Carl Icahn Now Wants ALL Of Lionsgate 
FINAL MGM BIDS DUE FRIDAY: So Who's In And … 
Action Comedy TV: Showrunner Matt Nix 
SAG National Board Approves Joint Bargaining … 
BBC Drama Unfreezes Development Money; … 
Lionsgate Board Rejects Icahn's $6/Share 
Is Betting On Box Office Good For Films? 
Marvel Still Looking For Captain America 
'Sopranos' Creator To Film Rock Drama 
LIVE-SNARKING THE 82ND OSCARS... 
'ALICE' IS A MONSTER! $116.3M Blows Past … 
Oscar Not-So-Thriller: Diller Mogul Picnic 
'Precious' Sweeps 25th Indie Spirit Awards 
Howard Stern Won't Be Next 'Idol' Judge 
Justin Theroux Readying 'Zoolander 2' For … 
Where do Los Angeles Times editors live? Why no Page One news article or photo of Friday's 4,000-person WGA strike rally, the biggest in the guild's history?
As you’re all aware, over the past few days there’s been a lot of criticism of the LA Times strike coverage. (And The New York Times', which ignored the protest which is somewhat understandable since it's based in a different city. And Variety's and The Hollywood Reporter's, but they've never been objective anyway.) After all, massing on Avenue Of the Stars is the equivalent of 4,000 protesters on Madison Avenue. But that may be the problem: it had to occur in NYC for the LA Times to cover it.
Ordinarily, an event like this strike – something that affects all socio-economic levels of what in many ways is still a Company town – drives newspaper sales, and sends circulation skyrocketing. Even people who don’t ordinarily read the paper will go out and buy it for an overview as well as for specific reporting and analysis about how this affects their lives and could cripple the local economy. (By comparison, DHD isn't aimed at a general audience. DHD is focused on the entertainment industry for the entertainment industry. I report and write as if I'm speaking only to insiders.)
Still, the front page of this morning’s LA Times raises a larger issue: Namely, the continuing myopia on the part of LAT editors about the city their readers live in. The WGA march on Fox was reduced to a 655-word story on page 2 in the Business section. And the paper used an unofficial estimate of 3,500, not the WGA's estimate of 4,000 or the LAPD's estimate of 5,000. I've read articles three times as long about French wine-making. Instead of a photo of the strike on Page One, there’s a generic shot of Benazir Bhutto (albeit a big story, but you wouldn't know it from that picture), an article about Rudy Giuliani and Bernard Kerik, and a really urgent piece about Michelin ratings and LA chefs. And for the life of me, even seven paragraphs in, I still can’t figure out what the Column One story about “A Pioneer Refuses to Fade Away” is about.
I'm tired of carping about the LA Times' incredibly slanted coverage of this producers v writers dispute. But jeez -- a Friday Business article claimed "The guild has so far resisted offers by agents and politicians to help broker a peace, according to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and others." Huh? I must be covering some other strike because my reporting shows the producers have resisted the mayor's offer .and the governor hasn't even offered to put himself on the hot seat yet. (If anything, anti-union Arnold is only schmoozing those powerful moguls who all gave money to his re-election campaign because he's anti-union.) Gee, ya think this has to do with the fact that movie advertising keeps declining in the paper, and the Powers-That-Be there want to curry favor with the Powers-That-Be in showbiz?
So the real question here isn’t “What’s Wrong With this Picture?” but “What’s Wrong With This Paper?” Los Angeles deserves much, much better.
Loading ...
Thank you, Nikki, for reporting on the incredible media bias against the writers. Not only did the LA Times bury their coverage on yesterday’s rally on page 2 of the Business Section, they also misreported the number of picketers. The LAPD’s official estimate was 5,000. Even more egregious is the fact that the NY Times completely ignored the rally and didn’t report on it at all. It’s about time the media gave us fair and unbiased reporting.
The LA Times has a statement from one of the 102 below the line crew members fired from The Office.
A grip’s view of the strike
Excellent commentary, as usual. However this perfect storm of investigative incompetence and financially motivated bias is, unfortunately, anything but a new story for anyone that follows the news.
Take, for example, the real estate coverage during the past five years in the LA Times, NY Times, Washington Post, and so on. Story after story quoting the NAR as if it were an unbiased authority rather than a trade interest group. Currently, millions of homeowners are waking up to a rather bleak reality of declining prices and upside down mortgages – the vary things the NAR vowed “never” occur.
Now we have the LA Times, etc, not only reporting the AMPTP’s version of events as if it were unbiased fact, but also apparently distorting the truth altogether. Given the concentration of media ownership of late, you’d think the press would be trying to avoid at least the appearance of pro-ownership bias. But we’re not even getting a token effort to feign impartiality. A sad state of affairs, indeed.
There hasn’t been ANY objective news reporting at the LA Times in years. That’s why I cancelled my subscription several years ago and continue to encourage others to do the same.
When I picked up the LA Times I was joyous. We need this paper to counteract Nikki’s impartial take on the strike. Go LA Times.
Scandalous. Just scandalous. CBS also ran a fifteen second piece at the end of their telecast. How biased are these “jouranlist?” 5000 people. A strike that could effect the entire state and cost upwards of a billion dollars. Jesse Jackson speaking. And we go after the main stories, the throwaways, weather, sports and the feel good story on cats eating rats. Scandalous.
Boo-hoo. Total sob-sister stuff. Where’s the deprivation and victim-hood? These people are all living off their hefty investments. Oh yeah, that’s tragic all right.
SUGGESTION: Try to convey how this affects general society, and why the Average Joe, who doesn’t give two-hoots about the pampered show-biz Industry —should care.
And, I’m actually not pleased with Nikki’s reporting. If she spent less time censoring commenters whose worldview she doesn’t agree with…..and more time on why this strike should even matter…outside of Hollywood…..
….mainstream Media, and non-Show-biz might take this thing seriously.
Thanks for counteracting their lazy-ass reporting, Nikki.
Shame on the LA Times!… Nikki, if it wasn’t for DHD we’d all be in the dark and believing the lie that the writers are the bad guys here. It’s obvious to any 2nd grader that the AMPTP is in the wrong. Your latest post underscores the fact that this a seminal moment in the history of the Guild and in the history of Hollywood. The conglomerates control all media – including the newspapers. The strike has garnered little interest from CNN, MSNBC and FOX (good luck). Where and how will our voices be heard in the media? This is why Ellen’s choice to continue with her show matters. This is why DHD is SO important. We need to be fully UNITED. We need to be STRONG. This is David versus Goliath. We have to be resolute, we have to be loud, we have to be aggressive if we want our message to be heard… otherwise they will keep burying it and…us.
FIGHT ON WRITERS!!!
Dump Variety and HR… long live DHD!
Thanks for the coverage, Nikki. It’s obvious that the LA Times doesn’t want to show the strike in the true light. I am sure they are being influenced by the big money guys. The only way you will get front page coverage is if Paris, Lindsey or Britney drives drunk through a group walking the picket line. Of course the paper will find a way to blame the writers for standing on the sidewalk. So much for a free press…
Nothing to see here. Move along.
I disagree. The Los Angeles Times has done an excellent job of humanizing writers. LA Times articles have done much to counteract the popular belief that all WGA members are millionaires. Exhibit A: This morning’s moving article about daytime writer Marla Kanelos, struggling to raise an adopted child, written by Martin Miller. Exhibit B: the smart piece about how residuals helped Marc Cherry stay afloat in between staff writerdom and Desperate Housewives. (FYI They never give much coverage to protest marches of any kind.)
Please don’t leave out a mention of the piece on Marla Kanelos, writer for All My Children in the Saturday LA TImes.
Newspapers have become irrelevant. It’s the blogs that own everyone’s ass nowadays and Nikki’s site owns the world. This is the place I come to when I want facts and not opinion. I haven’t picked up a newspaper in about five years.
Here’s how you get the WGA strike on the front page of the Times….arm the strikers with “I Hate Bush” signs and Mexican flags.
It’s awfully embarrassing of them to not have a photo on the front page.
You’ve got to be kidding. While I agree that the LA Times is a sorry excuse for a newspaper, in the overall REAL world, the strike is by far not the most important news going on in the world. In fact, continued days of striking without incident become continuously less newsworthy. No one died today because they didn’t get to enjoy some fresh pithy quip from Jon Stewart or Charlie Sheen. Stop whining about your perceived lack of press coverage and focus on issues and a return to negotiations. Trade Unionist rhetoric is so lame and dog-eared that even the Times has heard enough. I know it is important to you, but the world does not revolve around entertainment writing.
Our Local NBC news at 11pm last night covered the Strike for 16 seconds, then promptly did 33 seconds on – hold your noses – whether or not Michael Jackson could make his mortgage payments!? No matter what side of the strike you’re on, that is just wack-a-doo!
True enough about the LAT and trades, but there are also a number of excellent film bloggers that consider themselves journalists, yet I’m surprised they’re not covering the strike on their websites. Is it a coincidence that they have studio movie/Oscar ads on their site, and Ms. Finke does not? Oscar season is of course prime ad money time, and no doubt many depend on the studio’s Oscar ad $ to keep them afloat.
Trade bloggers do not seem much better than their trade employers, not surprisingly. The venerable Anne Thompson gives a brief shout out to Ms. Finke in her column today (”I know Nikki Finke is kicking ass with the writers strike”). It’s as if they figure one journalist is all that’s needed. (also – tvweek.com’s coverage has been noted – any others?)
Interesting, in that it seems film bloggers/journalists like to consider themselves independent and able to cover issues in ways traditional media can’t or won’t – yet… silence. Perhaps, for them, silence is golden? Or?
I’m cancelling my subscription Monday morning.
L.A. Times envisions itself not as a local paper, but as a world-class paper on par with the N.Y. Times.
And the smug, self-important nature of its editorial page is so annoying I have stopped subscribing, except for Sunday for the grocery coupons.
The LA Times isn’t even good enough to use as toilet paper.
I’m cancelling mine, too. Imagine if 4 thousand of us did that?
Come on guys it’s the LA Times, did you really think this rally would get a full page coverage? If it has nothing to do with the Illegal Aliens taking over Los Angeles, they don’t care. That’s all they seem to report on anymore, and it’s mostly sob stories to get the public to feel sorry for them. That’s part of the reason I don’t take the Los Angeles Times seriously, that and their joke of reporting.
I have seen a lot of reporting done by KTLA Los Angeles in the morning, Sam Ruben has covered this strike since it began.. I don’t know about Friday’s Rally because he is only on in the morning.. So we will see Monday if he covers it… Also Bill Handle from 640am KFI has done a good job covering the strike and he is for the writers.
I think Nikki has done a fine job with the reporting, for the general public that wouldn’t get fair and equal information either way… So good job Nikki….
Screw the LA Times, that paper will go under in a few years….
A TV Fan
“The LA Times has a statement from one of the 102 below the line crew members fired from The Office.
A grip’s view of the strike”
Try and take that Grip’s mandatory time and a half or meal penalties that he counts on away and he’d strike for just as long as the writers.
The Los Angeles Daily News had absolutely ZERO coverage of the Fox rally in Saturday morning’s paper. Nice article, though, on a charred tree in the Buckweed Fire that resembles (supposedly) the Virgin Mary!
Forget the LA Times, I am shocked at the piss-poor coverage that indiewire has done on the strike. Do independents really think the strike doesn’t affect them? Or is this simply an indication that indiewire doesn’t really have a staff capable of sustained coverage of anything besides Sundance?
Everyone:
As much as a lot of folks in L.A. (including me) understand and support the issues the guild is striking over, hardly anyone outside of hardline WGA members (with some exceptions) felt this was something to literally strike over. Better would’ve been: keep talking, reach a deal (whenever that may’ve been) and pay retroactively back to 11-1-07. But we should not have walked out. That way, everyone in town would’ve won. Fact is: nobody cares about writers except other writers. Sorry. That’s just true. I am a writer, I should know. I see it all the time. In fact, each day that ticks by, we writers get resented more.
Thanks for the update. I am cancelling my subscription and making sure my office cancels it’s subscription too.
Gotta agree with this point…
The LA Times is a pretty terrible newspaper and its taken a well-deserved circulation hit in recent years, apparently greater than the average circulation drop newspapers have been seeing in general.
It’s biases are well-known and very well-covered in the blogosphere. Check out patterico.com for a near daily dose of catching the LA Times red-handed in one falsehood or another – falsehoods they often acknowledge and then refuse to correct.
The L.A. Times is biased and misinformed? What about the New York Times, which features this statement on its “special coverage of the Writers Strike” web page: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/w/writers_guild_of_america/index.html
Huh? Maybe top A-listers occasionally earn that much, but the rest is absurd. I remember when this appeared in the NYT months ago (and was derided). Now it’s included in the permanent text that appears online here. Why don’t they correct it?
So from what I’m getting is Strike > Pakistan..nice to know :rollseyes:
Wow. Pointing out that the strike is going to have huge consequences in Los Angeles, as well as California, in terms of financial and job losses, somehow translates to Strike > Pakistan? Please. The fact remains that, on top of the recent devastating fires, the state faces huge losses if the strike is not settled soon.
And for all the people saying that we’re striking for raises: the AMPTP actually offered us page after page after page of rollbacks. Their terms would have forced the guild to raise the minimum for health insurance, for instance, which means that many writers would have lost their coverage completely. They wanted to roll back residuals as well. The contract offer was so ludicrous that it even demanded that the AMPTP be able to keep writers’ names off any publicity materials. What is the point of that, other than minimizing the role and importance of writers even further than they already have? There was nothing in their offer to say yes to.
The quote I’m referring to in my comment about the New York Times is this one:
The writer of a major film studio release can expect a paycheck of at least $1 million, according to union members[].
Here’s the deal, Nikki:
Newspapers don’t want to cover labor issues. The hypocrites have their own issues with the Newspaper Guild.
Newspaper writers face the same issues of payment and use of their “content” in “multiple platforms.”
Is anyone at The Times, for example, being paid to blog?
Not to disagree, but the LAT doesn’t cover labor well. The supermarket workers strike got far fewer stories (admittedly much of the LAT’s coverage of the WGA has been in soft news and snippets online) and that strike involved more workers and covered a bigger geographic area.
One of the most interesting things I have come across during discussions about the strike is how many of my more conservative friends are pro-WGA than the supposed liberal ones. I was actually shocked to hear people who have always professed to be more compassionate to the struggles of labor spewing imaginary class hatred while the more conservative ones looked at the facts and went, “go writers”.
I stopped the LATimes years ago since they only seem to write to impress each other rather than writing the facts.
I t appears the writers have unrealistic expectations as it relates to the press. The fact is there is not enough interest and it is not being reported as you would have hoped. Unfortunately the writers have been played by their own union that has failed you on many levels.
This is a ½ strike. I say that because while it is causing significant disruptions in TV it has had zero effect on films. Now you’re attacking Ellen when every major movie actor has been rushing to lockdown a film gig and your own membership was rushing to get scripts in to keep their careers and financing going while you are out of work.
The producers are clearly in no hurry to get back to the table and seem to be looking forward to dealing with the adults in the room, the DGA. Had the WGA waited until June they would have been part of a global movement of all the unions and would have truly shut down the entire industry. A more likely scenario is that as that deadline approached it would have been settled without a strike.
Has anybody read Disney’s most recent financials? The strike was a mere footnote and clearly has not caused even a ripple on Wall Street. Unfortunately, Wall Street is where you need to make waves.
I am not a writer but do support your cause. Everything I’ve learned in the past few weeks leads me to believe that you are absolutely right and deserve everything you’re asking for. Especially an increase in DVD residuals that your negotiators took off the table before the strike. To make a move like that and not stay at the table just doesn’t make sense.
So wait, some of you are saying that… because the Times isn’t what it should be, because they never do the job they should, that I should somehow forgive their lousy, insufficient coverage of THIS STORY? So, basically, they always suck, so keep your subscription and continue to expect the worst? HUH?
Or… that lots of people disagreeing with the reasons behind the WGA strike is somehow AN EXCUSE for the Times to give sub-par coverage to a 4-thousand strong WGA rally in an entertainment company town?! Say what? Disagreement makes for good stories. Even a high school journalism student knows that.
The Times may’ve long been a lousy excuse for a major metropolitan newspaper, but if people don’t stop buying it, it will never change.
The Times has ignored every significant issue in town for 30 years. US Steel and GM left? So what-they run an article on rising industry–in India. County Govt is a graft-ridden entity that appears to exist only for the unions? The Times reports on corrupt judges–in Nevada. The Times people are all from NY or wish they were writing there. LA schools? They can’t stay focused on them. They blew every major call in the past 30 years: Prop 13; Three Strikes, the Davis recall, etc. So the writer’s strike? The Times yawns. Office space, coffee shops, school tuition, people’s lives are being wrenched left and right: I wish you all luck. I am not a writer or producer but I can see how big this is. The mayor ought to be hammering both sides right now.
Thank god the LA Times is focusing on actual world issues, instead of the petty greed involved in the strike.