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.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







“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.