Both Sides Are Talking

It's been a few days since posting something new, but there hasn't been much to post about.

This is a good thing.

Writers and Producers are talking.  Writers have removed demands for Animation and Reality (which were, no offense to writers in those fields, obvious bluffs all along).

Both sides seem to be honoring a news blackout.

Dissection of the DGA deal continues, but the rhetoric seems to have fallen sharply.

Good luck to both sets of negotiators.  Figure this thing out and let's all get back to work!

The Irrational Fear That Reruns Will Disappear

One of the popular "problems" with the DGA deal (and past proposals) which keeps getting repeated like Gospel, is the idea that television reruns are going away and that soon all repeats will only be on the internet.  

The fear mongering argument then says that any money in this area, short of $20,000 (the current residual for a one-hour program) is a roll back.  Writers are going to go broke, claim the writer radicals, because their residuals will vanish.

The problem with this "problem?"  It's completely false.

Content is indeed shifting to the internet, and in a big way.  The issue, though, is who is watching it there.  The answer?  First time viewers.

People are watching more and more of their favorite TV shows online.  But they are watching it there instead of on TV, not in addition to TV.

The bigger problem with the Fear of Disappearing Residuals is that those afflicted can't come up with an answer to what will replace these supposed vanishing reruns.

If there's an empty timeslot on CBS' Monday Night Schedule, what do you think they're going to air?  The answer is simple CSI: Miami Repeat.  Why?  Because even if NBC airs a brand new episode of Studio 60, The Black Donnelleys or Journeyman; guess what show wins the timeslot?  CSI: Miami Repeat does.  Don't believe me?  Look up the last two years worth of Neilsons.

And, okay, I grant you that CSI: Miami is a hit show, and the WGA is striking for all writers, not just those on crappy David Caruso vehicles (nice shades, dude).

Let's take our dearly departed Journeyman then.  Assume for a moment that the show was still on the air.  March rolls around.  It's not Sweeps.  You could air a new episode, but you want to keep it for later.

So what is NBC to do?  According to the No More Reruns folks, NBC can't repeat an episode of Journeyman to catch up someone who hasn't watched from the beginning and still doesn't quite get why Dan Vasser travels through time, but never bangs his ex-girlfriend.

Well, if they can't rerun something (doomsday scenario), doesn't this mean that they have to -- gasp -- air something original instead?!?  And wouldn't this mean that there's a Writer somewhere getting first episode money instead of much lower rerun money??  Isn't this a GOOD THING??

Or is NBC more likely to just go black for the hour?  Seriously, they can't compete against CSI: Miami (ignore for the purposes of this argument that THEY are in repeats), so NBC should just throw in the towel and go dark, or let the late local news come on early so we can get extra footage of the Butt Naked Bandit.

In short, repeats -- to the detriment of the Television Viewer -- are not going anywhere.  They are a staple of American Network Programming and they are here to stay.  And all those cable channels?  They've got even more reruns than the big 4.

Streaming Media moolah is fresh, delicious moolah.  If you want more, go out and get it; but don't do it out of fear that stale old rerun moolah is going anywhere.  That garden is mighty green for years and years to come.

A Response to Nikki Finke's Shitty Column

As has already been reported, Nikki Finke's first column back since falling ill was titled first "Is That Shitty DGA Deal The Only Deal", and is now titled "That Shitty Deal Is At Least A Start."

Muckraking "journalism" at it's finest...

But I'll give her a tiny little bit of props for actually allowing some anti-Nikki comments to post.  I especially liked this gem, which completely sums up my feelings about DHD:

You probably won’t post this and that’s a shame. But I’ll comment anyway, futile as it may be. I come from a family of instigators, where someone will say to someone else that so-and-so said this awful thing about them, fueling anger and resentment on both sides. Most of the time, these gossiping family members think they’re “doing a good deed for the greater good of the family”, when in fact, they’re simply creating an atagonistic environment. What they really must do instead is: let people resolve issues amongst themselves. And that’s what you need to do with the strike. By posting your “shitty DGA deal” comment, you’re again fanning of the fires of radicalism. Which is what this strike has become. A radical, irrational shit-throwing war. Rational people in the WGA are muzzled by louder, angrier and bitter people in the WGA. Notice how progress was made in your absence, without your snarky editorials. Bottom line: you’re not really in the movie and TV biz, Nikki, you just report on it, yet inexplicably your comments can arguably iffluence the position of many people who are actually WORKERS in this town. Look, you do some very good reporting, but right now, you’re getting involved in something you shouldn’t be getting involved in by fanning the flames. So use your power wisely. I know you try to, but at times, like today, you do nothing but make a bad situation worse. Just like people in my family do. I see it all the time and believe me, people like you do no one any good.

Posted by "Rational Thinker".

If This Deal Was On The Table In October...

UPDATE - I'm moving this post back to the top, because I think discussion of the DGA Deal and it's impact on the WGA Strike is more interesting than a discussion of what's happening behind the scenes over at United Hollywood...

----------

Bloggers and commenters seem to be split on the value and merits of the DGA deal, especially when discussing whether the WGA should sign the same deal.

The most common refrain is something along the lines of "we didn't strike all this time to get that deal."

This is a common emotional response to negotiations, but it is the wrong way to look at the deal that's on the table (or soon to be, in this case).

What's done is done and it can't be changed.  So the Writers have to try to forget (for a moment) that they've been on Strike and look at this deal with fresh eyes.  They need to examine its merits and its faults and weigh whether it is acceptable versus an alternative of months more striking in exchange for an uncertain deal.

In short, pretend that the Strike never happened.  Pretend that the WGA MBA expires on January 30.  The DGA deal is presented by the AMPTP.  Do you take it?

If the AMPTP had been this reasonable way back in October, would this deal have been good enough to avoid a Strike?

If the answer is yes, then every businessperson in the world, every economics professor, would say you should sign the deal now.

If the answer is no, then you have more work ahead of you.  Now you have to determine what you might realistically gain by Striking.  And that has to be compared to the costs of Striking.

In all likelihood, a WGA dismissal of this deal would amount to a Strike which lasted until July or August.  The AMPTP would have more leverage than they have had at any time during this Strike.  And they have large coffers.  They won't budge from this, at least not in the short term.

This Strike has lasted 2 1/2 months.  Are you financially ready to go 6 months more?

There would likely be a wave of Fi-Core writers.  Maybe it's a handful, maybe it's dozens, maybe it's a hundred or more.  But no close observer of this Strike could honestly believe that the entire Guild would hold strong after rejecting a deal that many of its Members believe to be good.  How would this affect the Strike and the negotiations?

Finally, what is the added benefit that the additional strike would earn?  Could you get $2000 for new media streaming?  Is that worth 6 months of Strike and defections of the Membership?  Could you get Reality and Animation jurisdiction?  Would that make up for the current Members that you would lose?

This deal is not perfect.  In fact, it's far from perfect.  But this deal is good.  In fact, it's actually very good.  It offers new payments and jurisdiction that the WGA never had before.  And it forms the foundation for the next contract, when you can negotiate for an even bigger portion of the pie.

This deal is worth signing.  

Please, approve the deal and let's all get back to work.