across the network: Kyle Brady: Blog  |  Kyle Brady: Fiction  |  Kyle Brady: Status  |  Kyle Brady: Stream  |  Kyle Brady: Projects  |  Kyle Brady: Profile contact
across the internet: on Twitter | on Facebook | more...

Old Content:

Writers’ Strike? Really?




Again, this is a topic I've avoided recently, not to better understand it, but because I thought it was stupid and would never happen. Oh how I was wrong.

Unless you live in a deep dark hole full of demons, you know there's a Writers' Guild strike going on. And that it's deeply affecting shows that some people probably are more addicted to than a backwater hic to meth.

Why?

From what I understand, and I'm not claiming to either, there are two issues:

  1. Money

  2. Distribution


Each is actually dependent on the other, so let's take a look...

Money

I read somewhere (not cited) that the average TV writer makes $200k/yr. Oh wow, that's completely surprising! I thought everyone in Hollywood / LA was poor, and just pretended to be rich and successful, when in reality they are more poor than the average American and totally without any fame. I guess I was mistaken.

Seriously? $200k/yr for writing a season's worth of TV shows, that ranges from 12-24 episodes, with maybe another show or two? And you're COMPLAINING? [Edit/Note:  my reference of "$200k/yr" was based upon something I read, and meant to link to.  I've since lost that link, but I mention it because the number is being questioned by a few people.]

If you're a writer (also called "authors" in the real world of books), you don't expect to make alot of money, or be immensely successful. Yes, there is one author out of many who becomes wildly successful (and occasionally very rich) like J.K. Rowlings or Michael Crighton, but you don't get into "the business" because you want to be rich. The fact that these writers make an absurd amount of money for what equates to a small portion of a book, and is often times just juvenile humor or slightly complex drama, is amazing.

But even more amazing that they feel underpaid.

Distribution

The guys who write NBC's "The Office" have a video floating around the Internet (Google it) of them complaining about not receiving money for distribution of their media. They mention "webisodes" and "online viewing of episodes", and not being properly compensated for them.

This is hilarious to me.

Let me get this straight: you're complaining that not only are you not getting enough money for doing very little amounts of work, but you're also complaining that you aren't getting paid for your content being shown in what is a largely ad-free environment?

If you view an episode of "The Office" online (legally), you are shown maybe three 30-second advertisements during the showing, and it's usually for the same company/product/service. If you view one of their "webisodes" for the show, you get even less advertisement. So, you want to be paid for everytime someone views your work, especially online? How does that even make any sense?

You People Are Stupid

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you (writers) don't get paid per viewer of your TV show through the normal delivery method (aka TV), do you? I'm pretty sure you don't because the number of viewers for any given show is one of the most highly argued issues in modern media. So that means you get a lump sum for a certain productivity level.

I will then assume that that amount of money scales based upon both your work output and the overall popularity of the show (from season to season). By the same logic, one would assume that if you write a "series of 10 webisodes" (as the same video references), you get paid more than you would for just a normal season.

Right? That's what I thought. You guys just can't accept that, God forbid, your show is viewed any other way than on TV or DVD. May Zeus strike me down if I were to miss an episode, and want to watch it on the network's website, so I can continue watching your show that I may or may not love so dearly.

Guilds? Is This 1943?

Not only does this whole strike situation piss me off, but it also brings to light one of the worst permutations of a great idea in the history of mankind: a guild/union. A long long time ago, in an America perhaps 60 years ago, they were a great idea. They helped to standardize wages, work conditions, and other critical elements of any job.

But today, they are nothing but a sorry excuse for a group of money-grubbing attention whores. The only time I can remember a strike actually having purpose and legitimacy, during my time of sentience, is the UPS strike (Google it). This writers' strike is not an example of good intentions or purpose, just like when labor unions band together to increase how much the standard plumber charges you to show off his ass.

New Media

The world of "new media" is here, so get over it. Blogs, videoblogs, webcams, webisodes, TV on the Internet, and others are not going anywhere, no matter how much you want them to "go gently into this good night". The "old media" companies are having a hard enough time adjusting as it is (online episodes, Internet-distribution of media, etc.), without you causing them any more problems.

If you like making everyone's future absolute Hell, keep it up. Maybe we can make a revision to the DMCA where no-one is allowed to distribute anything on the Internet, ever, without paying someone royalties.

Yeah, because that has worked out so freaking well to the music industry, hasn't it?

[I'm not the only one who thinks this way... see what Micheal Eisner and Jon Stewart think]



Old Content posts are leftovers from a less structured, less civilzed era that are kept for posterity.
Kyle can be found on Twitter and MySpace, or reached via email.

submit to reddit Add to Mixx! Share on Facbeook Retweet
Printable Version Printable Version

More Old Content Pieces

see more...


Commenting Rules

The following is a basic set of rules that are enforced for all commenters.

Any violations of these rules will result in comment deletion, user bans, or both.

  1. No excessively foul language.
  2. No racist remarks.
  3. No SPAMing, unrelated linking, or otherwise unnecessary promotion of outside material.
  4. No trolling.
  5. Be respectful.
  6. Be valuable.
  7. Feel free to respond, argue, or counter-point an article - but do so coherently and intelligently.
  8. Use a personal nickname, commenting account, or moniker. Do not use your business' or website name/account.
  9. Do not trackback/pingback to this post unless your content is relevant.
also available as a standalone page

  • I'm confused: you say New Media is here to stay yet think that it should be ignored when paying writers? Residuals are a normal part of pay in that industry just as tips are a normal part of a waiter's pay. The money that doesn't go to the writers, actors, etc. goes to the studios, who certainly make more than 200k/year. (Most writers don't actually make that much, of course, but even if they did, they'd still be making less than the studios and the execs on the other side of the issue.)

    I'm not a big fan of unions or strikes either, but the studios are so ridiculously unreasonable about this issue that they're leaving the writers no other choice.
  • I think that New Media is doing things the way they should be done... independently and without an guilds/unions. I don't think they should be ignored, per say, as much as they should stay out of all of this.

    I'm also not arguing that residuals aren't necessary or are a bad thing, but rather that wanting "4 more cents per DVD sold" or things of that miniscule nature are totally not worth this whole ordeal.

    Because that's what this is all about: getting a very small amount of money added to their current pay, based upon internet views, and an increase in DVD residuals (by mere pennies).

    --Kyle
  • Steve
    How about just giving the writes a percentage of the take. If it is displayed with no revenue gain for the studies, they get nothing. If there is revenue, then they get a share. This is going to be an issue when the actors and the directors unions contracts come up later in the year. They also currently enjoy residuals as part of their compensation and are losing out on digital delivery. The whole industry has to deal with this, the writers are just first.
  • Kyle, I see what you mean, but the problem is that today's contract will probably be in force for the next twenty years (just like the last one), so the writers need to secure some pay for online stuff right now or be screwed for decades. The studios are claiming that it's too early to know how profitable online viewing will be (yeah right) so they should hold off on giving the writers a cut. (I think this is silly since 1% of $0 is still $0.)

    I think I misunderstood what you meant by "New Media". I was also including things like webisodes produced by the old media companies, iTunes distribution, streaming content on network websites, etc. All of those things are highly relevant to the issue even if more indie stuff isn't. For example, I often watch Supernatural episodes on the CW website (yes, yes, you probably think it's badly written, but that's not the point), and these are shown with several commercial breaks per episode. It's not much different from showing reruns (for which the writers get a hell of a lot more than they get for DVDs).

    The way I hear it, the writers really did try to avoid the strike, but the studios have been even more dishonest than usual, so negotiations broke down. (Negotiations that have been going on for ages, btw, so it's not as though the studios didn't have ample warning that they needed to negotiate seriously.) I have to say, my sympathy is still with the striking writers no matter how many biased news articles I've read that favor the networks/studios.
  • Chad
    Hey genius how the hell do you think Jon Stewart agrees with your crazy ramblings? If you are going to make comoletely erroneous claims, maybe you should actually read the article you link to for support.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Kyle Brady: Blog
coherent thoughts on diverse topics


Site Navigation:
About Columns Ethics Rules Contact