UPDATES with AMPTP response today.
We already know that SAG offered a counter-proposal to the AMPTP’s supposed “final” offer. For once, SAG and the AMPTP agree on the reasons why. Today, the AMPTP said the Screen Actors Guild’s chief negotiator told the Big Media cartel’s negotiating committee that he could not accept AMPTP’s offer because the digital media “landscape has dramatically shifted in the six months since the DGA” reached its deal. The Screen Actors Guild also gave that reason today — and explained why by issuing a very intriguing White Paper on its website entitled, “It’s Not New Media – It’s NOW Media” showing why the AMPTP’s latest New Media offer isn’t good enough. It’s an index of significant events and deals in entertainment media technology made since January 2008 when the DGA-AMPTP deal tried to set “the template” for all the guild negotiations. “The index shows a sizable increase in technology investments, new deals, unique platforms and dramatic market forces at work,” SAG says.
For its part, the AMPTP said today that SAG “ignores the truly seismic shifts we have all seen over the last six months in the rapidly deteriorating economy, the worsening credit crisis, and the skyrocketing price of energy.” This, even though most Big Media moguls said publicly at Camp Allen that the downturn wasn’t affecting their biz. But the big actor’s union answers that charge in its White Paper. It also quotes a Forbes article written as recently as June 2008 explaining why pricing for display advertising next to user-generated content has collapsed. And rates on Facebook, MySpace and YouTube etc have fallen 45% since February 2008. ”Most of the momentum now is for ads within full episodes run on the TV network sites, such as NBC and Fox’s Hulu, ABC.com and CBS.com. It’s a format advertisers understand,” the magazine said.
So what’s the AMPTP’s next argument? That SAG members are losing out by continuing to be paid under the old contract during this stalemate when they could be earning under the new one. Not very persuasive that — especially after the AMPTP continually chided the WGA for NOT having continued to negotiate instead of striking! Sure sounds like SAG has the most leverage by just waiting, and waiting, and waiting…
Here’s the full text of an email SAG sent its members today:
Dear Screen Actors Guild Member,
I want to tell you why your national negotiating committee has not accepted the June 30 offer put across the table by the Alliance of Motion Pictures and Television Producers (AMPTP) For one reason and one reason only: It’s not a good offer. It doesn’t address enough of your priorities (as outlined in past SAG Contract 2008 Reports), particularly in new media.The AMPTP ‘s current offer to SAG, which is nearly the same for new media as the deals that the DGA, WGA and AFTRA accepted, has come to be called “the template.” Some of you may be wondering why we don’t just agree to the template established by the other unions. The template doesn’t protect actors, and while we may be the last union to come to the table, we still have the obligation to address the issues that are most important to you.
We have had the extra time to effectively assess the impact of rapid technological and marketplace changes, and after careful analysis, we don’t believe the template works for SAG members. In the six months since the Directors Guild of America reached a deal with the AMPTP, the landscape in digital media has dramatically shifted. The seven global conglomerates that own the motion picture studios and television networks are so confident in digital media prospects, that they are putting up huge dollars to fast track their technology deals.
The DGA and WGA represent writers and directors, not actors. Their resolution of the new media issues may work for them, but they don’t address your specific needs. The DGA and WGA agreed to allow producers to make new media productions entirely non-union, at the producers’ option, for projects below budgets of $15,000 per minute (effectively, almost all new media productions for the foreseeable future.)
Most union directors and writers don’t have to worry about large non-union pools of trained and talented competitors, but union actors do. Non-union principal and background actors already compete for your jobs, especially outside of New York and California. It makes no sense for SAG to agree to allow the studios and networks to exacerbate our problem by giving them a pass to produce entirely non-union under a SAG union contract. We are a union, and our mission and obligation to all of our members nationwide is to promote union jobs.
Another example of how the new media template negatively impacts actors is its effect on residuals. The AMPTP’s recent offer to SAG doesn’t include residuals for programs made for new media and streamed again on ad-supported new media platforms. So a program originally made for ABC.com could be available for re-viewing on ABC.com, or any other ad-supported Internet outlet, as often as possible and forever with no residuals, no matter how much money is generated or how many times it is shown. (There is one minor exception if a program is made for and re-run on a pay platform like iTunes and the budget is more than $25,000 per minute.)
Just as we have shown we can work successfully with low-budget filmmakers, we are flexible and can accommodate fledgling new media productions under SAG contracts. We have offered to base made-for new media residuals on a percentage of revenue with no fixed obligation. If there is no money generated, no residuals are paid. But if revenue is generated from programs available over time, actors should receive residual payments.
So far, management’s negotiators have rejected SAG’s reasonable solution, while management’s proposal could mean the beginning of the end of residuals. What some among our employers – the major global media conglomerates — insist on terming “new media” it’s really “now media.” It is urgent, instant and immediate. That’s why achieving a fair compensation formula now, in all forms of media, and confirming jurisdiction from the first dollar of the production budget, are core objectives of the SAG national negotiating committee. [Click here to downlink the full version of our “Now Media” white paper including the index of recent new media entertainment developments.]
Your national negotiating committee takes its responsibility very seriously. We want to make a deal as soon as possible, but we don’t want to make a deal that hurts actors. No deal is better than a bad deal that allows non-union productions by our employers and snuffs out residuals for projects made for and rerun on new media platforms. We don’t need to experiment on the backs of actors. Our real world and practical experience has taught us how to provide union benefits and protections in low budget productions.
Management’s resistance is frustrating but we have to be patient. The stakes are too high to concede jurisdiction and residuals for programs made for new media. That future is now and, if we ignore it, it will pass actors by and this generation and future generations of actors will never recover.
Thank you for your understanding and your solidarity.
Doug Allen, National Executive Director and Chief NegotiatorP.S. For anyone who thinks that is a hypothetical and distant future, this is what the business magazine Forbes said in a June 2008 article about YouTube: “The vast majority of YouTube’s library is…babies laughing and dogs splashing in wading pools… Pricing for display advertising next to user-generated content has collapsed. Rates on sites such as Facebook, MySpace and YouTube have fallen 45% since February (’08), to 18 cents per thousand page views, according to digital analytics outfit PubMatic. Most of the momentum now, says Chris B. Allen, director of video innovation at media buyer Starcom is for ads within full episodes run on the TV network sites, such as NBC and Fox’s Hulu, ABC.com and CBS.com. It’s a format advertisers understand.”
Click here to download the full text of our white paper “It’s Not New Media – It’s NOW Media.” And to see an index of significant events and deals in entertainment media technology since January 2008, when the DGA-AMPTP deal tried to set “the template.” The index shows a sizable increase in technology investments, new deals, unique platforms and dramatic market forces at work.
Here’s the AMPTP statement From today:
“Today, SAG’s chief negotiator said he could not accept AMPTP’s offer because the digital media “landscape has dramatically shifted in the six months since the DGA” reached its deal. This statement is not just factually untrue; it ignores the truly seismic shifts we have all seen over the last six months in the rapidly deteriorating economy, the worsening credit crisis, and the skyrocketing price of energy. Even in the midst of these severe economic problems for our country and our industry, AMPTP has made SAG a good and fair offer, with more than $250 million in increased compensation, groundbreaking new media rights, and pension and health protections that most Americans would envy.
By refusing to accept the AMPTP’s offer, SAG’s negotiators are ensuring that SAG members will continue to work indefinitely under the old contract – a contract negotiated by SAG that has allowed for non-union Internet production since 2001. AMPTP has offered to extend SAG jurisdiction to original new media production, including low-budget programs that employ a single “covered actor.” The AMPTP’s final offer also guarantees residuals of 3.6% of distributor’s gross when original new media productions are reused on consumer pay platforms, and terms to increase pay and residuals if the program is eventually exhibited theatrically or on television. These terms are a major advancement for SAG members compared to the existing contract terms.
In addition, the new media framework we have offered to SAG establishes first-ever residuals for ad-supported streaming, made-for new media programs and reuse of clips in new media. We have also offered to double the residual rate for permanent downloads and give SAG exclusive jurisdiction over new media programs derived from existing television series. Not a single one of these rights exists under the contract that expired on June 30th – a contract that SAG members now must work under because of the failure of SAG negotiators to make a deal.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.


What’s this? SAG is striking out first. Finally. Give ‘em hell!
Doug Allen’s e-mail to SAG members gets across what seems to have been somehow missed in trade punditry relating to SAG’s contract. SAG has consistently been vilified by the AMPTP, AFTRA, and members of the other unions, including its own, as well as endless angry bloggers on this and other sites. My own personal belief, is that the more you truly understand the gaps in the AFTRA contract everyone is trying to shove down SAG’s throat, the clearer it becomes that SAG simply cannot accept this deal, no matter how inconvenient it may be to the needs of other union members, or the AMPTP, or ancillary businesses that suffer if SAG strikes, as real and serious as those concerns are.
SAG’S negotiating committee’s obligation is first, last and always, to the membership of the UNION. Outside concerns must come in a distant second. If the UNION is truly threatened, as it is in this current anti-SAG environment, it is our leaders solemn obligation to explain to membership and everyone else effected, why we cannot accept this deal. This proposed contract, if accepted as is, essentially spells the end of residuals as SAG actors know it. Doug Allen’s e-mail to SAG members today spells out that this is not “new media” it is “NOW MEDIA” and that actors are already being cut out of their formerly protected content approval and compensation (residuals) on streaming web sites such as Hulu, Veoh, MySpace and many others. Why the AMPTP won’t agree to a fair percentage of ALL new media revenue, from both new and old content, and why they insist on a non-union space in new media (content made for less than 15 grand per minute, essentially, ALL content they would make, because it would be easy for them to meet that price using non-union actors), is obvious: the AMPTP wants to set a precedent that allows them to exploit new media at the expense of the UNION ACTOR. AFTRA has allowed themselves to be trapped into this environment already by accepting their AMPTP offer. SAG must NOT do the same. This is an immediate threat to the livelihood of the working actor – not 5 years from now, but now, already. I ask all of SAG’s most influential members, the stars, to rally behind the negotiating committee, and their fellow SAG actors, and support rejection of this contract, and show PUBLICLY you are willing to strike in necessary to get a FAIR contract for SAG actors.
It’s pretty obvious from the list. The mogels want everybody to work for free…or wait…this just in from some sniveling Harvard MBA nephew…let’s get the actors, writers, directors and the like to PAY US for projects. That way, we have a duel income stream from the get-go. Thank god SAG is finally showing some muscle.
Has the S.A.G. leadership abandoned the demands for increased DVD residuals? The members deserve to know.
I don’t see how this changes anything. Unless you can get the 75% strike vote nothing changes. Send out the contract and see where the members line up here.
Information is power. It’s about time SAG negotiators start releasing rock solid information as to exactly why they are holding out – and in digestable, understandable terms. It is hard to rally the troups unless you give them something they can rally around. I think Doug did a good job of that in this email. They can’t send out a 10 page memorandum and expect everyone to actually read it. This was perfect – one thing at a time, with details, in easy to understand terms. KEEP IT UP SAG – I think a lot more people are finally starting to get what is at stake here, and starting to understand what a crappy deal AFTRA sold their membership out for.
So it’s clear that the moguls aren’t going to change their position and, from this position paper, it’s clear that SAG wants considerably more than the last mogul offer. So is there any sense in more bargaining? SAG needs to keep up with its PR campaign to the media and its members and then ask for strike authorization. Do they need 75% yes for strike authorization? Does anybody see any other strategy?
Fine you win, strike. Just stop all the back and forth and call for a strike.
Finally! I wonder how much ink the AMPTP’s internal newsletter (Variety) will give to these essential issues. (That’s a rhetorical question, btw)
How can the AMPTP talk about SAG ignoring the skyrocketing cost of energy when the producers are still paying us the same mileage reimbursement rate they paid in 1980?
YAY SAG !!!! STAY STRONG !!!!!!!
A $250 million dollar contract over the course of 3 years. Let me see, isn’t that about what Batman will gross in 3 DAYS ?
How very generous indeed. Divided up between hundreds of thousands of members that’s what, maybe $30.00 each?
SAG is right here, and I’m astonished to see how many of it’s own members can’t see that.
Peggy Lane O’Rourke
proud SAG member
AFTRA member
AEA member
SAG makes some surprisingly good arguments. Distinctions between SAG’s interests and what has been accepted by the other guilds is an important topic of which time bashing AFTRA would have been better spent.
In addition, AMPTP’s comments are surprisingly weak. They also attempt to be addressing too many different people in their statement. They should have only addressed SAG members, other related industry, or the public, but not have attempted to address all three.
One statement for one audience. SAG won this battle of the press releases.
I do hope the tide is turning in terms of people realizing that a strike may be necessary. It has been really unfair the way the other unions’ members have acted like we should just accept the same deal they took.
Actors have unique issues – largely stemming from the fact that unlike writers and directors our FACES are our product. We are in front of the camera which limits us and ties us to product integration and projects in a way that writers and directors don’t have to worry about. We get over exposed by being re-run a thousand times or limited in our commercial opportunities and that means a big hit for our paycheck if we are not getting paid for that exposure and product placement. Writers and directors can go to the well many times because they are behind the camera. It was ALWAYS unfair to expect us to take the same deal without significant modifications that take into account actors’ realities.
As for AFTRA – I wish someone could come up with a viable way for us to all leave at one time. TV/Film actors should have a separate union from other broadcasters, radio, etc. I voted AFTRA’s contract down and it makes me sick how little they value their union members’ needs and how ridiculously they are willing to sell us out time and again to undercut SAG. With a union like AFTRA willing to put you in the poorhouse, you might as well be non-union. I agree with whoever said SAG should kick AFTRA out of the joint office space if possible. AFTRA is no friend to the actor.
Help us SAG, you’re our only hope!
O.K., I guess I’ll be called a “shill” for this one. Can anyone answer the question why actors seem to have such an entitlement issue?
Sam, anyone who produces work of any kind for a trillion-dollar conglomerate has an “entitlement” to be paid for it, no what AFTRA or the DGA negotiate.
Actually Sam, the post just above yours by SAG actor explains it quite well. Maybe it wasn’t up yet, when you posted.
For every movie you see or tv show you watch there is one director, perhaps one, two or three writers credited, and how many actors? In a film maybe 100 or more and we ALL share in the residual PERCENTAGE. That’s 100 people dividing up the pot.
Again, that’s one director, one or more writers, ( usually no more than 4 ), and a whole lot of actors. Residuals are the life blood of any actor, and without them , well, we might as well all do theatre.
There’s a lot of money in that right?
The apocalypse must be nigh [grin] because Harold finally agrees with us on one point…the AMPTP clearly loses this round to SAG in the PR battle.
That said Harold’s PR campaign approach “They should have only addressed SAG members, other related industry, or the public, but not have attempted to address all three” [in one press release]? Well that is exactly what has been getting the AMPTP into trouble for months now.
See, this new media stuff is not like broadcast in that a few people control a medium and send a message out a bunch of others cannot respond to and that message can be relied upon to stay in only one venue. Thanks to the internet and the World Wide Web, you can respond to the intended to be ‘one way’ messages plus you can aggregate the information and the messages from all these sources, put them together like a jigsaw puzzle, and you can communicate with all of the other supposedly limited audiences and compare notes on those messages.
And when actors, other industry members and the public are comparing those inconsistent messages, and sharing them with legislators, bureaucrats, investors and shareholders, well that is exactly where the AMPTP and the companies hiding behind it are losing the information war. If the AMPTP had picked one message called THE TRUTH and stuck to it no matter who the audience was they wouldn’t look so damned foolish right now to so many people.
But that’s what comes of telling tales out of school, you stop being believed. Next comes people leaving you out of the equation…
My union, SAG, is definitely on top of the NOW Media issue. As it happened just before the period set for the Now Media analysis, it wasn’t listed, but it’s also interesting to note that NBC-U bragged they were going to make $1B in ’08 off New Media as well.
The most basic fact about media consumption today is that a screen is a screen is a screen. Actors deserve to be properly compensated for their work, whether it’s destined for the big screen, the TV screen, a computer screen, a handheld screen, some other kind of screen or projection device, or some combination thereof. We can’t let the AMPTP sell us this Animal Farm notion that some screens are more equal than others.
As for the AMPTP’s pointing out the obvious about the overall economy, the silver lining for them is that going out to the movies is cheaper than hitting the road this summer, and increased box office attendance and revenues are the proof of this. Television ratings and DVD/VOD rentals are also likely to spike this Fall because staying in and watching TV is cheaper than most evening entertainment outside the home.
The moguls are benefitting from the lousy economy they’re whining about, and unfortunately for the country but fortunately for them, projections are that we’re nowhere the worst of it yet, so the big media companies will continue to do quite well through the Depression 2.0. They can damn well afford to pay working actors a decent wage and residuals.
It’s amazing to me what this e-mail from doug allen and the list of new media deals since the dga “template” have been made, have done. those of us advocating sag’s cause on this blog and everywhere else, have been lone voices, as we have been shouted at and shouted down. we have been waiting for the leadership to present what’s happening and what it means, in a clear concise way, that everyone, especially sag members, can understand. and now, I sense, the tide is turning. there is no easy road ahead, the amptp will surely bluster their way through yet another arrogant response, and continue to stonewall. but, sag members particular needs notwithstanding, I sense all the creative unions, once again, are beginning to get their backs up when faced with the lies and distortions of the conglomerates who make us all dance like puppets. we’re happy to dance like puppets, but you have to PAY OUR WOODEN ASSES. as it becomes clearer and clearer that the producers want to clear the internet space of distractions such as paying the people who make the content, and using increasing non-union people to avoid the whole “pay people” thing, EVERYONE, creative union members, regular people who just read about this in their paper across the country, are returning to that eternal truth that, sure as the sun will rise, never changes: ownership will screw labor EVERY SINGLE TIME. this “new media” space is another MASSIVE opportunity to do just that, and, so far? they’ve been sliding by, in the aftermath of the WGA strike, siting lost revenues and vilifying sag for being obstinent and outrageous in their demands, and people, by and large, have been buying it. but, as the facts come out, we see it is the PRODUCERS who are being unreasonable, the PRODUCERS who are exploiting the unions, pitting one against the other, then sitting back and laughing at us, the PRODUCERS who know they are ONE CONTRACT AWAY from wrapping this whole thing up, setting precedents in all the creative unions that will work to both the AMPTP’s short term and long term benefit, while depriving the creative unions out of their fair share of internet revenue. it’s simple – all the creative unions should have a percentage of ALL INTERNET REVENUE, both original and reuse. that protects the producers, and it protects the creative unions by it’s fairness and simplicity: you make 100 million? we get X percent. you make 10 dollars? we still make X percent. the fact that they won’t agree to that tells you all you need to know, and exposes the soft white underbelly of their lies and hypocrisy. sag needs to get it right – for everyone.
Peggy Lane O’Rourke. You’re goofy takes never disappoint. You brought up Warner Bros. massive windfall on Batman, but neglect to mention their massive loss on Speed Racer. Cherry picking facts is not the way to construct an argument
The tide is turning. SAG members are beginning to understand the issues in this new contract, because their leadership is finally explaining it to them in simple, real world terms. No one wants to strike. No one wants to suffer financial hardship (more than they already are), but it has become clear exactly WHY SAG must reject this deal, and strike if necessary. The AMPTP has conned AFTRA into agreeing to a deal that allows a huge space in new media for non-union production. That means the AMPTP can, and will, use non-union talent to make original content. They will pay those actors a low wage, with no Pension and Health contributions (no union to contribute to) and no residuals. Ever. Those non-union actors will have NONE of the workplace protections SAG actors have: breaks, meals (they’ll say “bring your own lunch and eat it when you’re not on camera”), meal penalties (going too long before a meal break, which kicks in extra money to the actors for overworking them), turnaround (SAG actors get 12 hours – minimum – before they can be called back to work – you work till 2am? – common on both movies and TV – - you can’t be called back to set until 12 hours after you wrap). You get hurt on a non-union set? You’re on your own. They will have had you sign a liability waiver clearing them of any responsibility if you get hurt. IF you have health insurance (which you won’t through your union because you won’t have a union), you’ll be lucky. If your injury forces you to miss a few days work? You’ll have no union protection and they’ll fire you and get someone else. If you are disabled by your accident? You’re on your own. There is disability help if you’re SAG. These are just a FEW of the ways the AMPTP can and will exploit the HUGE non-union space in the contract AFTRA agreed to. So, SAG wants, and must have COMPLETE jurisdiction, so union actors don’t have to compete with non-union actors, which will increase exponentially. Actors, as opposed to writers and directors, already face non-union competition: you audition to play the Dad in that Disney TV series? They “love you,” but, since they’re shooting it in a “right to work” state, say, Utah, they hire a non-union actor, who does the job for a fraction of your cost, with none of the benefits, and none of the residuals. SAG cannot VOLUNTEER to INCREASE that competition. It’s INSANE for a union to do that. Under the proposed contract? – All original programming for “new media”? NO RESIDUALS. All reuse for “new media”? NO RESIDUALS. This is happening NOW, already. There is tons of content that previously would have been subject to an actors consent for use, and then a payment to the actor (residual) that, under this new media landscape is ON LINE RIGHT NOW FOR FREE. NO RESIDUALS. Once media companies start making original movies and TV under their NEW NAMES? CBS.com, NBC.com, Paramount.com, Universal.com. Showtime.com, HBO.com? They will be subject ONLY to the provisions of the deal AFTRA has already agreed to, and SAG is fighting off – NO RESIDUALS. All the creative unions will benefit if the negative energy and rightful anger after the WGA strike, and all the anger over lost revenue, starts to go where it truly belongs – THE PRODUCERS. THE PRODUCERS are causing the delays by not agreeing to a fair deal with SAG. What’s a “fair deal”? Simple: complete jurisdiction for all new media (no massive non-union space to be exploited by the suits), and a PERCENTAGE OF ALL REVENUE FOR BOTH ORIGINAL AND REUSE. SAG gets X % of 100 million, or, SAG gets X % of 10 bucks – whatever the producers make. Protects them, protects us. Simple, and, it’s clearly fair. Same should be true for the DGA and the WGA. WHY won’t the AMPTP agree to such a fair and simple solution? Because they understand they are ONE CONTRACT AWAY from sewing up all the creative unions for good, and they will be free to exploit all the ways they can use non-union talent and save billions of dollars over time in costs saved and not having to pay residuals. SAG MUST STOP THIS FROM HAPPENING. And, if everyone starts directing their anger, their RIGHTEOUS anger, where it belongs – AT THE AMPTP, the AMPTP is going to start feeling an increasingly unbearable strain, and the prospect of unbearable losses if there is a strike. And they KNOW they can end it and get back to work IF THEY GIVE SAG A FAIR “PERCENTAGE” CONTRACT . It’s that simple. Let’s all start e-mailing the members of the AMPTP, let’s all start showing them we SEE their lies and hypocrisy. As sure as the sun will rise: ownership will screw labor. EVERY SINGLE TIME. We have to stop it.
Scott -
I know you’re just trying to distract from the bigger picture, which is that the studios on the whole are doing quite nicely this summer, thank you very much. While arguments may be made for other factors, like the overall quality of this summer’s product, the strongest correlation does appear to be between gas prices – which have curtailed travel for a lot of people – and box office revenues. Going to the movies is cheaper than going to Yellowstone.
On the television side, experts interviewed on KCRW’s The Business pointed out that television ads are still highly valued. If I’m correct in my guess that more people will stay home this Fall and enjoy their big screens rather than going out of the house for more expensive (gas and other costs) food & entertainment, Nielson numbers should track upwards. If the experts I’ve heard and read are correct in their assertion that we haven’t yet seen the worst of the bank failures, inflation, tight money, job losses, and other signs of a severe economic downturn, the trend back to cheaper entertainment like television & DVD/VOD will continue for the next couple of years.
In short, the moguls can afford way more than they’re offering the actors. They know it, and thankfully the leadership at SAG knows it too. Maybe the AMPTP should take SAG’s last and best offer before conditions change again, SAG reassesses the numbers, and asks for more.
MHeister, You don’t know “I’m just trying to distract from the big picture”, I just get tired of Peggy’s weak takes. Your current take, on the other hand is food for thought. Be that as it may, I find it hard to believe that SAG, the most disorganized of the Big Three Guilds, suddenly and finally started researching the New Media and came to conclusions that are more correct than the other, more measured Guilds.
They’re not “more disorganized.” they just have had to fight off AFTRA while AFTRA made a run for the AMPTP and took a deal that made it much, much harder for SAG to get something fair. The DGA did their “research,’ and went and made a shitty deal with the AMPTP, and everyone thinks the DGA is the smartest union. I’d say they are the slickest union. Directors don’t rely NEARLY as much on residuals, so, they ran their numbers through their computer models, then made a deal that is essentially the one the WGA and AFTRA took. But, if you look at the “new media” deals listed ny doug allen of SAg and reprinted by Nikki, you’ll notice – they ALL cam AFTER the DGA made their deal. the producers got the DGA, they figured the WGA would follow suit, which, despite all the sturm and drang and the drama, they did (it’s 1 writer, maybe 2,3 or 4 TOPS splitting a residual payment, it’s 50 actors), and then AFTRA just decided “fuck it – there’s gonna be more jurisdiction more power, more dues money from more membership, if we give the AMPTP what they want. AFTRA was ready and willing to capitulate to the big ticket items to distance themselves from SAG and pay back SAg for not merging twice, and what AFTRA felt was SAG’s lack of respect for AFTRA. Problem is, AFTRA caused the AMPTP to make SAG the union that finally spelled out, through common sense, and their own research, that the AFTRA deal wouldn’t work for SAG and was a clear and present danger to the livlihood of the middle class actor, for all the reasons spelled out above. So to tag SAG as somehow inferior to the DGA is a misnomer. The DGA STARTED this whole thing by being the firs tunion, supposedly the smart, prepared union, to make a deal that became, in the producers mind, as a negotiating hammer, the “template” for the WGA, AFTR and SAG. Problem was, the DGA deal is no good. It’s not even that good for them, but it’s HORRIBLE for SAG. to think SAG should or will accept this conventional wisdom that, because the big, bad DGA made the “template deal” that SAg has to accept it? Well, I think we now see, because of SAG’S RESEARCH, that this “template” is no good for ANY of the creative unions. Once the AMPTP gets the precedent set, it will be a cold day in hell before they allow themselves to be forced to raise, or change that precedent (DVD, VHS). I truly think it jst took this “template” finally getting to SAG for it to be exposed as the sham it is, because SAG was forced to communicate to SAG members, and therefor EVERYONE, why this template is a recipe for disaster.
Scott -
SAG is not necessarily more correct that the other guilds – but it is more tied to the products as what the viewer sees. And SAG doesn’t need new research. Its not even an issue of how much money specifically New Media will make this year or next year (we all know it is making some money and is quickly growing), its an issue that whatever shows the AMPTP or anyone makes in ANY medium actors have a special relationship to the product because we are visible while the DGA, WGA, and IATSE’s members are largely invisible to the general public.
Sure there are some name writer and directors, but even that’s not the same. If someone saw several ads for ET, Jaws, Jurrasic Park, and Schindlers List repeatedly all in one day they probably wouldn’t go – “That Steven Spielberg, so overexposed, I’m so sick of seeing his movies everywhere!” (That analogy would be better if all those films came out in the same year, but go with me here…) And if Steven Spielberg wanted to make a commercial for Twizzlers, people probably wouldn’t say, “But in ET, they use Reese’s Pieces to lure ET out! We can’t us him for this project!”
That’s what happens to actors, and with jobs often far and few between as it is, not only do we need to get paid to keep us in between jobs (residuals), but we have additional concerns about consent and use of clips and shows and product placement. Otherwise actors won’t be able to afford to be professional actors, and rely on acting alone for our income. That’s all we want, to be able to float our standard working actor with money from acting jobs – to have that possibility, even though it is hard for many to meet and many must have other work regardless.
Sam – there is no “entitlement” here – only the fact that we have very unique needs and for other unions or other actor unions to pretend that we don’t have those needs is wrong and detrimental to all actors who want to be paid fairly for what we contribute.