There were rumors all weekend about how the AMPTP wasn’t making its second half of the offer, and how the WGA wasn’t making a New Media counter-offer. Both proved to be false, thankfully. So here’s the reality. The WGA has been informed that the AMPTP is indeed on Tuesday going to make the second-half of its proposal when contract talks resume for Talks Day #5. And the WGA will indeed make a counter-offer tomorrow.
I’m told by a WGA board member tonight that the writers’ negotiating team have agreed they will accept the approach of the networks and studios and use a flat rate “with modifications” (with numbers that will be much much higher) while trying to come to terms with the producers on streaming. The flat rate could wind up being a good change-up in the long-term. As an AMPTP insider explained to me when I asked why they moved off a percentage, “The reason we went with a flat-rate for streaming is because they’re always complaining about our funny accounting, so we thought rather than give them a percentage of a percentage of funny accounting, we’ll give them a flat rate.” (Point here is that even the studios know their accounting is bogus.)
The WGA’s board and negotiating team visited the picket lines today to explain to members how they planned to respond in Tuesday’s resumed talks about the AMPTP’s hilariously titled New Economic Partnership made last Thursday regarding streaming, content made for new media and programming delivered over digital broadcast channels. (Left is David Goodman, WGA negotiator and board member, holding an informational meeting for strikers at Paramount. Photo by Jim Stevenson.)
It wasn’t exactly helpful to the goal of ending the strike last week when the producers attempted to lowball the writers with an insulting offer on New Media and inflame a volatile situation where the studios and networks keep holding back the semi-decent deal they know, and the writers know, could move these negotiations closer to a speedy settlement. Nor was it helpful when the WGA not surprisingly threw a temper tantrum within minutes of receiving the lousy offer. But I received a call from an AMPTP insider suddenly realizing that perhaps his organization had not used the most productive of negotiating tactics this time. He asked quietly, “Have you heard if the WGA is going to make a counter-offer on Tuesday? They understand that this is just a starting point for negotiations, right?”
Well, apparently, the WGA does. Hallelujah. Let the haggling begin.
Back when even the pre-strike talks were going on, the major criticism I’ve heard from both the AMPTP and the WGA is that the other side won’t haggle. One side makes a proposal, the other side simply says no. And vice versa. There’s no back and forth.
Until now.
Just as the WGA was issuing emails urging all its members to join in union solidarity, the AMPTP took out full-page ads in tomorrow’s trades trying to sound all conciliatory. Since there’s no wall between editorial and advertising at either Variety or The Hollywood Reporter — toldja! – both trades had early access to the ad.
The showbiz papers claim the gist of the AMPTP ad is that this latest proposal isn’t a ”take-it-or-leave-it” offer. “It is designed to allow both sides to engage in the kind of substantive give-and-take negotiation that can lead to common ground. The WGA leadership asked for five days to respond. So with the ball in the WGA’s court, we look forward to what they have to say when we meet today.” [However, the WGA claims it was the AMPTP that suggested both sides get back to the talks on Tuesday. So right there is a squabble.] “This is not a zero-sum campaign where there is one winner and one loser,” it said. “We need the writers and the writers need us. And we need to work together if we are to navigate the rapids of this increasingly complex, high-tech economy.”
That’s all well and good. But consider what a Hollywood mogul told me by way of summing up the negotiations so far, “We’re tough, and they’re stupid.” And consider what a WGA board member emailed to members this afternoon about ‘The Playbook Of The AMPTP’. Again, I ask, how is this helpful? I’m constantly reminding both sides that Hollywood is a collaborative business, and that the archetypical union movie screenplay Norma Rae was greenlighted by a studio. Obviously it may be too much to ask that the resumed talks, which started under friendlier circumstances last week, take place this week in a less acrimonious atmosphere. Cuz these guys can’t get along for 5 minutes.
First there was the pre-strike bickering over the chairs. Then the site of the negotiations. Late last week, the AMPTP and WGA found a whole new set of ridiculous issues to argue over that have nothing to do with the substance of the contract negotiations or even the strike. Really, I’m getting fed up here. Starting Thursday and continuing over the weekend, they argued incessantly over whether the news blackout was violated. And they argued just as ferociously over who first suggested the WGA have until Tuesday to counter-offer. I refused to report the ins and outs of this because it’s irrelevent and it makes my head hurt. Such petty squabbling has to stop. This minute. Shut up.
Now both sides can argue all they want about flat rates tomorrow. (That just makes my eyes glaze over.) And remember, the operative word here is, “Haggle”.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







This negotiation is between the media congloms and the WGA. To think that these massive companies will not have their own presense on the internet is pollyana-ish. The issue remains, will they use Guild writers when they do. If not, the WGA will go away. Why would Google and Yahoo use Guild writers if the big media giants won’t?
The studios want to remain competitive in the net. I get that. Here’s an idea… For all low budget ventures on the net (say under $1.5 million), no guild jurisdiction. For anything above that, WGA minimums, pension, health, etc. will apply. That will keep the media congloms from creating big content (like TV shows) for the net without paying us. But will also allow them to experiment and compete with the smaller ventures on the net. Simple, no?
Sorry, no. The writers’ proposals represent the bare minimum of what constitutes a fair deal in 2007. I won’t accept a contract that “haggles” them down to some fraction.
chammax, you are missing the point.
Right now the congloms control television and every part of it, the internet is like the wild west to them. If not google, then facebook tv, or someother site that hasn’t been conceived yet.
You are right the networks will have a presence on the net, they just won’t be the ONLY presence, and that scares them.
Google cannot be bought, what’s to stop another company to come up and generate the same kind of financial wearwithal as google. Call me polly-anna all you want, but this is the nets biggest fear, as they recognize the future is all about content and marketing and not about distribution.
You are missing the point, this isn’t about low-budget content, or high-budget content. This is all about the power of distribution…if anything the AMPTP should be begging the WGA to deal with them on Internet so they can control giving them a small piece of the pie. If the writers are smart THEY TAKE ORIGINAL CONTENT ON THE INTERNET OFF THE TABLE, and let the market dictate what their percentages are.
In an open market for content these minimums are going to mean a hill of beans in 10 years, as writers will be pitching directly to Lexus, Proctor & Gamble, Starbucks, etc…for their series ideas.
Remember television exists because of advertising. Original programming is a by-product of companies needing to sell shit. Networks exist because of ADVERTISING DOLLARS and they aren’t going to give that up…so what do you do as a creator…GO GET THE MONEY YOURSELVES!!!
With television distribution is controlled by a handful of people, with the Internet it is controlled by the creators.
This whole negotiations is an exercise in futility since the points being discussed about jurisdiction isn’t going to mean anything in a decade. You want to see the future, look up IPTV.
Dear SS,
Your claims that men are inferior and women superior would be offensive if they weren’t so utterly ridiculous. My husband, brothers, father and most of the men I know or have known are nothing like the bizarre portrait that you have painted.
As for women being superior, look in any history book and you’ll find that women are just as likely to abuse their power as men. Take a monent to examine the legacies of Catherine the Great, Tz’u His, Ranavalona I, Agrippina the Younger, Valeria Messalina, Elena Ceausescu, Queen Mary I, Isabella of Castile, etc., etc., etc., and then explain to us how and why women are superior to men.
Sincerely,
wifeofWGAwriter
Agent,
With all due respect, I get the point. What I’m talking about is the future of our guild. Jurisdiction is key to any and all of the guilds. To say that the internet will be “the wild wild west” forever and will exclude major congloms is, I think, short sighted. The congloms will use the internet just like small businesses (including us writers). Jurisdiction means that when the congloms want to use us for their big projects (like tv shows made for the internet), they must include the guild. It preserves our middle class. And it’s worth the fight… for as long as it takes.
Again you are not hearing (or reading) me:
1. I never said the Internet will “exclude” the major congloms. What I am saying is right now they are the ONLY show in town when it comes to original programming. With the Internet, they are in competition with whatever new entity that pops up.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t have the money to start a brodcast or cable network, nor the reach. I do however have access to enough money to get advertising for Internet (in its current state) programming.
2. The fact that you are only looking at the “Internet” as something the congloms roll out for their “small businesses” shows you are completely missing the point.
The future is an all broadband, wireless platform. The distribution system isn’t going to be network signals, satellites, cable, antennas (at least coat hanger types). The future is delivery over what we now call the Internet (which is an outdated term). IPTV, VOD, its all going to be one giant package.
You won’t tune into ABC, NBC, CBS, etc…entertainment will come in bundles with no timeslots, and personalized advertising. The WGA is looking at the Internet as an ancillary solution rather than THE SOLUTION.
What you need to stop doing is worrying about the future of the guild, and start worrying about the future of entertainment.
I know several employees at Apple, Google, Yahoo, etc…who could give two shits about the unions and they seem to be doing pretty damn well.
Dear Blah Blah Blah,
You’ve obviously read my “Zoe, Duncan, Jack and Jane” drafts so I will not bother to defend my writing skills, or the lack thereof. However, I am proud to have been a member of the guild for 10 years and my current deal with ABC Studios is under suspension so I feel like I’m part of “us” even though you have deemed me unworthy of guild membership status due to one alleged meeting wherein I was a showrunner and did not give you a job. I say “alleged” because I don’t know who you are as you do not have the courage to stand behind your mutilated grammar and reveal your identity.
Perhaps you could offer a cogent argument as to how we solve this crisis? Instead of taking shots at me and my admittedly less than stellar writing acumen, why not be part of the solution and present something that moves the process forward instead of being a whiny bitch who clearly lacks the c.v. to enter the fray and try to make a difference.
Lastly, I was not trying to be funny in any of my posts including this one, as quite frankly I fail to see the humor in this entire fiasco.
“What you need to stop doing is worrying about the future of the guild, and start worrying about the future of entertainment.”
You make my point. Right there. The WGA is there for the working class writer. Providing health benefits and retirement. In this “wild west” that is the internet, we want that money paid to us, as writers, whether we develop it on our own, or work for some huge media conglomerate. If the capital investment is big enough (no matter who invests it) — the investors need to share the wealth, no matter hoe it is distributed!
I do realize the future is the internet. I also know that TV shows will be made for the internet. When they hire me o any other writer to write for one of these shows, the need to pay my guild. They need to support the other working class writers who are between jobs. End of story. I’m sorry you don’t get that. I understand you. Loud and clear.
Agent,
I am aware of the issues. And I know that one day, the show I am working for may suddenly become a made for the internet program. Gone are pesion and health contributions for the struggling writers who have come before me. So, when I sell my future show to Fox or Google or whomever, I’ll make sure they are a signatory to my WGA. So they will keep the pension and health plans alive for whomever needs them. Thanks for all your support.