In a story in the Hollywood Reporter AMPTP mucka-mucks criticize WGAW president David Young, who, you'll recall, is new and already had a reputation for not being great at negotiation. Although nothing that comes from either side should be taken with anything less than a fistful of salt, sources are claiming that Young has "dug in [his] heels" too hard, refusing to negotiate from the AMPTP's initial offer, which was never intended to be final. WGA negotiators have rejected the idea that Young is too inexperienced to be involved in these kind of talks. Officially I have no opinion, but I wouldn't be shocked if Young isn't quite as skilled as you might want your chief negotiator to be.
Film legend Woody Allen has shot a "Speechless" video in support of striking writers, according to Deadline Hollywood Daily. I'm intrigued to see this one, because unlike the others I've seen, I expect it might have some artistic merit as well as propaganda value.
New York Times: As expected, non-writing staff for Conan and Leno have been laid off by NBC. Conan's production company will be paying staffers until they're re-hired, and Leno has promised a Christmas bonus, but has said nothing about salaries.
AP: ABC News has reached an agreement with its newswriters, who have been working without a contract for three years.
The really important news is that I'm still writing occasional recaps for Northern Attack, filling in gaps in back episodes. My recap of "The Alliance" should be up sometime today.
Showing posts with label Deadline Hollywood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Deadline Hollywood. Show all posts
01 December 2007
30 November 2007
Two Steps Forward, One Step Back
Well, the press blackout has been lifted, and the news is . . . well, it's not good. Deadline Hollywood Daily and The Hollywood Reporter are reporting that the talks are moving slowly, and that the WGA is deeply unimpressed the AMPTP's new proposal. Apparently, negotiation sessions are brief, and the two sides spend a lot of time not even in the same room, mulling things over, with agent Bryan Lourd holding things together with twine and duct tape.
The WGA sent out an email to its members calling the AMPTP's proposal a "rollback". Here's the text of that email:
Yikes. They do not sound happy. It seems like my initial speculation that the AMPTP might be on the verge of an early buckle was incorrect, as there don't seem to be any big victories here. This sounds pretty much like the kind of compromise deal that might get done after months of striking has weakened the positions of both sides. I doubt very seriously it's actually a "rollback" -- what would be the point of offering your initial position, and then offering less? -- but it doesn't sound much.
So, the question becomes: Did the AMPTP come back to the table because they thought they were winning, or is this all part of a game in which they increase their offer incrementally in hopes that the writers accept something marginally less than the absolute maximum the AMPTP is prepared to give? I can't imagine they actually thought that offering the same thing again so quickly was actually going to work; writers have been loud, unified, and they've been winning the PR war handily. In fact, that sounds like a deliberate slap in the face, if not negotiation in bad faith, and either indicates that the AMPTP is totally clueless about consensus among their striking workers, or is just a collection of collossal assholes. It's kind of funny, but one hopes for the latter, because at least it means they have room to give, and a deal could still get done once they unclench. If it's the former -- negotiation not in bad faith but from bad information -- these talks will like collapse, just like the ones that ran from last summer through early this months, because no one's felt the pain yet, and no one has the incentive to make massive compromises.
The stage-hands strike ended yesterday, and Broadway, unlike Hollywood, is getting back to business. One wishes that this could be viewed as an optimistic sign, but I think it has essentially no effect or use as a bellweather for these talks; the issues were much simpler, the amounts of money much smaller, and the position of the union ultimately much stronger in this one.
Here's a depressing paragraph if ever I read one:
NBC is adding three hours of reality programming coming in January 2008, including a revamped "American Gladiators" to replace their best new show, "Chuck". I used to love "American Gladiators". I also used to wear Wolverine jockey shorts and suck on Otter Pops. Sigh.
I was all optimistic. Now, I think there's a strong chance this stuff falls apart before any actul progress is made.
The WGA sent out an email to its members calling the AMPTP's proposal a "rollback". Here's the text of that email:
To Our Fellow Members,
After four days of bargaining with the AMPTP, we are writing to let you know that, though we are still at the table, the press blackout has been lifted.
Our inability to communicate with our members has left a vacuum of information that has been filled with rumors, both well intentioned and deceptive.
Among the rumors was the assertion that the AMPTP had a groundbreaking proposal that would make this negotiation a "done deal." In fact, for the first three days of this week, the companies presented in essence their November 4 package with not an iota of movement on any of the issues that matter to writers.
Thursday morning, the first new proposal was finally presented to us. It dealt only with streaming and made-for-Internet jurisdiction, and it amounts to a massive rollback.
For streaming television episodes, the companies proposed a residual structure of a single fixed payment of less than $250 for a year's reuse of an hour-long program (compared to over $20,000 payable for a network rerun). For theatrical product they are offering no residuals whatsoever for streaming.
For made-for-Internet material, they offered minimums that would allow a studio to produce up to a 15 minute episode of network-derived web content for a script fee of $1,300. They continued to refuse to grant jurisdiction over original content for the Internet.
In their new proposal, they made absolutely no move on the download formula (which they propose to pay at the DVD rate), and continue to assert that they can deem any reuse "promotional," and pay no residual (even if they replay the entire film or TV episode and even if they make money).
The AMPTP says it will have additional proposals to make but, as of Thursday evening, they have not been presented to us. We are scheduled to meet with them again on Tuesday.
In the meantime, we felt it was essential to update you accurately on where negotiations stand. On Wednesday we presented a comprehensive economic justification for our proposals. Our entire package would cost this industry $151 million over three years. That's a little over a 3% increase in writer earnings each year, while company revenues are projected to grow at a rate of 10%. We are falling behind.
For Sony, this entire deal would cost $1.68 million per year. For Disney $6.25 million. Paramount and CBS would each pay about $4.66 million, Warner about $11.2 million, Fox $6.04 million, and NBC/Universal $7.44 million. MGM would pay $320,000 and the entire universe of remaining companies would assume the remainder of about $8.3 million per year. As we've stated repeatedly, our proposals are more than reasonable and the companies have no excuse for denying it.
The AMPTP's intractability is dispiriting news but it must also be motivating. Any movement on the part of these multinational conglomerates has been the result of the collective action of our membership, with the support of SAG, other unions, supportive politicians, and the general public. We must fight on, returning to the lines on Monday in force to make it clear that we will not back down, that we will not accept a bad deal, and that we are all in this together.
Patric M. Verrone, President, WGAW
Michael Winship, President, WGAE
Yikes. They do not sound happy. It seems like my initial speculation that the AMPTP might be on the verge of an early buckle was incorrect, as there don't seem to be any big victories here. This sounds pretty much like the kind of compromise deal that might get done after months of striking has weakened the positions of both sides. I doubt very seriously it's actually a "rollback" -- what would be the point of offering your initial position, and then offering less? -- but it doesn't sound much.
So, the question becomes: Did the AMPTP come back to the table because they thought they were winning, or is this all part of a game in which they increase their offer incrementally in hopes that the writers accept something marginally less than the absolute maximum the AMPTP is prepared to give? I can't imagine they actually thought that offering the same thing again so quickly was actually going to work; writers have been loud, unified, and they've been winning the PR war handily. In fact, that sounds like a deliberate slap in the face, if not negotiation in bad faith, and either indicates that the AMPTP is totally clueless about consensus among their striking workers, or is just a collection of collossal assholes. It's kind of funny, but one hopes for the latter, because at least it means they have room to give, and a deal could still get done once they unclench. If it's the former -- negotiation not in bad faith but from bad information -- these talks will like collapse, just like the ones that ran from last summer through early this months, because no one's felt the pain yet, and no one has the incentive to make massive compromises.
The stage-hands strike ended yesterday, and Broadway, unlike Hollywood, is getting back to business. One wishes that this could be viewed as an optimistic sign, but I think it has essentially no effect or use as a bellweather for these talks; the issues were much simpler, the amounts of money much smaller, and the position of the union ultimately much stronger in this one.
Here's a depressing paragraph if ever I read one:
"[American] Gladiators," hosted by Hulk Hogan and Laila Ali, will replace freshman dramedy "Chuck," which recently was picked up for a full season but only has a few more episodes in the can because of the strike. "Chuck" is scheduled to air original episodes through Dec. 3. No decision has been made when and where the show's remaining couple of new segments will run.
NBC is adding three hours of reality programming coming in January 2008, including a revamped "American Gladiators" to replace their best new show, "Chuck". I used to love "American Gladiators". I also used to wear Wolverine jockey shorts and suck on Otter Pops. Sigh.
I was all optimistic. Now, I think there's a strong chance this stuff falls apart before any actul progress is made.
29 November 2007
In which Conan Scores Big PR Points
Nikki Finke is reporting that Conan will become the second late night host, after Letterman, to pay staffers out of his own pocket until the strike ends. Conan wrote for "The Simpsons", among other shows, and is a WGA member. Finke also reports that Carson Daly, who has been absolutely reamed for his decision to cross pickets, was going to lose his show if he didn't, so . . . yeah. Still wish he hadn't done it.
It's official: The Democrats have cancelled the CBS debate, partially because WGA wouldn't promise not to picket. Any Democrat who crossed pickets would pretty much immediately have his or her candidacy torpedoed in the primaries, because outfits like the AFL-CIO (affiliated with the WGA, East) hold enormous sway with the hardcore left that votes disproportionately in primaries. (Personally, I support Osama in 2008. He's the only one who will hunt down and capture Barack Obama. Ya burnt!)
A question I wonder about is if this hurts someone like Barack Obama, who recently rebooted his campaign and has once more been gaining ground on Hillary Clinton, to the point that she's no longer a prohibitive favorite. Obama is still far behind, and he needs to score another debate victory like he apparently did a few weeks ago (I find Democratic politics only slightly less distasteful than I find Republican politics, so I don't watch the debates and am going off what I've read) to keep his train running. On the other hand, he's probably wise at this point to be concentrating locally on Iowa, where he appears to have a good chance of winning, which would blow up the entire race, I suspect.
Nobody asked me, but I'm going to say it anyway: I think Hillary Clinton is a disaster candidate for the Democrats. You'd think they would have learned their lesson about nominating charismaless, swotty Senators in the Al Gore and John Kerry debacles, both of whom lost eminently winnable races, not because their ideas were any worse than George Bush's (Kerry didn't seem to have any actual ideas), but because they were stiff and boring. Clinton is essentially the same, except she comes with the bonus of being perhaps the most hated woman in America -- there's a massive section of the electorate who would seriously consider voting for, I don't know, Homer Simpson over Hillary Clinton, and just live with the fact that their next President was fictional. I've been saying for more than a year that the only way the Democrats could lose the upcoming election to the Republicans, short of the Contitution being changed so Arnold Schwarzahoozy could run, was to nominate Hillary Clinton, thereby gifting whatever lame candidate the Republicans are able to find a whole bunch of easily-plucked votes.
I, personally, have no animosity toward Hillary Clinton, and would probably vote for her over any of the lamebrain Republicans who might win the nomination, mostly because the extreme right wing of the party seems to have outlawed the reasonable center -- you know, the sort of person who doesn't deny the existence of the indisputable fact of evolution and recognizes that there's a distinction between "low taxes" and "small government", and that one doesn't necessarily imply the other. Also, Rudy Guliani scares the shit out of me. But I'm not the sort of person they need to convince. Self-professed feminists are not the kind to be scared off by Hillary Clinton. It's everybody else. People hate her. People hate her just as passionately as other people hate George Bush. That is a fundamental disqualification for national politics.
Okay, tangent over. Go about your day.
It's official: The Democrats have cancelled the CBS debate, partially because WGA wouldn't promise not to picket. Any Democrat who crossed pickets would pretty much immediately have his or her candidacy torpedoed in the primaries, because outfits like the AFL-CIO (affiliated with the WGA, East) hold enormous sway with the hardcore left that votes disproportionately in primaries. (Personally, I support Osama in 2008. He's the only one who will hunt down and capture Barack Obama. Ya burnt!)
A question I wonder about is if this hurts someone like Barack Obama, who recently rebooted his campaign and has once more been gaining ground on Hillary Clinton, to the point that she's no longer a prohibitive favorite. Obama is still far behind, and he needs to score another debate victory like he apparently did a few weeks ago (I find Democratic politics only slightly less distasteful than I find Republican politics, so I don't watch the debates and am going off what I've read) to keep his train running. On the other hand, he's probably wise at this point to be concentrating locally on Iowa, where he appears to have a good chance of winning, which would blow up the entire race, I suspect.
Nobody asked me, but I'm going to say it anyway: I think Hillary Clinton is a disaster candidate for the Democrats. You'd think they would have learned their lesson about nominating charismaless, swotty Senators in the Al Gore and John Kerry debacles, both of whom lost eminently winnable races, not because their ideas were any worse than George Bush's (Kerry didn't seem to have any actual ideas), but because they were stiff and boring. Clinton is essentially the same, except she comes with the bonus of being perhaps the most hated woman in America -- there's a massive section of the electorate who would seriously consider voting for, I don't know, Homer Simpson over Hillary Clinton, and just live with the fact that their next President was fictional. I've been saying for more than a year that the only way the Democrats could lose the upcoming election to the Republicans, short of the Contitution being changed so Arnold Schwarzahoozy could run, was to nominate Hillary Clinton, thereby gifting whatever lame candidate the Republicans are able to find a whole bunch of easily-plucked votes.
I, personally, have no animosity toward Hillary Clinton, and would probably vote for her over any of the lamebrain Republicans who might win the nomination, mostly because the extreme right wing of the party seems to have outlawed the reasonable center -- you know, the sort of person who doesn't deny the existence of the indisputable fact of evolution and recognizes that there's a distinction between "low taxes" and "small government", and that one doesn't necessarily imply the other. Also, Rudy Guliani scares the shit out of me. But I'm not the sort of person they need to convince. Self-professed feminists are not the kind to be scared off by Hillary Clinton. It's everybody else. People hate her. People hate her just as passionately as other people hate George Bush. That is a fundamental disqualification for national politics.
Okay, tangent over. Go about your day.
26 November 2007
The Dim Flicker of Hope's Candle
Today, the WGA and the AMPTP return to the negotiating table after a scant three weeks off the job. In light of the rhetoric spewing from both sides as recently as two weeks ago, color me surprised but optimistic. As I wrote about on Saturday, strikes that end quickly are the ones in which things are achieved for one side or the other. One's instinct is to think that the writers may be close to a pretty serious win, but that may merely be a result of the fact that the WGA is loud and the AMPTP has remained -- Variety advertisements aside -- relatively quiet and faceless. Either way, there's reason to be optimistic, because neither side wins if negotiations break down at this point.
Which brings us to this article from Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood Daily. Finke's reporting has been invaluable over the last three weeks, and when she says that "a very reliable source" is telling her that there's a deal "seemingly in place", it's worth taking notice. Finke herself is very cautious in the post, and I think that warrants due skepticism from us out here in the Mobility -- either the agreement is tenuous enough to fall apart, or the source was unsure (she quotes him/her as saying "it's already done, basically" [emphasis mine]), or something. I think part of the caution she exhibits may be due to the fact that the deal is supposed to be done "before Christmas" as opposed to this week, indicating that not all the kinks have been worked out. If it's true, though, a good portion of the season may be salvaged. Just how much is hard to say -- we'll almost certainly see some down time as a result of what would be, at that point, a two-month-long work stoppage -- but at the very least, "The Office" may have an opportunity to save was has been, to date, a distinctly lackluster season.
CBS News has a fairly boilerplate article about the return of the sides to the table, but it does add some minor fuel to the idea that the AMPTP may be buckling: While studios have been talking about the abundance of unproduced scripts they have, it appears that some of the ones they were counting on -- including the sequel to "The Da Vinci Code" -- are unfinished and will remain so until the WGA comes back to work.
New Republic/CBS News: Writer Mark Evanier gives a little (somewhat self-serving) history of WGA labor unrest going back seventy-five years. Most notable for an illustration of the above point about the legnth of strikes: In 1985, the WGA went on strike with a divided membership, unity collapsed after three weeks, and they got their asses handed to them in the subsequent negotiations. Their position -- or rather, their dedication to it -- wasn't strong enough to support aggressive bargaining tactics. I suspect that one side or the other may have had that happen this time, and it doesn't seem likely to be the writers -- though again, that could all be spin and PR.
Entertainment Weekly reports that the talks are taking place -- probably as we type -- at an undisclosed location, and under media blackout. Picketers, who (like yours truly) took last week off to break bread with family and friends, are back out today despite positive action in the boardroom. The article links to Get Back in that Room, a blog that has catalogued more than 400 layoffs since the start of the strike.
ABC News: With talk shows going dark, Presidential hopefuls, who have made appearances on "Letterman" and "The Daily Show" staples of their campaigns in the last few go-rounds, are out a source of publicity -- but perpetual punching bags like Hilary Clinton are also getting a break from the barbs of late nite wags.
Anyway. I was trying to embed a YouTube video into this post, in which Daily Show writers take their usual approach and apply it to the AMPTP, but YouTube has made that more complicated, so fuck it, I'll just post a link. The video is actually kind of old news, and I actually find it interesting more as an object lesson in the symbiosis of writers and actors than anything else. The segment is hosted by writer Jason Ross, and he mouths words that sound exactly like what Jon Stewart says every night -- and they're still funny, but not nearly as funny. You can hear the echo of Stewart's voice in Ross's much less practiced delivery. But you also see that you must be hearing the echo of Ross's voice in Stewart's every time he goes on television. It's very interesting. Also includes a guest shot from John Oliver, TDS's Brit-in-residence.
Which brings us to this article from Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood Daily. Finke's reporting has been invaluable over the last three weeks, and when she says that "a very reliable source" is telling her that there's a deal "seemingly in place", it's worth taking notice. Finke herself is very cautious in the post, and I think that warrants due skepticism from us out here in the Mobility -- either the agreement is tenuous enough to fall apart, or the source was unsure (she quotes him/her as saying "it's already done, basically" [emphasis mine]), or something. I think part of the caution she exhibits may be due to the fact that the deal is supposed to be done "before Christmas" as opposed to this week, indicating that not all the kinks have been worked out. If it's true, though, a good portion of the season may be salvaged. Just how much is hard to say -- we'll almost certainly see some down time as a result of what would be, at that point, a two-month-long work stoppage -- but at the very least, "The Office" may have an opportunity to save was has been, to date, a distinctly lackluster season.
CBS News has a fairly boilerplate article about the return of the sides to the table, but it does add some minor fuel to the idea that the AMPTP may be buckling: While studios have been talking about the abundance of unproduced scripts they have, it appears that some of the ones they were counting on -- including the sequel to "The Da Vinci Code" -- are unfinished and will remain so until the WGA comes back to work.
New Republic/CBS News: Writer Mark Evanier gives a little (somewhat self-serving) history of WGA labor unrest going back seventy-five years. Most notable for an illustration of the above point about the legnth of strikes: In 1985, the WGA went on strike with a divided membership, unity collapsed after three weeks, and they got their asses handed to them in the subsequent negotiations. Their position -- or rather, their dedication to it -- wasn't strong enough to support aggressive bargaining tactics. I suspect that one side or the other may have had that happen this time, and it doesn't seem likely to be the writers -- though again, that could all be spin and PR.
Entertainment Weekly reports that the talks are taking place -- probably as we type -- at an undisclosed location, and under media blackout. Picketers, who (like yours truly) took last week off to break bread with family and friends, are back out today despite positive action in the boardroom. The article links to Get Back in that Room, a blog that has catalogued more than 400 layoffs since the start of the strike.
ABC News: With talk shows going dark, Presidential hopefuls, who have made appearances on "Letterman" and "The Daily Show" staples of their campaigns in the last few go-rounds, are out a source of publicity -- but perpetual punching bags like Hilary Clinton are also getting a break from the barbs of late nite wags.
Anyway. I was trying to embed a YouTube video into this post, in which Daily Show writers take their usual approach and apply it to the AMPTP, but YouTube has made that more complicated, so fuck it, I'll just post a link. The video is actually kind of old news, and I actually find it interesting more as an object lesson in the symbiosis of writers and actors than anything else. The segment is hosted by writer Jason Ross, and he mouths words that sound exactly like what Jon Stewart says every night -- and they're still funny, but not nearly as funny. You can hear the echo of Stewart's voice in Ross's much less practiced delivery. But you also see that you must be hearing the echo of Ross's voice in Stewart's every time he goes on television. It's very interesting. Also includes a guest shot from John Oliver, TDS's Brit-in-residence.
20 November 2007
Always Look on the Bright Side of Life
Hollywood Reporter: Fox has joined NBC-Universal and Sony in delivering letters of suspension to their actors, but in a new twist, are not invoking force majeure, which essentially terminates contracts and leaves actors free to do what they want without worrying about when their show comes back. Fox asserts that the contracts are still valid, and TV contracts remain priority one. SAG says that five weeks of half-pay is the maximum for "hiatus status", and then after that, contracts must be terminated if studios don't want to pay in full. Fox appears to feel otherwise.
La Times: CBS news writers and graphic artists, working the last two and a half years without a contract, have authorized a strike as well.
Daily Variety: The upcoming talks appear to be more than just a PR stunt. Apparently, we have four powerful talent agents to thank for this minor reconciliation; they had kept in contact with the heads of the AMPTP since the start of the strike, and last week reached out to WGAW's David Young. Here's hoping that Young can channel a little of his PR mojo into negotiation for once.
Deadline Hollywood: Somebody's in trooouuuble! An unnamed TV writer-producer has been called befrore the WGA disciplinary committee for breaking the strike rules on his show and a couple of other projects.
LA Times: The strike is a PR war, and there's no doubt who is winning: the writers. One poll shows only 4% of the public favoring studios, another, 8%. I coulda told you who was winning just from reading the news. Writers are getting out there, and the AMPTP is coming across as a monolith. The human face, boys: It wins every time.
Media Week: Advertisers may be asking for their money back soon. The issue is February -- sweeps month -- when ratings are highest and ads go for big bucks. If shows aren't back on track in three weeks, say some advertisers, sweeps could be wiped out -- in which case, it'll be time to start making some demands.
La Times: CBS news writers and graphic artists, working the last two and a half years without a contract, have authorized a strike as well.
Daily Variety: The upcoming talks appear to be more than just a PR stunt. Apparently, we have four powerful talent agents to thank for this minor reconciliation; they had kept in contact with the heads of the AMPTP since the start of the strike, and last week reached out to WGAW's David Young. Here's hoping that Young can channel a little of his PR mojo into negotiation for once.
Deadline Hollywood: Somebody's in trooouuuble! An unnamed TV writer-producer has been called befrore the WGA disciplinary committee for breaking the strike rules on his show and a couple of other projects.
LA Times: The strike is a PR war, and there's no doubt who is winning: the writers. One poll shows only 4% of the public favoring studios, another, 8%. I coulda told you who was winning just from reading the news. Writers are getting out there, and the AMPTP is coming across as a monolith. The human face, boys: It wins every time.
Media Week: Advertisers may be asking for their money back soon. The issue is February -- sweeps month -- when ratings are highest and ads go for big bucks. If shows aren't back on track in three weeks, say some advertisers, sweeps could be wiped out -- in which case, it'll be time to start making some demands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
