5 comments

• 

  Franzi

  1 year ago

  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.
  reply
• 

  Kyle Brady

  1 year ago

  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
  reply
• 

  Steve

  1 year ago

  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.
  reply
• 

  Franzi

  1 year ago

  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.
  reply
• 

  Chad

  1 year ago

  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.
  reply