BAFTA Awards: What ‘Artist’, Dujardin, Streep … 
64th BAFTA Awards Winners: ‘The Artist’, Meryl … 
BAFTA 2012 Preview: Very British Affair Takes On … 
RECORD-BREAKING WEEKEND! 4 Films Open $20+M: ‘The … 
Remembered: Jennifer Hudson To Perform Whitney Houston … 
Live From NY, It’s Jean Dujardin On 
R.I.P. Whitney Houston 
TOLDJA! Indomina-BET Buy Sundance ‘LUV’ 
Midnight Madness For ‘Breaking Dawn’ DVD 
Saoirse Ronan Bigger Teen Action Queen 
WME Signs Writer-Director Jon Kasdan 
‘Glee’s Jane Lynch Joins Indie Film Comedy 
Universal Revives ‘Dracula Year Zero’ With … 
Jodie Foster Sending Mel Gibson Film ‘The … 
‘Roseanne’ Reunion: John Goodman To Co-Star In … 
UPDATE: Closing Arguments Conclude In Golden Globes Trial; … 
Series Adaptation Of ‘Legion’ With … 
Lionsgate Calms Investors With Talk About Charlie Sheen, … 
Ridley Scott Commits To Next Direct McCarthy’s … 
Marvel Studio’s Tim Connors Defects To Legendary As … 
UPDATE: Warner Bros Lawyers Dig In Garbage Over ‘The … 
In a startling development, SAG’s new leadership used the Guild’s membership list to slam the “Vote No” contingent for “tricking” actors. 
This, after the SAG agreed that neither the guild nor its new high-priced PR firm would attack any members who campaigned against the contract. And this, after SAG staff and legal vetted the “Vote No” contingent’s Con statement included in the ballot package. The smear email was sent by the SAG National Majority, which consists of the coalition between most of the NY Division, Regional Branches and Unite For Strength which recently took over leadership of the guild. Several board members tell me the email was written by NY Division head Sam Freed and Unite For Strength leader Ned Vaughn and approved by Interim National Executive Director David White and the PR firm they newly hired, Saylor & Company. (Mark Saylor denied any involvement to me today.) Not only is this email inappropriate, it is inflammatory. It should be retracted.
Below are the offensive parts of the smear email, following by a “Vote No” reaction, followed by SAG’s response to my query:
“Don’t Be Tricked Into Voting Against The TV/Theatrical Contract
“Some members are trying to take our union down and continue to circulate misinformation about our tentative agreement. Don’t be fooled… So, when you see negative attacks launched by the opponents of this deal, ask them: What’s the alternative? They won’t give an answer, because they don’t have one. SAG’s National Board majority knows what the alternative to a YES vote means.”
Anne-Marie Johnson, SAG’s 1st vice president, chairman of the Hollywood Board, and a “Vote No” campaigner, sent SAG an email denouncing the SAG National Majority’s smear campaign:
“Well, I hope you all feel really proud of yourselves on this Memorial Day weekend. ‘Tricked’, ‘take our union down’, ‘would like you to believe that they have a plan’…
“When I first received this email I was angry and confused. I couldn’t figure out how on earth the AMPTP got my personal email address. But then I realized that it was from MY union. Well, at least we can finally see what you are paying Saylor to do. But I thought staff assured the the elected that Saylor was not hired to deal with the contract campaign and that they would certainly not be used to attack our own membership. That they were hired to work on re-shaping the image of SAG. Good beginning at the re- shaping. How’s that working for you?
“I pray to god Pamm Fair isn’t responsible for this. Or Pamela Greenwalt. I had hoped these two would have more integrity than that. I can only assume that this is the work of Saylor.
“Why didn’t any of you sign this message? Why didn’t David White put his name to this piece of work? I think the answer is obvious. I’m certain the AMPTP will be sending the Guild their thanks and appreciation for saving them thousands and thousands of dollars. Now they won’t have to take out any ads in the trades. You did all the heavy lifting for them. In more ways than one.”
When I asked why SAG was smearing some of its members in this official email, Pam Greenwalt, SAG communications executive director, responded with this guild statement:
“Screen Actors Guild communicated with our members at the request of National Board leaders who felt strongly that certain critics of the tentative agreement continue to make misleading statements about the agreement. We have always believed that when there is an honest debate about the substance of the agreement and the realities of the current economy and state of the industry, our members will ratify the contract recommended by the SAG National Board. The Guild’s staff has been directed to support the ratification effort, to ensure the accuracy of information distributed to our members about the tentative agreement, and to identify and correct misleading statements, which is what we will continue to do throughout the life of this contract campaign.”
Loading ...
OH BOY! Here you go again.SAG has become chaotic,seems to be too many lunatics are running the asylum.This is why a director is always needed to arrange actors in projects.SAG already has a true leader in Alan Rosenberg.TRUST HIM to lead SAG collectively to a better deal.
Even more sickening is that they adopting the AMPTP scripted talking point that SAG members have lost $85 million by not having a contract. Except their number is actually HIGHER than the AMPTP’s own estimate (back on April 20 the AMPTP estimate was at $67 million, according to Variety, so there’s no way it’s at $85 million now.) Does SAG’s research group, which vehemently disputed the AMPTP’s exagerrated estimates of lost wages over the past year, now believe that not only is the AMPTP right, they are lowballing it?
This “where’s the alternative?” is nothing but a transparent scripted talkinng point. Here’s the alternative: If SAG members vote down the contract, the new negotiating committee and David White go back to the AMPTP and say “You know that inadequate contract we thought we could sneak by the membership because we thought they were too weary to fight anymore? Didn’t work.”
Everyone keeps saying there is no alternative to this: I have one. Let Aftra fail. Make a deal. All AFTRA card carrying members will be allowed SAG memberships. In exchange, AFTRA disbands, shuts down, their lousy contract null and void, and then there is only one union where an actor can get work. And the AMPTP will have to deal.
If you want to beat this, you have to have the courage to be daring and be strong.
You have start displaying the type of unity that the AMPTP is using against us. Band together and go after them as one. Have the strength to risk and beat this thing. Don’t settle for less! They aren’t!!!
I don’t see a problem here. Well that’s not entirely correct, the problem continues to be Membership First.
It’s time to wake up from the Matrix and come back to the real world where there is no way in Hell we will negotiate a better contract than the one we need to ratify by June 9.
I VOTED YES. Let’s get back to work with the gains and footholds that we will have with this contract.
The vote yes contingent are a sad lot. They obviously honestly feel the membership cannot think for themselves and that their own greed isn’t transparent.
First they tried to take contract votes from the membership with “Affected Member Voting.”
Then they hijacked our leadership and negotiators to avoid the SAV vote by the membership.
Now they insult the membership by implying we could be “tricked” as if we were skipping through this forest like naive Little Red Riding Hood.
We know the issues people. More importantly we can smell a rat.
We are voting NO on this contract. And your childish exploits only make the NO VOTE stronger.
I wish we had a contract we could live with. We don’t.
I wish you self-serving arrogant narcissists hadn’t hijacked the union, but you did.
Here we are with the same contract offer as the Final Offer of 10 months ago.
You’ve done nothing but waste money and time with your childish hijacking. Now you sent insulting e-mails to the membership to win us over to your way of thinking that we are dummies.
None of your antics have helped anyone, certainly not yourselves, certainly not our union.
We are voting no because this contract, in the words of your mouthpiece David White, “SUCKS.”
Vote no.
Way to go Vaughn, Carteris, Walsh, Speight, Arkin…
Way to go!!!
Not sure I’d label it a smear campaign, but instead a weak response to the recent “No” video. The “No” video outlines 3-5 important points that the No camp argues are fatal flaws in the proposed contract and reasons to vote no. The SAG email doesn’t respond to these points but instead labels “misinformation”. What “misinformation” is being referred to? Any response that fails to address those points is a nonevent.
However, their question “What’s the alternative?” is a fair one. If the “no” vote wins, what’s the strategy for moving forward? A fair question that can be addressed in “Actors Voting No – Partie Deux”.
Screen Actors Guild communicated with our members at the request of National Board leaders who felt strongly that certain critics of the tentative agreement continue to make misleading statements about the agreement.
Wow. I think my irony meter just broke, considering the wealth of lies from the United For Suckers contingent.
I didn’t think they’d sink any lower, but I guess they’re getting desperate in their attempt to shove this shit deal down SAG’s throat and weaken it in their bald attempt to force a merger with AFTRA.
Too many people are waking up to how this deal will utterly destroy residuals (and everything else SAG has earned over the decades) via the “tv will soon be delivered over the internet, which makes it ALL New Media, wink wink” loophole. Sorry, UFS — people are turning away from your pro-AMPTP dishonesty.
If there’s one thing I can’t stand, it’s a fucking liar. Especially an unrepentant one.
I was appaulled when I received the email. Seriously like why the fuck would they do that. Not that it influnced me amyways, my No vote had been the mail since Thurs.
Its time the AMPTP and their dog, the “National Majority” take us seriously. Let’s secure our own careers’ longevity because it’s official they won’t.
Paging, Bateman. Justine Bateman. Please report to Deadline Hollywood Daily.
It’s not just about the SAG theatrical contract. It is JUST as important to vote for the AFTRA board members.
If you feel that AFTRA has done right by us – then vote for the people who took the deal and have kept people working.
If you feel that AFTRA has betrayed dual-card holders, then vote them out of there. And vote for the many SAG active people who will fight like hell to keep AFTRA from selling out.
But VOTE !
Peggy Lane O’Rourke
The alternative is to actually try to get a better deal, through negotiation and asking members for a strike authorization, you know, the way unions have done for years and years and years.
When our “leaders” are asking for “alternative ideas,” they should step down as they have just admitted they are not up to the job.
Seriously, SAG is paying a PR company to convince its membership to vote yes on a contract proposal, and it chooses to attack those opposing the proposed contract. Is there so little substance in the proposal they couldn’t go the condescending and sympathetic route, you know the one where you understand the opposition’s disappointment but reduce their arguments to rubble using facts? Jeez, way to look desperate.
Whatever SAG is paying Saylor and White it is too much, and I would say that even if I didn’t think that the AMPTP rolled the rational adult National Majority and took their wallets, jewelry and underwear.
Why would expect anything less? Having taken power by an anti-democratic coup d’etat they now have to spend other people’s resources smearing and suppressing opposition.
The “what’s the alternative?” line is an irrelevant scare tactic, the membership are voting on what is in front of them, not what isn’t. By that logic, you could never vote ‘No’ on anything.
SAG Trick or Treat?
Why would SAG send out a “vote yes” campaign message on Sunday evening in the middle of a three day Memorial week end? Why would they urge members to “vote YES today and mail your ballot” …when the informational meetings around the country to answer contract questions HAVE NOT YET BEEN HELD!!!??? Could it be they would rather the membership obey and not ask any questions. There is no trickery here?
The contract package has the list of the informational meetings that will be held around the country. It also contains both a majority report (pro) and a minority report (against) All the material was vetted and rebutted and printed by SAG. Now all you have to do is read it!
You will no doubt have QUESTIONS. Hollywood had its meeting and it was overwhelmingly against this contract. Perhaps those on the board have gotten nervous that the membership at large can think for themselves when informed. Perhaps the members of SAG are not quite as ready to capitulate to a contract that will place their future in jeopardy.
Ned Vaughn and Sam Freed may ask if the “no vote” members have an alternative plan. Why tell them, SAM was the NY vice president that broke ranks with the negotiating committee an sent out a press release informing the world in the middle of negotiations that NY did not agree with our strategy, thus de-leveraging
the SAG negotiators.
Most of the Yes vote people I have talked with have personal and/ or financial reasons for wanting to accept this deal they admit is bad. They are not thinking of the membership as a whole! They think they can re negotiate money out of a producers pocket after it has gone there!
THEY WILL DO ANYTHING TO AVOID A WORK STOPPAGE and fought incessantly in the board room to keep a strike authorization from going out to the membership. Now they are spending our dues money to sell us essentially the same deal that was on the table five months ago! That is unacceptable to me, and I hope the majority of SAG. We deserve better, and they can do better. All it causes is for SAG to lose credibility with its’ own membership!
I don’t need a Union to make a bad deal for me, and I don’t need a union to spend my dues money to condescend to me and try to sell that same “empower yourselves” and “Yes for your future” bullshit rhetoric!
Read your ballot material, ask questions at your town hall informational meetings, and demand that your union treat you with respect! I’m voting NO!
In solidarity,
Mark Carlton
The most disgusting line in the blast is “for the last year, their plan failed miserably. You lost jobs, wages and maybe even your health coverage.”
So now we find out that Ned Vaughn, Sam Freed. David White and all of their cronies hold the AMPTP entirely blameless for the lack of a contract. The rest of us know that the AMPTP intentionally stonewalled not only to divide and conquer, but to teach SAG members a lesson for electing and hiring people who refused to roll over like IATSE, AFTRA and the DGA does.
Instead of insulting your fellow union members by using staff time and consulting funds to blast this to them, publish it in the AMPTP’s German-based house organ SAGWatch.
Vote NO!
Doesn’t it mean that SAG’s National Board will have to actually “do something”? Perhaps they will have to say something that the AMPTP won’t like. Perhaps they will be in a position where the Union Members will be able to judge their capability of running the Union. No matter what the National Board believes it means it will be hard to overlook what the Membership believes it means. It means that the National Board was wrong. That’s what it really means.
read the minority report included with your ballot, pages 3 & 5, as well as the majority rebuttal on page 7.
the last two lines on page 3:
>>No union minimum wages established for New Media productions. SAG actors can be paid as little as federal minimum wage, now $6.55/hour<<
and on page 7, the first almost half of the page about pension and health say it all.
these psychos who staged the coup, ousted doug allen and gag-ordered alan rosenberg, YOUR ELECTED PRESIDENT, and installed david white, known amptp shill, are FUCKING YOU. they’re producers and/or working steadily on a series and want to keep their jobs at your expense.
so, let me get this straight: is david white saying the minority report included with your ballot is full of lies? the minority report THAT WAS APPROVED AND INCLUDED WITH YOUR BALLOT?
I watched both the No and the Yes videos. And this is what it seems to come down to: The proposed contract would screw elderly actors who depend on residuals from television shows from nearly four decades ago. Otherwise, it’s not that bad.
But would the elderly actors really be screwed? Only if the distribution of these old shows via the internet increases to an extent that residuals from them would be significant, and only if broadcast television implodes, and only if all this happens within their remaining lifespans.
Is this really such a likely event? How old are these people? How fast is the internet going to kill off television? How much demand will there be for old Gunsmoke episodes on the internet? To what extent could such stale content even be significantly monetized?
Why not just have the union create a fund for these 13 people who will still be alive when the harm occurs?
The funny thing about this “Don’t be tricked” statement was that it was the last straw for me for any residual doubt that I had in Voting No. THis statement feels like the obvious trash that Glen Beck and Sean Hannity puts out.
I read the contract proposal from beginning to end. It is so obviously in favor of the producers and therefore treasonous to the membership. The only group trying to do any tricking is the Vote Yes crew.
I voted no.
Alternative? Reinstate Allen Rosenberg, Doug Allen and the negotiating committee and back to the drawing board on negotiating with the AMPTP. They did a much better job of confronting the AMPTP and representing the union membership’s interests.
Personally I think someone from the Obama Administration should take interest in this situation.
This is an embarrassing new low for our guild and our board. I have never seen anything so blatantly and intentionally divisive under an official SAG letterhead. Whether one supports this contract or not, to use official Guild communications to discredit and defame other members for their righteous opposite opinion is beyond the pale.
If Nikki’s report is correct, that the 2nd Vice President of the Guild and an alternate board member devised this slander and David White, the Interim National Executive Director approved it, they should all be brought before the NLRB.
How does something like this “rebuild our union” or “restore union pride”. It is a shameful and unethical use of the “union” resources to widely, publicly, and anonymously attack fellow members for having an opposite opinion. It is cowardly and cynical in the highest degree to hide behind the great name, history, and reputation of the Screen Actors Guild. What kind of men are these so bereft of principal and ethic. Cowards…Cowards…Cowards.
The staff of the Screen Actors Guild should be above the pettiness and hold the dignity of the union that pays them and organized labor generally in higher regard than to stoop to denigrating fellow members. Ms. Greenwalt embarrasses herself defending this petty, scurrilous “Message.”
What has been misleading? Where is the point by point refutation in this “message”. Where is the record set straight? How has the debate been clarified for the members? Where are the cold merits of the contract discussed? Where are misleading statements corrected?
This “Message to the Members” is a blog post dressed up as official communication. Who wrote this?! Who?! Who is using our union so ignobly!? It is outrageous malfeasance and misappropriation of resources. Ned Vaughn? Sam Freed? David White? Cowards. Unworthy cowards. Ms Greenwalt? “Just following orders” is your defense? Awful.
The people spreading misinformation are the writers of this “message”. “After a year of negotiations and 11 months of working without a contract, we finally have a good deal”. Really? This deal? How is this deal better than the deals the national board and membership rejected over and over again. How does this deal protect and improve the lives of actors so much more than all the other previous versions proffered by the AMPTP? How about an honest debate rather than accusations of “bringing down the union”.
The real truth is that you cannot defend this contract sufficiently and you have shown how desperate you are. You have just declared that you know you cannot prevail based upon a sober discussion and debate on the merits of the terms. So you turn on your own. Anonymously savaging fellow members who have real concern and questions about the realities of this contract going forward. You are beneath contempt. You diminish us all and deserve no respect. Dishonorable and cowardly. Go to hell.
The smear campaign is absolutely disgusting: Not as disgusting as the absolute POS deal that the thin “yes” “leadership” is trying to cram down our throats to kiss producers’ asses, but disgusting nonetheless.
I hope membership on the fence smells a big stinky rat WHY the “yes” vote feels the need to play dirty pool to divert you from reading the contract that the NAS himself knows is chock full of unacceptable garbage per his own previous quote.
Good Lord.
“The Guild’s staff has been directed to support the ratification effort…” Directed by whom exactly, Pam? Ned Vaughn? David White? John McGuire? Sam Freed? Joe McCarthy? Adolph Hitler?
This is not a democratic board, vote nor campaign – it is a travesty of fascists attempting to overrun our guild for their own selfish purposes.
“Directed to support…” My GOD – you people are contemptuous! Who the hell are you? You’re not SAG members. True SAG board members would never try shit as low as this! Smear campaigns? Misleading “information”? Straight out lies? I expect these kind of shameless tactics from the AMPTP. To them it’s just business and we’re the enemy. But from my own union? How can you people kiss your own children goodnight without throwing up for your indiscretions?
When there is an actual LIVE debate with both pro and con support leaders, then we’ll see who’s making the “misleading statements”. The “Majority Report” and the “Minority Report” didn’t scratch the surface. I want a face-to-face debate – with facts, with support staff providing the truth – and I want it streamed live. The “Minority” has never shied away from that. Why? Because they know the truth, have the facts and have nothing to hide. The “Majority” ran like scared little children when asked for a debate last year. Why? Because they don’t have a plan. Because Ned Vaughn will pee in his knee-pants when confronted with facts. John McGuire will be begging to phone a friend: asking his AMPTP bosses “what the hell should I say/do now?” (David White will do whatever he’s told. “Good boy, David. Here’s a Milk Bone ™”)
Our own SAG National Board is currently staffed by a very slight majority of people who call themselves “Unite For Strength”. That’s less irony than oxymoron. Everybody in SAG knows we need to all get together to fight for a common goal, and moves like this show exactly why we’re so fractured. The same people who caused the rift in the first place are now deepening that divide. “Unite For Strength”, my ass.
And again: TWICE in Pam Greenwalt’s statement, she refers to the offer as “the agreement”. It is not any kind of agreement. It’s not in any way, shape or form an “agreement”. It is nothing more than an offer to SAG members. Pure spin and product positioning. You’re actors in the advertising business, right? You’ve all seen this before, right? You all know how this works, right?
Haven’t heard a peep out of U4S celebrities like Amy Brenneman, Ken Howard, Kate Walsh… Are you people on board for this kind of politics? Is this what you signed up for? Or are you just gonna hide in the shadows in the corner and slip in your ‘NO’ votes when no one’s looking?
Fellow SAG members, please see this desperate move for what it is. Though the Interim Majority may have the power to email everybody they want and to silence everyone they don’t want you to hear from, please be mature and intelligent enough to know manipulation when you see it. Further, understand why they are taking such drastic and shameful steps to deride those who are (and have always been) fighting FOR YOU; those people with NO REASON TO LIE TO YOU!
If this doesn’t make you lose complete trust in your U4S Interim National Board Majority, I don’t know what will.
So keep diggin’ your grave, U4S Interim National Board Majority. Pretty soon you’ll have pissed off 75% of the membership – enough to pass the SAV in spite of you.
I thought David White was doing the best he can in a tough situation, even after he said “this deal sucks” then hired an expensive PR firm to ram it down our throats. But this smear email makes his motives all too clear – he’s in the pocket of those who pulled off their disgraceful coup – what a despicable move! I am OUTRAGED by this and it removes any doubts I had about voting NO – I hope others feel the same and that this email backfires on the sneaky, anonymous senders, and creates more NO votes then it prevents.
Anne Marie said it best above – and thanks, Pam Greenwalt for your robo-reply. My god…..we’ve reached yet a new low.
SAG’s new national majority knows the alternative to a yes vote – it would mean they, as well as the AMPTP, had severely miscalculated the mood of the members.
Already in the comments sections of recent SAG-related posts we’ve seen the argument trotted out that there is no alternative to ratifying the contract. Other SAG members, including Harry98 and Matt Mulhern have refuted such nonsense.
Again, of course there’s an alternative if we are wise enough to vote down this giant crap sandwich of an offer. We go back to basics; we do what unions do. We organize, we build solidarity, we send David White back to the table to do FAR better, and we get the 75% SAV because we know we must mount a credible threat to the moguls’ bottom line in order to get a deal that will not decimate the guild and turn acting into a hobby for all but the A-listers and a scattered handful of other actors.
We’ve been carrying on a great debate on Nikki’s site and other places. Perhaps the folks pushing this offer felt that the tide wasn’t going their way. Perhaps this email is a desperation move on their part. Perhaps, the more SAG members look into the details of this offer – precedent-setting non-union new media for the moguls, ridiculously inadequate new media compensation, capitulation on force majeure, leaving individual actors on their own to negotiate clip consent, offering actors zero protection on forced endorsements – the more they realize they have to vote no.
And perhaps SAG members also realize we still carry quite a bit of weight – enough certainly to demand and receive 100% jurisdiction of new media period, parity in residuals old media to new, clip consent, protection from forced endorsements or reasonable compensation for doing commercials in character in the middle of scripted programming, that AMPTP signatories honor 100% of their contractual force majeure obligations….
My NO vote is in the mail. We can do better. Much better.