Network Television SAGs Painfully

As the Screen Actors Guild nears the wire in its negotiations with the AMPTP multinational corporations, many hurdles remain. Perhaps the biggest is that as long as anyone other than the CEOs are negotiating for the AMPTP, they are only empowered to say "No." When the CEOs show up, they'll make a deal.

This too shall pass. But until that arrival, all that exists is a flurry of words. And the one most notable pronouncement from the AMPTP is a carryover from the Writers Strike, and used as a bludgeon to ward off dissent.

It's the current Common Wisdom being offered in the background throughout SAG negotiations that the Writers Strike Destroyed Network Television. Take that to the bank. Book it, Dan-o.

Hey, honestly, it sounds reasonable.

As long as you don't think too hard. Or at all.

It's important to note that Common Wisdom in Hollywood is neither common, nor wise -- and worse, generally non-existent.

Network television isn't destroyed, of course. And of course, whatever lower ratings network television does have can be attributed to many factors -- not the least of which is that people today watch television in countless ways other than on television. They record programs on Tivo, or watch on the Internet, or as downloads, or wait until season-DVDs are released -- none of which count in Nielsen ratings. But the network shows are still being watched. And in many cases, actually paid for.

But, oh, no, the reason ratings are down is because -- the Writers Strike Destroyed Network Television.

Or...or...maybe there's yet another reason, too. Maybe -- just maybe -- the networks are mucking things up themselves.

Last week, on July 2 to be exact, I was browsing a TV schedule, wondering what there was to watch. There were 12 separate programs listed that night on the four main networks. The complete 12 were -

"Baby Borrowers"
"Baby Borrowers" (again. A second episode)
"Wife Swap"
"Supernanny"
"Celebrity Circus"
"So You Think You Can Dance" (two hours)
"America's Next Top Model"
"Pussycat Dolls Present: Girlicious"
"Price is Right Million Dollar Spectacular"
"Primetime: Crime"

Also, repeats of "Criminal Minds" and "CSI: NY".

These aren't the worst shows on television all week. These are every network show that was on the air that one night. If you wanted to watch network television on July 2, this was what you had to choose from. Period.

If you were an evil mastermind who wanted to come up with a devious plot to drive the audience away from network television, that might be it.

One show gave away babies. Another then gave away their mothers. A third gave away all parental responsibility. And the networks gave away the store.

And the AMPTP and "crack analysts" dare blame low TV ratings on the Writers Strike??! If you looked up the word "gall" in the dictionary, the dictionary would be too embarrassed to even define it. At best, it would say, "See July 2, 2008."

To be fair, it's the summer, so we're not seeing networks put on their regular product. But that's no excuse. So what if it's summer? There is a public responsibility that goes with having a broadcast license. Just because it's summer is no excuse to not respect your audience. To put on only material that makes your brain hurt -- and then blame the Writers Strike for driving audiences away.

Admittedly, this is only a very tiny snapshot of a very large landscape. There's good television, and mind-numbing television. But whether it is the summer or not, this signifies network thinking, because this is what all the networks -- every one of them -- chose to put on.

And then blamed the Writers Strike for driving audiences away.

Dear AMPTP corporations: your industry is not in dire straights, and the problems you face are largely your responsibility. For underestimating your audience shamelessly and too often going for the basest common denominator. For cancelling programs before they have a chance to develop and build a following. For having corporate business executives give artistic "notes" to artists commanding how they must create. For you choosing uninteresting, uninspiring, uninvolving, soul-crushing programs to put on your schedule.

And then blaming the Writers Strike for driving audiences away.

And then continuing that blame throughout SAG negotiations. What timing. What a shock.

Of course, if you have another union's contract running out, and you plan on making low-ball offers, and want to scare people about why your industry is supposedly in such dire straights, then it's probably the only argument you can make.

Much of the same pattern with writers is being repeated with the actors. And if the AMPTP multinational corporations again decide to play chicken with a creative union -- then once again another 3-1/2 months could pass before a contract offer is made that could have been made on Day One. And more network audience will leave.

Perhaps an accommodation can be reached. Hopefully so. But until then, they'll blame others for...well, everything.

Even "America's Biggest Fart."

Don't laugh, it's probably being developed.

Comments

[Jodi Lampert - Huffpost Blogger]

See Jodi Lampert's Profile

Bob --

What a sweet, always calm voice of reason.

Let's get onto the Bush impeachment thing, shall we?

Jodi

[TTigerX2]

Just imagine a time when the wizards tapped their sticks and sent "The Word" through the land by way of the actors. The land was combed with honey and the mighty were benevolent. The stars were aligned and it was good to be an actor. Then one day the wizards saw it was better that they knew the Word and not the actors, and knew better than the Word and they knew the word better than The Word -- money. The heavens opened and poured, the flood swallowed actors whole. And such was the Word to come. So it was and so shall it be.

[edgraham]

Dear Mrs Wakely,

Your post (s) would make a better TV show than what the networks are offering. When I look at the line-ups and see "Baby Borrowers," "Wife Swap," and "Supernanny," I know that it is time to give up.

As long as there is corporate greed, there will be labor problems. But a few good shows wouldn't hurt.

Ed Graham

[wanked]

Its called the dumbing down of America.....Yeeeha. I got rid of the tube last winter.


I catch Jon Stewart online.

[MrsWakely]

uh... good luck with the cut up posts. it made sense when I did it ,in order, somehow it came out repeating stuff and generally jumping somewhere else in midsentence. but, I guess you'll get the gist...

[MrsWakely]

I know because I sent one. It's all been Jonathan Handel and his generally anti-SAG posts. I wish you would post a measured analysis of the issues at stake, and debunk some of the anti-SAG smack visiting the show-biz blogs. The short story? AFTRA, breaking 27 years of precedent, split from SAG at the bargaining table, and negotiated one on one with the AMPTP. The AMPTP - surprise! - gave them a relatively quick, easy deal, that put SAG in the position of having to fight to try to get all dual card holders of SAG and AFTRA (44 thousand) to vote "NO" on the AFTRA deal.
We'll learn the results tonight or tomorrow morning. Conventional wisdom says the vote passes. Actors are weary of strikes. Actors need to work. Actors say "make the deal!" But AFTRA's betrayal has threatened to undermine SAG to such an extent as to seriously change the union landscape for actors - and not for the better.

[MrsWakely]

SAG wants a raise in the nearly three decade old DVD residual rate. WGA didn't get it. DGA didn't get it. AFTRA didn't get it. But, actors needs are different on this issue. 12 cents a DVD ("negotiated" nearly 30 years ago) split between 10-20-30 actors on a movie or TV show? Well, let's just say SAG has lost hundreds of millions of dollars on this concession over the years. SAG asked to double it - to 24 cents a DVD. Woo! "non-starter" says the AMPTP (they say that a lot). Okay, how about a 15% raise in DVD residual, just to get things going and negotiate in good faith? "Non-starter" says the AMPTP. SAG wants a few other things: ability to bargain force majeure collectively - which we already have. Why? Because the AMPTP wants a give back on that. They want the ability to go at actors one by one, bargain separately with each actor. So, we're negotiating for what we already have on that one. SAG wants a raise in the minimum primetime "top of show" rate (highest rate for guest starring on a TV show). Why? Because, in the last ten, fifteen years, "minimum" has become "maximum."

[MrsWakely]

The SAG PRESIDENT, Melissa Gilbert, spent millions of dollars in SAG members dues money, to convince SAG members to merge with AFTRA, so there could be "solidarity" at the bargaining table. SAG members listened to this interminable debate, and voted "NO" - twice. Seems SAG members want to be represented in a union of actors for actors, not merge with AFTRA. SAG has 100% jurisdiction in movies and 99% in primetime TV. So, members weren't keen (enough) on merging with AFTRA, which covers a few cable shows that shoot digital and the one or two (literally) prime time shows they cover. "Digital" has emboldened AFTRA, which claims shared jurisdiction, to poach TV shows with inferior deals, from SAG. SAG wants a raise in the nearly three decade old DVD residual rate. WGA didn't get it. DGA didn't get it. AFTRA didn't get it. But, actors needs are different on this issue. 12 cents a DVD ("negotiated" nearly 30 years ago) split between 10-20-30 actors on a movie or TV show?

[MrsWakely]

Used to be, actors had a "quote" on movies and TV - the rate you got paid for your last job of the same description (a weekly movie quote, a guest starring TV quote, etc.). Now? No more quotes. Why? Well, the producers just stopped paying. Sorry! No quotes anymore! So, actors need a raise in the minimum, to, you know, try to make a living. But here's the biggie. SAG wants jurisdiction, and a fair percentage of all original content and reuse (residuals) for the internet. Why? Well, because if SAG doesn't get it, it spells the end of residuals as we know it. Once the AMPTP gets that precedent? Bye, bye - it aint ever coming back. The producers say "we have no business model for the internet." They say "we'll revisit the issue" through a "sunset clause" in the AFTRA deal. Uh-huh. The DVD thing went down the same way. Never heard from them again. Right now, I've got a CBS show I was a regular on for CBS running with ad-supported revenue, on Veoh, Hulu, MySpace and other sites. You can watch entire episodes. I'm not paid. I wasn't even asked.

[MrsWakely]

Wow. When did that happen? AMPTP says they need the "flexibility" to use clips of actors without their consent because policing the internet is impossible. But Viacom is in a legal battle with Youtube to gain access to their viewers records because Viacom says their copyright is being infringed. But, Viacom is participating in the ad supported platforms (Hulu, Veoh etc.) that show entire episodes of TV shows, new and old, and not notifying, let alone paying, the actors in those shows, whereas, they used to have to ask, and if the answer was "yes" from the actor, they had to pay a reuse, or residual, fee. So, translation: Viacom wants to sue Youtube for stealing their content, so Viacom can steal from actors.
And the AFTRA deal, while their leaders crow that they got concessions from the AMPTP on this issue, does NOT nail this down, and agrees to "revisit" the issue via a "sunset clause." Sound familiar?

Why did AFTRA betray SAG? Because, over the last 15 years, there have been 2 attempts to merge with SAG.

[MrsWakely]

Now? No more quotes. Why? Well, the producers just stopped paying. Sorry! No quotes anymore! So, actors need a raise in the minimum, to, you know, try to make a living. But here's the biggie. SAG wants jurisdiction, and a fair percentage of all original content and reuse (residuals) for the internet. Why? Well, because if SAG doesn't get it, it spells the end of residuals as we know it. Once the AMPTP gets that precedent? Bye, bye - it aint ever coming back. The producers say "we have no business model for the internet." They say "we'll revisit the issue" through a "sunset clause" in the AFTRA deal. Uh-huh. The DVD thing went down the same way. Never heard from them again. Right now, I've got a CBS show I was a regular on for CBS running with ad-supported revenue, on Veoh, Hulu, MySpace and other sites. You can watch entire episodes. I'm not paid. I wasn't even asked. Wow. When did that happen? AMPTP says they need the "flexibility" to use clips of actors without their consent because policing the internet is impossible.

[MrsWakely]

Well, let's just say SAG has lost hundreds of millions of dollars on this concession over the years. SAG asked to double it - to 24 cents a DVD. Woo! "non-starter" says the AMPTP (they say that a lot). Okay, how about a 15% raise in DVD residual, just to get things going and negotiate in good faith? "Non-starter" says the AMPTP. SAG wants a few other things: ability to bargain force majeure collectively - which we already have. Why? Because the AMPTP wants a give back on that. They want the ability to go at actors one by one, bargain separately with each actor. So, we're negotiating for what we already have on that one. SAG wants a raise in the minimum primetime "top of show" rate (highest rate for guest starring on a TV show). Why? Because, in the last ten, fifteen years, "minimum" has become "maximum." Used to be, actors had a "quote" on movies and TV - the rate you got paid for your last job of the same description (a weekly movie quote, a guest starring TV quote, etc.).

[MrsWakely]

But Viacom is in a legal battle with Youtube to gain access to their viewers records because Viacom says their copyright is being infringed. But, Viacom is participating in the ad supported platforms (Hulu, Veoh etc.) that show entire episodes of TV shows, new and old, and not notifying, let alone paying, the actors in those shows, whereas, they used to have to ask, and if the answer was "yes" from the actor, they had to pay a reuse, or residual, fee. So, translation: Viacom wants to sue Youtube for stealing their content, so Viacom can steal from actors.
And the AFTRA deal, while their leaders crow that they got concessions from the AMPTP on this issue, does NOT nail this down, and agrees to "revisit" the issue via a "sunset clause." Sound familiar?

[MrsWakely]

Why did AFTRA betray SAG? Because, over the last 15 years, there have been 2 attempts to merge with SAG. The SAG PRESIDENT, Melissa Gilbert, spent millions of dollars in SAG members dues money, to convince SAG members to merge with AFTRA, so there could be "solidarity" at the bargaining table. SAG members listened to this interminable debate, and voted "NO" - twice. Seems SAG members want to be represented in a union of actors for actors, not merge with AFTRA. SAG has 100% jurisdiction in movies and 99% in primetime TV. So, members weren't keen (enough) on merging with AFTRA, which covers a few cable shows that shoot digital and the one or two (literally) prime time shows they cover. "Digital" has emboldened AFTRA, which claims shared jurisdiction, to poach TV shows with inferior deals, from SAG.

[MrsWakely]

Robert! Finally, a peep! I (we) have been waiting for you to go to bat for SAG, just as SAG went to bat for thAFTRA basically, feels marginalized, dissed - they're livid they lost 2 votes for merger, so, when the AMPTP gave them the wink and nod to come negotiate separately from SAG for the first time in 27 years?AFTRA fell for it. They screwed SAG out of bitterness, made a deal that isn't nearly protective enough or progressive enough for actors entering the internet age, and the AMPTP WILL exploit this rift every chance they get if the AFTRA deal passes, and SAG can't rally the troops to get a strike authorization vote. Cause striking is the only leverage SAG will have if the AFTRA vote passes, which it probably will.

[MrsWakely]

Actors are so used to being exploited they are being brainwashed by AFTRA to "take the deal," "keep working," not understanding that, if this AFTRA deal becoms the standard, the template, and SAG can't get the votes to at least threaten to strike? Being an actor able to make a living is about to go from almost impossible to... well, whatever is left after that. And, the "stars?" Our most influential members? the ones who make obscene amounts of money working SAG movies, who haven't worked an AFTRA contract in 20 years, if ever? Well, some have been supportive of SAG. Some - TOM HANKS - have not. Why? Well, Hanks is a major producer as well (Playtone) and he released a statement a few weeks ago saying "we're being held hostage" by the SAG labor demands. Thing is, Hanks is being held hostage in a 5 star hotel in Italy, where he's shooting "Angels and Demons," while the "middle class actor," who this is ALL ABOUT, can't pay the bills already, and this AFTRA deal threatens to make it worse. Thanks Tom.