Funniest writer’s strike video yet.
found by John Markoff
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Delightful. And, sadly, true.
My Ex once got stiffed by a magazine that published an article they commissioned her to write. I think they spent the money on fast cars and loose women instead. Bunch of typically Californian sleeze-bags.
My new theory is that there is no “ism”, but rather just those who wish to oppress others in order to keep more for themselves. Of course we each are our own worst oppressors.
Wouldn’t it be funny if they didn’t get permission from, say, Brittany Guy to use his clip?
At the end of the day, this rates a -5 on my “Gives a rat’s ass about it” scale. The rich whining about not being even richer.
Which is the same reason I could care less whenever any pro-sport goes “on strike”.
#4natefrong
What makes you think all Hollywood writers are rich? Is it because they work in Hollywood?
>>What makes you think all Hollywood writers are rich? Is it
>>because they work in Hollywood?
I get the impression that Mr. Froggie thinks that all writers are in a tax bracket with Brad Pitt or Barry Bonds.
And as such, they are not entitled to a fair share of the residuals from works that they create.
Better that the studio magnates keep all the profits from their relentless pimping of others’ products over the internet. Right?
#4 – The rich whining about not being even richer.
What color is the sky in your world? *
The writers are not rich. And in case anyone is wondering what writers really get paid… I can’t say with absolute certainty… But I can say with absolute certainty what they got paid in 2004, because this is the 4 page 2004 Schedule of Payments from the WGA:
http://tinyurl.com/39c4n6
If you understand what you are looking at, you’ll understand that writers do not make HUGE bucks. If they work consistently, they make good bucks though.
Keep in mind, they are contract labor responsible for their own taxes and such. The figures you’ll see are gross numbers.
The annual take home for one of the average TV writer is probably about $60K to $80K assuming consistent work. Obviously, If you’ve been a staff writer for CSI or a hit like Seinfeld for a while, you are banking some dough. But your talent commands top dollar just like a pro sports athlete, a bankable movie star, or any other talent… so it isn’t unreasonable to pay more. But these top dollar guys aren’t the norm, nor are they the writers we are really concerned about.
—–
In other completely unrelated news, to those of you who game, Crysis totally rocks. I’m absolutely satisfied with my purchase. (and I seem to be getting better at the game as I play, which is good because I was getting my ass handed to me when I started.
File this under the “delusion that anyone cares what I write here” department, if you noticed my absence from threads on Thursday… I took the day off from work to play Crysis.
I posted this question in a previous thread just as it scrolled off the main blog page (see: http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=14550#comments).
This discussion has made me think more about the subject of employers and employees. I am still trying to better understand the basic difference between a software company hiring a few people to write a software product and a production company hiring a few people to write a screen play.
They may be different skill sets (which is true when comparing most occupations) but they are both creative endeavors. Anyone who has had to write a substantial amount of software can tell you writing software is not just the pure mechanics of stringing commands together. Just like anyone who has written a good screen play can tell you it is not just about stringing words together.
The biggest difference I see from an employment point of view is that the screen writers were much better at negotiating a deal that included residuals! Perhaps that is the bottom line.
I am just trying to understand the issue better.
Isn’t writing for money the second oldest profession?
#8, I think you hit it right on the head. But, profit-wise, a television show is much easier to track than some corporate software.
>>I am still trying to better understand the basic difference between
>>a software company hiring a few people to write a software
>>product
Please list the last few software products of note that were written by “a few people”.
In any case, if you think programmers are being gypped, you should encourage them to go out on strike. Maybe Vista and M$ Office programmers SHOULD get a cut of Mister Bill’s profits for each copy sold. That’s a separate issue from what is being contended here.
As it stands now, writers, actors, authors, etc. derive residuals when their works are replayed for profit or converted into another medium for profit. In the case under discussion in the strike, the studio magnates have identified and exploited new ways (interneto-based) of generating profits from the writers’ work. But rather share those profits with the writers, they seek to KEEP ALL THE PROFITS FOR THEMSELVES.
I agree with the strikers on this one. Why does it matter what medium a work is presented on? If the work makes a buck, no matter how, then the writer should get a share of it. It is not that complicated.
Pay us for our original content as we blatantly ripoff Monty Python.
>>Pay us for our original content as we blatantly ripoff Monty Python.
wtf are you talking about? any time a Monty Python work makes a buck, the writers make a few cents. At least until now, if it’s put out on the internet, they’re supposed to get screwed and like it?
I don’t really understand the confusion here. If the works make money, the writers should make money. What’s up with the support for studio magnates? If you think the writers are “rich”, then the studios are like King Midas.
Don’t get me wrong, I could frankly care less about the writers strike, now that most of the shows I watch are having shortend seasons, I frankly wouldn’t be too upset if they all (the producers, studios, and yes the writers) all threw themselves off a cliff.
But to my original question. I never did understand this entire residuals thing. I mean, I am an engineer, I design equipment for a company I work for. The company then pays me for my time and abilities. I don’t expect to make a percentage every time they sell that product for the rest of my life. I design a product, they give me money. I am then happy. If I wanted to make a percentage for the rest of my life, I would have to strike out on my own.
So could someone explain why the writers are entitled to a percentage of the profits a movie, tv show, ect. makes for the rest of their lives?
Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t care who wins this strike, but I am just having a hard time figuring out why any of these people (I am talking about actors as well btw) deserve anything more after they have already been paid for a job they have done. I mean are the writers and actors paid in dog food or something, so they need this residual income?
Thanks in advance.
(a) writers aren’t rich, they may be comfortable, but the thought of every writer living a rockstar lifestyle is laughable. (b) the media conglomerates want it their way on every issue, the sooner you see that, the sooner you’ll understand why the writers are striking. (c) even assuming the writers are rich, you’re saying they’re not protected and shouldn’t be paid for their work, no matter which avenue it comes from?
It’s disgusting how arrogant the media companies are, and how they are making the fans suffer for their arrogance. Even more disgusting are people thinking the writers are the ones causing this.
>>I am just having a hard time figuring out why any of these people
>>(I am talking about actors as well btw) deserve anything more
>>after they have already been paid for a job they have done.
That’s just the way things are done in that business. If you think engineers should get a cut of the action for each gizmo they design (and residual, should the gizmo be resold), go for it. Form a union, go on strike.
In this case, nobody (nobody who’s involved in the negiotiations, anyway) is saying that writers (or actors, or rock stars) should not get residuals for continued use of their work when using last-century technology. Now that the studio magnates have found new ways to pimp those wares for profit, the writers want a cut of that action too, just like they’ve been getting for reruns, DVD versions of movies, etc.
I don’t see how anybody (except the self-serving greed-mongering studios) can disagree with that.
If you think there should be a revolution in the way Hollywood does business, that’s a whole nother kettle of fish.