of the art confiscation booty.

No, hear me out. Television is, bar none, the worst influence and impediment on the public mind in the past century, with formula filmography not far behind. Television's raison de 'etre is to make money for investors, which means making money for advertisers.

I can't say I don't have some sympathy for the workers who put out the shows (and, to the point, have no say whatsoever in their quality or the messages they put out). But that sympathy sits alongside my sympathy for out-of-work loggers in Oregon, when out-of-control old growth timber harvest was cut back. In a word: Sorry!

But I have no warm feelings for those who make big money from keeping the cultural propaganda machine churning along. That includes directors and producers, and the poor AMPTP. And it includes the writers of the shows as well.

You and I both know, Jon, that television programming, regardless of "quality," serves mostly to keep viewers glued to their sets for the commercials. Yes, viewers "demand" better scripts, by clicking to channels that do a better job (and thank heaven for that, eh; or think of the drech you'd be writing!); but in the end, the reality-warping effects of television are a good part of what's driving this country under.

Wouldn't we be better off, if we had attention spans longer than a two second cut? Wouldn't we be better off without the illusion that we know something about current events, after watching mindlessly absorbing comedy and drama for four hours, followed by what passes for "news" these days?

Pulling down illusions is the first step to enlightenment, but we can't even take that first step as a culture, because television, a medium with so much promise, is instead devoted to grooming viewers as consumerist cash cows, and is invested in piling illusion on illusion to do so.

--------
Kill your TV, and free your mind.

[Pneumaticus]

Sounds very Counterproductive, but then Hollywood's history does not reveal much respect for talent they can't control. And today it appears you've got more bean counters than beans.

[Jason87]

Unfortunately, studios and networks won't be hurting for at least a few more months down the line. While the opposite is true for all the people out of work.

What can the writers, actors, directors and the IA crew (in short, folks who actually make the product)do to really strike at the future earning potential of Big Media?

Some new paradigm of financing and distribution should be formulated so that the message Big Media can be replaced is sounded out loud and clear.

[Leontes33]

Word on the street is that this could go on well in to the Spring!?

[guru75]

Robin, buck up. It is still a matter of days, not weeks or months. This strike cannot be resolved until the AMPTP begins to feel some of the pain they have been inflicting on the writers and the other craft workers in the industry. You can't force a negotiation by wishing that your opponents were better people, or beginning to cast a cold eye on those who represent you in the negotiation because they have not brought the producer's to the table. It will happen in its own time, but this is clearly not the time. And please worry less about what the public thinks of writers. This strike will not be solved when they love writers more or love them less. The public will always blame the writers for the poor quality of the programs offered - never thinking that the decision to produce a program or a film is that of a network or a studio. It is, and always has been, a no win situation for writers when it comes to the public's view of them. But keep your priorities straight. As the bible says, or I think it says, "If I am not for myself who shall be for me?"

[RedWhiteandBlueState]

Jon--

When you did your deal for "Brothers and Sisters" why didn't you demand appropriate DVD and / or new media revenues and apply that clause to the rest of your writers on staff, thus setting an important and prescient precedent? With all your prior success you must have been privy to the issue. It would seem to me that if the most successful "writers" would say "NO" instead of "where do I sign?" this issue might never have come up and true, bold, principled leaders amongst writers would emerge.