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 Hollywood Reporter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hollywood Reporter. 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.
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.
11 November 2007
Pressure Points
I'm fast learning that Reuters, despite the fact that it is neither located in the United States nor specifically geared toward entertainment news, most often offers the most insightful analysis of events leading up to and comprising the strike. In this article, by Steve Gorman and Dana Ford, tells us that layoffs may be imminent among the non-writing staff of late night shows, and also mentions -- something I hadn't heard before, but maybe I wasn't listening closely enough -- that the AMPTP has said it will return to the negotiating table if the WGA agrees to suspend the strike. WGA has so far refused that overture. Instead, executives from talent agencies are trying to act as mediators. It's easy to scoff when people say it's a small town, but Hollyweird really is a small city within a much larger one, it seems.
Protean-voiced producer Seth MacFarlane, of "Family Guy" and the egregious "American Dad", has apparently been a hit on the picket lines with his hot rhetoric and comedia dell'arte of characters. He's also been encouraging producers who can afford it to pay laid-off assistants out of their own pockets. Now that would be a gesture. I wonder what MacFarlane's definition of "afford" is.
The San Jose Mercury News ("the Merc", to this old Peninsulaite, and best paper in the Bay Area), reports that with Jay Leno refusing to cross picket lines NBC may be bringing in guest hosts in an attempt to stay on the air. No word on who that might be -- those people would have to be amenable to strikebreaking where Leno isn't -- but I'd encourage NBC to go some kind of completely radical route. How about James Gandolfini? That would be different. Also, Oprah is always looking to expand her Earth-swallowing empire. (Did anybody else hear on "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" that people in rural Iraq watch Oprah? Wow.)
At BloggingStocks.com, venture capitalist Peter Cohan estimates that a six-month strike could cost the WGA as much as $486 million in lost wages. His numbers are admittedly fuzzy, but if it drags on that long, if he's even in the ballpark, it's going to take a long time for the writers' action to pay for itself, and even that's assuming massive growth in new media.
Protean-voiced producer Seth MacFarlane, of "Family Guy" and the egregious "American Dad", has apparently been a hit on the picket lines with his hot rhetoric and comedia dell'arte of characters. He's also been encouraging producers who can afford it to pay laid-off assistants out of their own pockets. Now that would be a gesture. I wonder what MacFarlane's definition of "afford" is.
The San Jose Mercury News ("the Merc", to this old Peninsulaite, and best paper in the Bay Area), reports that with Jay Leno refusing to cross picket lines NBC may be bringing in guest hosts in an attempt to stay on the air. No word on who that might be -- those people would have to be amenable to strikebreaking where Leno isn't -- but I'd encourage NBC to go some kind of completely radical route. How about James Gandolfini? That would be different. Also, Oprah is always looking to expand her Earth-swallowing empire. (Did anybody else hear on "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" that people in rural Iraq watch Oprah? Wow.)
At BloggingStocks.com, venture capitalist Peter Cohan estimates that a six-month strike could cost the WGA as much as $486 million in lost wages. His numbers are admittedly fuzzy, but if it drags on that long, if he's even in the ballpark, it's going to take a long time for the writers' action to pay for itself, and even that's assuming massive growth in new media.
09 November 2007
Governotor?
Reports of Ahnuld's involvement in the strike are greatlyexaggerated according to a UPI report. The Governator says he has not "been asked" to get involved, but he will down the line if the sides come to him. A reasonable stance to take, I suppose, but less proactive than I had expected from an action star.
But wait! The BBC spins it another way! Schwarzathingy is all over this in a backstage kind of way! It's so hard to know who to believe in our post-modern America. (Or Britain, as the case may be.) Is there "objective" truth in these post-Derrida times? Where will we find it? Don't look at me -- I just ask questions, I don't answer them.
Those crazy Democrats are . . . well, they're talking, which is what they're best at. Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards all come out in favor of the WGA. Given that Republicans seem to be best at things that are even less useful than talking, these days, it seems likely that our next President will be on record in support of the union. Yeah, shocker. Hopefully, this will all be over by then. If not . . . well, if not, I don't think there would be any Hollyweird left for a hypothetical future President to meddle with.
This press release states that rallies today on the Western Front will be outside Fox, and no less than Tom Morello (of Rage Against the Machine fame) will be playing an acoustic set. That sounds . . . weird.
The Hollywood Reporter says that Ray Romano and other members of the cast of the late not-so-lamented sitcom "Everybody Loathes Rain Man" (I assume you can get there) were on the pickets yesterday . . . but the really big name is Jesse Jackson. Gotta tell ya, I'm not sure this is a good thing for the WGA. The man has a fetish for lost caues, I swear.
One last note, and then later I'll have a different sort of post later today if I have time (heading out to Portland's Wordstock Festival soon enough): Software globjillionaire Marc Andreessen takes studios to task on his blog for picking a fight at the wrong time. What makes this the wrong time? This:
So the uber-rich technocrati are as split on this issue as anybody else -- Michael Eisner thinks the WGA is dumb, Andreessen thinks the AMPTP is dumb. Maybe they're both dumb. Who knows. You know what this situation could use? A muscle-bound Austrian with a giant bazooka.
But wait! The BBC spins it another way! Schwarzathingy is all over this in a backstage kind of way! It's so hard to know who to believe in our post-modern America. (Or Britain, as the case may be.) Is there "objective" truth in these post-Derrida times? Where will we find it? Don't look at me -- I just ask questions, I don't answer them.
Those crazy Democrats are . . . well, they're talking, which is what they're best at. Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards all come out in favor of the WGA. Given that Republicans seem to be best at things that are even less useful than talking, these days, it seems likely that our next President will be on record in support of the union. Yeah, shocker. Hopefully, this will all be over by then. If not . . . well, if not, I don't think there would be any Hollyweird left for a hypothetical future President to meddle with.
This press release states that rallies today on the Western Front will be outside Fox, and no less than Tom Morello (of Rage Against the Machine fame) will be playing an acoustic set. That sounds . . . weird.
The Hollywood Reporter says that Ray Romano and other members of the cast of the late not-so-lamented sitcom "Everybody Loathes Rain Man" (I assume you can get there) were on the pickets yesterday . . . but the really big name is Jesse Jackson. Gotta tell ya, I'm not sure this is a good thing for the WGA. The man has a fetish for lost caues, I swear.
One last note, and then later I'll have a different sort of post later today if I have time (heading out to Portland's Wordstock Festival soon enough): Software globjillionaire Marc Andreessen takes studios to task on his blog for picking a fight at the wrong time. What makes this the wrong time? This:
You're faced with a massive, once-in-a-lifetime shift in mainstream consumer behavior from traditional mass media, including film and television, to new activities that you do not control: the Internet, social networking, user-generated content, mobile services, video games. It's been snowballing since the mid 90's, for like 12 years -- 12 years of denial and obfuscation -- but it's really rolling fast now.
So the uber-rich technocrati are as split on this issue as anybody else -- Michael Eisner thinks the WGA is dumb, Andreessen thinks the AMPTP is dumb. Maybe they're both dumb. Who knows. You know what this situation could use? A muscle-bound Austrian with a giant bazooka.
08 November 2007
In which there is a war of words, and I try to think up a less ugly name than "scab".
Hi all. News continues to build. United Hollywood is reporting that some soaps are already hiring "scabs", though I haven't seen anything confirmed on that. I don't like the term "scab", because it makes me sound like what Brian Howard would call a "union shill", which I swear I'm actually not. "Picket-line-crosser" is sort of cumbersome, however . . . "nonunion writer"? That's a little unweildy as well, but I like it better than "scab". This is difficult, because "scab" is such a versatile word (it can be verbed -- one can "scab" -- or remain a noun -- one can be "a scab"). But there you have it. "Nonunion writer" it is, until I come up with something better.
Michael Eisner, former head of Disney, has something to say, and it's not good:
Talking to the Hollywood Reporter, he had several other colorful things to say, including calling the talking up of digital media by networks and studios "a harlot's parade" (good one; I'm going to steal that), and saying that the only people currently making money off of new media are the aggregators and distributors, like Apple. Of course, Eisner himself heads a company called Tornante that invests heavily in new media, so it's hard to take exactly what his meaning is. "They should do it in three years" is probably the heart of the statement -- he's saying that they're giving up a dollar today for a dollar tomorrow, and that dollar probably won't actually be there until next week. There might be some merit to that, but if you ask me, it's always better to get in something a little too early than a little too late.
Put it this way: If there were no money in this, would the AMPTP be so reluctant to give it up? Of course not. "Sacagawea dollar? That's what you want? Here, have one." So perhaps WGA is making sacrifices that aren't yet necessary, but they will be eventually. Call it the ripping-off-the-bandaid approach.
In other news, The Governator appears to be trying to step in -- nothing heavy-handed from this small-government hero, just some back-channels chatter -- in a move that frankly I had expected earlier. Ahnuld (notice how I keep carefully avoiding spelling his last name? not a coincidence) is well-positioned to A) make a real difference in this matter, and B) come out looking like a real champ, which everyone knows he loves. He's bright, he's rich, he's got the weight of government behind him, and he knows the business. The Reuters article I've now cited like a billion times indicated that the two sides were so estranged that the only way to bring them to the table would be gradual communication through back-channels; Schwarzenegger (did I get it?) is the perfect man for that job. This is the signatirue industry of the biggest, most powerful state in the most powerful nation on Earth.
"You know my handcuffs? I picked them."
Michael Eisner, former head of Disney, has something to say, and it's not good:
For a writer to give up today's money for a nonexistent piece of the future -- they should do it in three years, shouldn't be doing it now -- they are misguided they should not have gone on the strike. I've seen stupid strikes, I've seen less stupid strikes, and this strike is just a stupid strike.
Talking to the Hollywood Reporter, he had several other colorful things to say, including calling the talking up of digital media by networks and studios "a harlot's parade" (good one; I'm going to steal that), and saying that the only people currently making money off of new media are the aggregators and distributors, like Apple. Of course, Eisner himself heads a company called Tornante that invests heavily in new media, so it's hard to take exactly what his meaning is. "They should do it in three years" is probably the heart of the statement -- he's saying that they're giving up a dollar today for a dollar tomorrow, and that dollar probably won't actually be there until next week. There might be some merit to that, but if you ask me, it's always better to get in something a little too early than a little too late.
Put it this way: If there were no money in this, would the AMPTP be so reluctant to give it up? Of course not. "Sacagawea dollar? That's what you want? Here, have one." So perhaps WGA is making sacrifices that aren't yet necessary, but they will be eventually. Call it the ripping-off-the-bandaid approach.
In other news, The Governator appears to be trying to step in -- nothing heavy-handed from this small-government hero, just some back-channels chatter -- in a move that frankly I had expected earlier. Ahnuld (notice how I keep carefully avoiding spelling his last name? not a coincidence) is well-positioned to A) make a real difference in this matter, and B) come out looking like a real champ, which everyone knows he loves. He's bright, he's rich, he's got the weight of government behind him, and he knows the business. The Reuters article I've now cited like a billion times indicated that the two sides were so estranged that the only way to bring them to the table would be gradual communication through back-channels; Schwarzenegger (did I get it?) is the perfect man for that job. This is the signatirue industry of the biggest, most powerful state in the most powerful nation on Earth.
"You know my handcuffs? I picked them."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
