Deal Reportedly Reached In Writers' Strike

BlueshiftVFX writes to let us know that the writers' strike may be over. CNBC and other media are quoting former Disney CEO Michael Eisner: "It's over. They made the deal, they shook hands on the deal. It's going on Saturday to the writers in general... A deal has been made, and they'll be back to work very soon."

I guess...

I guess this means the Colbert/Stewart/O'Brien fued has been resolved, too...

Re:I guess...

Well, some of them. The good news is that they can take some of the programs that were suspended due to the Writer's Strike, like Bionic Woman and Journeyman, and go ahead and cancel them.

Re:I guess...

Actually, I think this past decade has been one of the most creative decades for Television since the medium began. Anywhere from BSG, The Sopranos and 30 Rock to Lost, The Office and Heroes. And let's not forget Firefly.

Now are the geeks happy?

Original story link

This seems to be missing so here it is: http://www.cnbc.com/id/23057002/ [cnbc.com]

Darn

Part of me was hoping this would never be resolved and that this would eventually cause a media revolution. Whether it was the rise of local access channels or simultaneous live airing and official torrent release, I thought there was a small chance it might have really changed things from top to bottom.

Ah well, at least The Office will be back.

Outsourcing Scriptwriters

It was either that or outsource scripts to India. Imagine Bollywood style comedy on American TV...

Pity It's Over

I had a dark horse hope that perhaps the writers would learn to disintermediate the studios. The reason is a friend recently turned me on to BBC's "I.T. Crowd," which you can only watch in the States over the intertubes.

There are no commercials in the webcast, of course, but the BBC shop sends me emails advertising box DVD sets of Doctor Who and the like; definitely a fave show and the sort of message I'm open to, as opposed to endless commercials on regular TV for cars and feminine hygiene products, which I'm not in the market for.

The strike is NOT over.

Guys... Eisner proclaiming the strike over is just part of a PR effort to attempt to pressure writers to vote for the strike proposals by creating the wide expectation that the strike is over, that it's a done deal. That way, if the writers turn the proposal down, people feel let down.

The strike is NOT over.

If you watch the video [cnbc.com] where Eisner insists the strike to be over, he says quietly at the end that he is really just passing on a rumor. He also points out that the writers have to vote on the offer. He says the writers would be "insane" not to take it, but he also previously had stated [wikipedia.org] that the entire strike was "insanity" so he's not the most unbiased person on this.

The strike is not over until the full WGA membership votes on the proposal. They may do so, but they may not. The terms of the contract proposal have not even been seen by the writers, so there's no way to know right now what's going to happen.

If you don't believe me, may I recommend this post by Joss Wheden [blogspot.com], or this one [deadlineho...ddaily.com], or this one [deadlineho...ddaily.com].

W

Re:This is news for nerds...

... because many nerds watch tv.

Re:This is news for nerds...

Speaking as someone who is in the entertainment industry and has been on strike in the recent past I just want to say; Going on strike is not an easy decision. There is a great deal of consideration that goes into what the industry itself can bare. There is also a great deal of consideration about the long term effects of not going on strike would be. You say that there are have been people that would have been fine with the old contract. True. There are probably people who would be willing to do your job for much less money as well. But what would the long term effects be? In the case of the writers, it would be the end of writing as a viable career option. They were fighting to have the same royalties on internet distribution as they currently have on DVD distribution. Everyone knows that in ten years the vast majority of the distribution will be via the internet, so in essence they were fight to have royalties at all. Royalties are what allow for writing to be career. [johnaugust.com] It was clear from the outset of this strike that the writers would have to do some short term damage to the industry as a whole, in order to preserve the long term existence of their jobs. The reason this was obvious was because the management on the other side of the bargaining table was putting forward a proposal that would have short term gains and long term damage. In the short term they would have profited 3% more on internet sales, but in the long term they would have destroyed the position of professional screen writer, leaving only those who would pursue writing as a hobby. Sure they could always get some starry eyed recently graduated newcomers to fill the job, but as those people tried to do things like buy a house or raise a family, they would be forced out the job by the financial realities of the "old contract". There would be no one around with 20 years of professional experience, there would be no one to really refine the craft, there would only be glorified interns. That isn't good for the industry.

Re:This is news for nerds...

Actually, stagehands are represented by the IATSE [iatse-intl.org] - or the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employes.

I need only three words to explain this

Joss Whedon, Dollhouse [wikipedia.org].

Re:I need only three words to explain this

Joss Whedon, Dollhouse [wikipedia.org].

I was really expecting Dollhouse to get killed during the strike before it ever even had a chance to get off the ground, but it looks like Fox is fully committed to letting me see it, fall in love, and then break my heart after 14 episodes. Thanks, guys.

Re:Is it?

Well according to the Writers Guild website

The Latest Word

(2/4/08)

Dear Fellow Members,

I would like to update you on where we stand with bargaining with the AMPTP. While we have made important progress since the companies re-engaged us in serious talks, negotiations continue. Regardless of what you hear or read, there are many significant points that have yet to be worked out.

In order to keep members abreast of the latest developments, informational meetings are being planned by both Guilds for this weekend - details to be announced. Neither the Negotiating Committee, nor the West Board or the East Council, will take action on the contract until after the membership meetings.

As the talks proceed, never forget that during this period it is critical for us to remain on the picket lines united and strong. We are all in this together.

In Solidarity,

John F. Bowman

Chair, WGA Negotiating Committee

Re:Is it?

That WGA post was made three days before Eisner's statement. Still, Eisner is the only one saying it's over. No one from WGA or any studios have said a word.

Re:Was that still going on?

Personally, I thought Conan, Colbert and Stewart were a lot funnier WITHOUT the writers. It forced them to get creative for the first time in years. Now that the writers are coming back, looks like it's back to the 10-millionth reiteration of "Masturbating Bear" and other tired old skits.

Could they have just STAYED on strike?

Re:Was that still going on?

They were damn good, but for how long? I don't think they would be able to keep coming up with original material for much longer. They would burn out eventually. If you noticed while their skits were good they needed to be dragged out. More interviews and more 'lets look at this'. They were able to make skits just not nearly as many.

Re:Was that still going on?

Thanks for letting us know [theonion.com].

Re:Was that still going on?

Who lost their houses? The vast majority of writers saved up 6 months' salary in anticipation of exactly this strike. Not to say it wasn't a financial hardship, but my friend who currently writes for Scrubs tells me that almost everyone was planning for this.

Re:Lets hope...

As a Hollywood writer, I am intrigued by this concept of "originality" that you speak of. But I can't quite wrap my head around it. Can you explain it in terms of other things that I'm already comfortable and familiar with?

Re:Seems like noone won

'As a result of studio cutbacks, however, many of the writers who went on strike are unlikely to return to the same big-money contracts they'd had as individuals with the studios.'

That sounds a lot to me like "We fired these guys for supporting the union, but we can't say that because that would get us in trouble with the NLRB."

Re:So...

That's thinking a bit short term. If their terms are met like they were hoping, it means that they're not cut out of emerging media outlets. That's going to be an important point in the next couple of decades as people shift their content viewing to legitimate online venues and away from traditional television.

Re:So...

So the writters get like a couple percent increase in their salaries while they lost about 1/3 of their anual income. These are writters not mathamatitions,

And based on your comment, "mathamatitions" are not "writters," either.

Actually, a lot of the people on the WGA negotiating committee are "show runners"--IE, writer/producers with a huge amount of responsibility. One of the negotiators, for example, is Carlton Cuse [imdb.com], one of the two guys who runs LOST; as you can imagine, you don't end up running a multi-million-dollar enterprise unless you have a lot of financial savvy.

So why would a bunch of smart people recommend a strike under these circumstances? Two main reasons.

First, writing careers can be very short-lived, and they are usually sporadic, with many periods of unemployment. (In fact, in any given year, nearly half of WGA members are unemployed.) The major issue in this strike was "residuals"--the royalties that writers get every time a TV show they wrote is broadcast, or a movie they wrote is sold. So, it's not entirely foolish to give up your 50% chance of employment this year to get a good deal on royalties that might be feeding your family for the next two decades.

Second, believe it or not, this was not strictly a selfish action. WGA members are very conscious of the fact that a lot of the stuff that makes it possible for us to earn our livings was won by previous generations of writers. Obviously a desire to have a good living is the main incentive in any business negotiation, but in the back of all our minds, we don't want to be the generation that let the studios roll back several decades of labor gains.

DISCLAIMER: I am an individual WGA member. These are just my opinions. I don't speak for the union.

Wow

You and the moderators have no clue. Here's a couple of Fun Hollywood Facts.

1. There is so much money flowing through the distribution cartel, that unions are the only way to wrestle it out of the Producers/Studios. I'm old enough to remember a blockbuster low-budget movie called "My big fat greek wedding" has, to date, not turned a profit. Now, I could see a bad movie not turning a profit, but that movie was and still is INSANELY popular. Hell, my wife still gets residuals from a commercial that appeared in a big-budget movie made 20 years ago. That's how shady Hollywood accounting is.

2. Writers are about the least respected guild in Hollywood. Seriously, food craft gets more respect. (probably because they aren't a union)

5. Producers routinely turn great stories/scripts into trash. Once they own the rights to the script, let the destruction begin!!! This is why good books rarely make good movies. Once the writer gives up control it's all downhill. Notable exceptions usually have the writer having final say on the script.

You, and the idiots who modded you up have no clue.

Writers' incomes

Yeah. As it is, those folks only make $75000 to $100000 a year. That's not much to live on.

Actually, writers' incomes are all over the place. According to the WGA's annual report [wga.org], 45% of its members had no income at all in 2006. (Or, at least, no writing-related income; they may have been waiting on tables or doing something else to pay the bills.) Of those who DID work, 25% earned less than $38,740, while 5% earned more than $685,000! With such a wide disparity, you can juggle the statistics to suggest pretty much anything you want. The studios said something like "Working writers earn an average of $200,000 a year" while some writers said things like "the median income of a writer is below $5,000." I suspect both those statistics are, technically, true--notice that one is about an average while the other is about a median.

Personally, I think the most useful way of looking at a writer's salary is this: 55% of WGA members are employed in a given year, and among those who are employed in a year, the median income is about $107,000. So, with a 55% chance of earning $107,000, your expected annual income is $58,850. This is an excellent income if you are young and single. If you have kids and a mortgage, and you live in LA or NYC (two of the most expensive cities in America), then it's still a good wage, but it's not mansion-and-a-yacht level. This confirms my own experience--the WGA is basically a middle-class union, negotiating with multibillion dollar global companies.

(I know--I'm making a number of assumptions in my analysis, but I'm not a statistician and I have to simplify things a little. I'd welcome corrections from any of the numerous Slashdot readers who must be better at statistics than I am!)