Reported for WGA picket duty today outside Fox at 47th and Sixth Avenue. I've never walked a picket line in my life, so circling a half block radius for four straight hours (minus ten minutes when the sainted Margaret Clark, one of my Pocket Book editors across the street, provided bathroom relief for me) was a new experience to put it mildly.
A ton of celebrities such as Robin Williams and Alec Baldwin showed up to express solidarity...on previous days. No one turned out for us today, so that kinda sucked.
At one point a guy with a microphone, identifying himself as being from Sirius Satellite radio, pulled myself and another writer, a distinguished looking older fellow named Michael St. Germain, aside and asked if he could interview us. We shrugged and said sure. He had a list of questions and the first couple seemed straightforward enough. But St. Germain was looking at him suspiciously and suddenly said, "You're from Howard Stern, aren't you." The guy nodded. That immediately flipped a switch in my mind, so that--moments later--when the questions turned skewed ("If UPS makes a delivery to your home, are you forbidden from signing for it since you're not allowed to write?") I was able to roll with it rather than say, "Huh?" So that was lucky.
Met several staffers from the Colbert Report, which was also cool.
Will be back at it next week. I hope this doesn't drag on, but suspect it will.
PAD
Posted by Peter David at November 9, 2007 07:11 PM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingGood for you, Peter. I'm not sure I would ever walk a picket line as I'm horribly poisoned by the MSM against protesting anything--although, should the situation arise, I bet I could do a pretty good job of it.
(I hope this strike lasts forever.
Fill the air with
GET SMART
TIME TUNNEL
ETC.
there are so many great shows to rerun that noone ever saw,
"We don't need no stinking writers".
Is Robin Williams still considered a celebrity???????????????????????????
Wow. That's only a few blocks from my job. I'll have to stop by and give those guys some support. I hope the writers get everything they deserve.
And of course they didn't have a celebrity there today- YOU were the celebrity today, PAD.
Walk that line, strikers! If you don't look out for yourselves, who will? Sure as hell not your employers! They never have, and they never will.
As a fellow Union Member (SEIU Local 113) Give them Hell Peter. Here's to a short but successful strike and may you all get what is rightfully yours.
I find it extremely cool that someone named Germain would pick out the most pertinent detail about the interviewer.
Lousy pinko-commie writers in their ascots and all their finery strutting about for more money! Bah! A pox on all who keep Kristin Chenoweth from my High-Def TV screen! A pox, I say!
( Hey Peter, in all seriousness, how does the logistics of such a strike work? Does each writer simply show up on the picket line as his/her schedule allows - or are things a bit more precise and organized? )
The WGA sends out daily updates saying where the next picket line is going to be. You sign up ahead of time on line.
PAD
"The WGA sends out daily updates saying where the next picket line is going to be. You sign up ahead of time on line."
That sounds disturbingly organised. Like a lynch mob formed, but the torches and pitchforks had a sign-out sheet.
1). As soon as you mentioned 'Sirius Satellite', I knew where you were going. Back when Howard was on regular radio, his guys used to say they were from 'CBS Radio' to throw off celebrities/victims. It was usually 'Stuttering John.'
2) This is one strike I find myself in support of. As I understand it, screenwriters/teleplaywriters are often treated as the 'red-headed stepchild' in the film/tv industry. Directors are treated as gods, yet the writers are expendable. This always flabbergasted me, because the way I see it, the screenplay is the foundation of the movie, upon which everything else is built upon. I wish them success, but even if every one of their demands is provided, I suspect they'll still be the low man on the totem pole, even if they have more brains than a lot of actors.
1). As soon as you mentioned 'Sirius Satellite', I knew where you were going. Back when Howard was on regular radio, his guys used to say they were from 'CBS Radio' to throw off celebrities/victims. It was usually 'Stuttering John.'
2) This is one strike I find myself in support of. As I understand it, screenwriters/teleplaywriters are often treated as the 'red-headed stepchild' in the film/tv industry. Directors are treated as gods, yet the writers are expendable. This always flabbergasted me, because the way I see it, the screenplay is the foundation of the movie, upon which everything else is built upon. I wish them success, but even if every one of their demands is provided, I suspect they'll still be the low man on the totem pole, even if they have more brains than a lot of actors.
The WGA sends out daily updates saying where the next picket line is going to be. You sign up ahead of time on line.
Does the WGA send out those notices to anyone other than WGA members? I'm wondering where non-writer supporters find out about your picket sites.
Keep up the good fight, good sir.
I'll share with my fellow PAD readers the photo I saw of Harlan that was linked on the HarlanEllison DOT com forum.
Yep, that's Harlan. Who else could get away with a sign like that?
So what was your answer tot he UPS question? and any other clever answers to other questions?
Regarding Sirius: Yeah that was probably Gary Garver. Howard makes him ask usually 2 serious questions to people/celebs, and then he blindsides them with either an idiot question, or if you are a celebrity, something they find horrendously offensive.
One of the interviews they replay alot on Stern is the one where he interviews Brittany Murphy. He asks her a question regarding how it is to work with Liza Minneli (sorry for poor spelling if I did)...and Britany goes on this 3 minute speech of how wonderful it is to work with her.
His second question then I believe he asks her about reports that she (Brittany) is crazy. Britany ends the interview right there.
Anyway, I rarely support (in my mind) strikes of any kind. Mainly because they usually involve multi-millionaire atheletes. But this is one strike I do support...as what the writers are asking for seems more than fair.
Im actually in the mid 50s on the east side, so I may take a walk over during the week and see whats going on at some point
i have just one thing to say.......if the strike goes to long welcome to MORE REALITY TV :(
Good for you, PAD! When I heard that there was WGA action in NYC as well as Hollywood, I wondered if you might be involved. Despite the apparent spin attempts by some media outlets, I think that most of the public recognizes the reasonable and justified nature of the writers' requests.
To any on the west coast who are curious, there are picket lines outside of several studios regularly. A website, fans4writers.com, has been created, and continues to be developed and expanded, to provide both information and ways for the fans to support the writers during this dispute.
Since I'm a big fan of great writing, I was ready to support the WGA without getting any facts. Now that I've seen the facts, I'm even more convinced that the writers are right. Stay hard WGA!
I support the strike in general terms, but strongly oppose the actions of some of the participants. If non-union writers were being imported, then I would accept jeering toward them, but that at non-writer cast and crew who show up for work seems wrong. I guess it comes down to this - they have the right to deprive their employers of their services, but not that of the other employees, if there are still scripts to film, sets to build or other functions to perform. The legitimacy of closed-door sets and states is a more complex question than this, but I do think about that.
Jeff didn't you ever hear of supporting your coworkers? There is nothing wrong with a actor/prop guy saying you people are right I am not going to work to support you. On the other hand the writers have a right to be annoyed by the actors ect saying thanks for giving me lines to say but I can't support you for wanting the same thing we get so go away.
Regarding Sirius: Yeah that was probably Gary Garver.
No. He said his last name and it was more complicated than that.
PAD
Hmmm. If you want to read more about what it is like for the writers on strike, I suggest that you check out http://kenlevine.blogspot.com Ken is a sitcom writer who has written for such shows as MASH, CHEERS et al. He has his tongue firmly in cheek about the strike and picketing out here in California.
You can have the world's most esteemed actors, the greatest director ever to grace a set, a producer with an unlimited checkbook and special effects not yet dreamed of, but it all becomes a worthless bad joke if you don't have a good writer to tie it all together. Writers never get enough respect, and I hope they strike until they get it.
Daniel wrote: There is nothing wrong with a actor/prop guy saying you people are right I am not going to work to support you.
Agreed, if they can afford it. Please remember that not everyone in the business makes tons of cash. If the prop guy has a family to support, he may sympathize, but he has to work.
On a separate note, I always had heard that the writers were treated as the red-headed stepchild. It was hammered home when I read that a film's writer only receives 1/3 of a penny per dollar of a DVD! So when we buy that DVD in the discount bin for $6, the writer only sees 2 cents. Talk about being undervalued!
I hope the strike ends quickly with the writers getting a fair shake.
Well i just hope those writers get what they want (or at least a huge part of theire list).
It's ironic that the last time the WGA made a deal with the studios/producers, they agreed to take a cut on their home video residuals, on the assumption that they would give the still-developing home video market a chance to grow. Since then, the video cassette has come and gone and people are already talking about the demise of the DVD format in terms of direct download. So when people talk about the 'greedy writers,' they're forgetting that the WGA has already been waiting the better part of two decades to get the deal they should have got then. Ironically, direct download means an even greater profit, because there are no duplication costs, warehousing, distribution, etc, so one would think the producers would be more willing to give up a bigger, if still diminutive share, but if they could find a way of giving the writers nothing, they would happily do it.
I had a conversation on day two of the strike with the gal who cuts my hair. At first, she was pretty irritated about the whole thing, didn't see the point, etc. I said something to the effect that without the writers, the studios would have no "product" from which to make money, and that if the studios continued to make money from the product, the people who provided it in the first place really ought to be fairly recompensed all down the line.
She said, "Oh. I can see that." Don't know how long that lasted, but it encouraged me. (No, I'm not a writer.)
"Regarding Sirius: Yeah that was probably Gary Garver.
No. He said his last name and it was more complicated than that.
PAD"
Hmm, I'm not that huge of Stern fanatic that I know everyones full names, but my guess is then it may be someone from his regular staff, and not his news staff. Many times he sends his producers (or I think they just go on their own) into the field and do bits like that for the show. A lot of times they do it for Howard TV also, though you didn't mention they had a camera.
Michael
Yep, that's Harlan. Who else could get away with a sign like that?
I don't get it, but I still think it's funny.
Picket locations are listed on the Writer's Guild website at http://www.wga.org/subpage_member.aspx?id=2536
Don't go as fans... go as supporters. If you like a show's writing support the people that make the plots and words your enjoy! Make noise! Let the producers know that you, the consumer, are for the writers. Face it... you are the ones who allow all the money to be made by taking your time to watch. Without you there is no work. It is shocking that when you chose to watch an episode on the web, with commercials, writers receive nothing because it is considered "promotional." As my favorite judge from Boston Legal would say: "SHOCKING!"
Irving Belateche over on the blog http://unitedhollywood.blogspot.com/ wrote about this awesome conversation he overheard:
"Every day after picketing, I come home and work on my long, elegant essay articulating why we're on strike. It's meant for the general public and attempts to summarize the issues. But today, I overheard something that took care of my essay in one fell swoop.
Guy (into cell phone): The writers are on strike out here.
[PAUSE]
Guy (into cell phone): Because the corporations are dicks."
LOL- Stay in to win guys!
Was the Stern interviewer Sal "the Stockbroker" Governale? Sal's done these kinds of things a few times when there was something around the NY area. He interviewed people in Harlem after OJ got in trouble again.
That's it. That's the name. Sal Governale. I'm pretty sure that's what he said. Kind of an oblong face; reminds me of the comedian Chris Elliot.
And no, there wasn't a camera; just a mike.
PAD
daniel: Supporting co-workers is nice, but if the show is cancelled there are no co-workers, just former associates. When an actor who is not on strike decides to go to work, he is just doing the job he was paid for, using a script for which the writers have been paid under their existing contract. If the writers were able to force the end of the programs for which they are writing, the subject of future royalties would be moot, because there would be no future shows for which to be paid. Preventing non-union or other-union workers from doing their jobs comes close to restraint of trade. Preventing the shows from using non-union writers is one thing, but preventing them from other activities is another.
I wonder how those writers fortunate enough to be the creators and/or producers of their programs square their interests as union members with those as owners of valuable property. When Tina Fey (as one example) shows solidarity with other writers, she is also diminishing the likelihood of her self-created program being renewed and generating income for her. There are many similar examples. It appears that many of these creators (all of those of whom I am aware) are showing solidarity with their union, but I suspect if they did otherwise their careers would suffer greatly. It's difficult to say how virtuous an act is when the cost of doing otherwise is greater than that of doing "the right thing."
James, I certainly don't want to put words in your mouth, but it sounds as though you're implying that doing the right thing in this case is not necessarily the right thing? Or are you simply saying that there's no real way of knowing what is right or wrong, because for these people there is only one course of action available to them? If as you say, the writers are owners of valuable property, surely they're entitled to a bit more money for that property?
I think my favourite celebrity-supports-writers story was when Eva Longoria showed up to give pizza to striking writers and they just razzed her. That's pretty crazy. I realize that it was probably within their rights if they didn't like the stance she was taking with doing work and all but, come on, Eva Longoria! With free pizza!! I think my head woulda just exploded.
I think the reason they razzed her was because Lonoria had reportedly just shot her scenes for the day before showing up with pizzas. Maybe it felt just a tad hypocritical to them.
My point was that, even if one is convinced that the noblest approach is to honor the strike, the censure and blacklist one would face for ignoring it would make the alternative much more unattractive. It's something like this: You are in a room where your captor announces he will torture your companion, unless you defeat him. After he's through with your companion, he says, he'll kill you very slowly. If you stop him, who can say whether your motive is love for your fellow man or concern for your own skin? Either is entirely possible, but the circumstances make it very unattractive not to behave "nobly." If one honors a strike because it seems like the best thing to do for society (or one's profession), that sounds like a good thing. If one does so because one believes one will be expelled from your own union, generally hated and denied employment in the future, there is no virtue attached - merely good game-playing.
daniel: Supporting co-workers is nice, but if the show is cancelled there are no co-workers, just former associates....
My point was that, even if one is convinced that the noblest approach is to honor the strike, the censure and blacklist one would face for ignoring it would make the alternative much more unattractive.
If you're talking about performers, performers are in the same boat as the writers when it comes to getting a cut from yet-to-be-enjoyed profits from new media. If the writers union prevails in getting their cut, the performers union benefits from someone else setting the precedent. Therefore the strikers are right to heckle those who will benefit from their sacrifice, but who nurture the obstruction against them all.
I think the reason they razzed her was because Lonoria had reportedly just shot her scenes for the day before showing up with pizzas. Maybe it felt just a tad hypocritical to them.
Yeah, I understand the thought process, but I can't go along with it. Personally speaking, if a super hot chick showed up with pizza, I'd totally just sell out my principles.
I would like to support the writers, but right now i don't know what the writers need from me -- the average joe -- any thoughts or suggestions???
If the show is cancelled, future work on the show dies. If I had any part in a production I would be leery of anyone who had sabotaged production beyond a personal work stoppage. Suppose an actor or someone else involved in a show were unhappy, and wanted more money. Perhaps he can stop working, but if he forces the writer to stop working that is nothing but stealing his livelihood. Fine, the writers walk away, and the producers cannot hire new ones: It may not be entirely fair, but it's not the same thing as preventing preventing the actors, or carpenters, or painters, or whatever else, from doing work they were hired and paid to do, and which the producers are still willing to pay them for. I have no sympathy for those who would interfere in that way.
If the show is cancelled, future work on the show dies.
You keep saying that, but that's as much a concern for the studios stonewalling on giving a cut of yet-to-be-enjoyed profits from new media as well as the strikers. It's inherent in any organized labor negotiation.
What is this "If the show is [canceled], future work on the show dies" rationale for criticizing the strike if not protectionist sniveling? Do you think studios keep content they could make money from vaulted away in case of a strike, do you think they'll figure out a way to survive without new content, or what? The talent can always resort to filming and posting something and linking google ads from it if the studios continue to withhold the profits that prevent the talent from doing so in the first place. It won't be like studios will be able to give audiences anything more entertaining.
If I had any part in a production I would be leery of anyone who had sabotaged production beyond a personal work stoppage. Suppose an actor or someone else involved in a show were unhappy, and wanted more money. Perhaps he can stop working, but if he forces the writer to stop working that is nothing but stealing his livelihood.
That ain't happening here. The events of the SAG negotiations are taking place roughly a year later than what's going on with the WGA. SAG is going to ask for the same things, and will benefit from the sacrifices the WGA makes now. Actors who drive through the main studio gates to work should have their cars egged and tomatoed. If they're going to work against a strike they benefit from, they should at least have the decency to sneak into the studio.
Mike, I don't think the studios have much in the vault at this point, but there was a story earlier this week (in variety.com I think) about how the studios might be looking to import UK product and/or writers to help tide them over during the strike. I don't know how much of that is actually true, but it will be interesting to see what, if anything actually happens.
Wow... just....wow...
I wish when I fized a computer I still got a check everyday that the computer continued to work.
I bet your auto-mechanic would love you to send him a paycheck each day the car he repaired for you keeps running.
Be great to do one thing and get paid it forever instead of maybe getting what the market will pay and then doing something to earn that next paycheck rather than just thinking you are owed for something you already did in the past...
Unions, and we wonder why there are fewer jobs left in America anymore....
"I wish when I fized a computer I still got a check everyday that the computer continued to work."
It's really not the same thing. *Somebody* is going to get paid every time a DVD is sold.
When you fix a computer, that's exactly one computer that gets fixed for one person. When a writer writes a screenplay, it doesn't get watched by a pre-set number of people and then that's it, nobody else ever pays to watch it again. If more people buy the DVD, then those people pay more money. Where that money goes is what's in dispute.
Same thing with the internet rights. The studios are putting stuff online and getting money for it. They plan to do more of that in the future. The writers did some of the work to make that possible, so they don't believe the studios should get all of that money while they get nothing.
Bladestar,
If (using your computer example) a programmer creates a much in demand program, should he or she not be paid something for each sale or download of his or her program?
If an artist creates a piece of work that is then turned into prints and sold, should he or she not be paid something for each print sold?
If a writer turns 350 pages of blank paper into a book, should he or she not be paid something for each book sold?
If a writer turns 70 - 100 pages of blank paper into a popular TV or movie script, should he or she not be paid something for each sale of the product (whether that be VHS, DVD, syndication or internet) that he or she created when there are so many others who did far less who are? And many of those who did less are paid far more now then the writers are asking for.
And the value of a writer is far greater then many of the others involved in the process. Take away the people who make TV and movies, and actors can still ply their trade on a stage. Take away the actors, and the writers can still create stories for the entertainment of the masses. Take away all the writers, and you'll have a huge number of actors and film crews with nothing to do.
"Unions, and we wonder why there are fewer jobs left in America anymore...."
Have unions overreached or made a few missteps over the years? Of course they have. But they also did a hell of a lot for the poor and the working class in this country over the years. Whatever nice wage you get paid for your job, you should thank the unions of years ago for their hand in creating the circumstances that helped create it. They may not be what they once were, but they did a hell of a lot in creating the country that you now sit comfortably in and dismiss them from.
Peter, I know you're a devotee of Broadway among your other interests - what do you think of the current strike that's now keeping almost all of Broadway dark?
If a writer turns 350 pages of blank paper into a book, should he or she not be paid something for each book sold?
Obviously, he doesn't; by the same reasoning, PAD shouldn't get royalties from his next Damned World novel---it belongs to the publisher. And sales of his next X Factor trade should all go to Marvel, and not to him.
This type of reasoning rests on three flawed assumptions: a) that writes are interchangeable parts, b) that writers bring nothing to the table, that the source of creative talent that viewers/readers want to see/read lies in the company or ownership and c) that the owner/writer is inherently adversarial.
While the latter is a common mistake (one that is shared by the studios), the first two is surprising to see here, on the blog of a comics writer, whose income is inextricably linked to being recognized as a major contributor to a title's success and in field where it's crystal clear that a writer or artist does indeed make a difference to the bottom line and are recompensed both before initial publication and afterwards.
(It also betrays a lack of knowledge of the legal niceties that ALL writers [prose, graphic, film stage etc.] face when dealing with shared properties, in that contracts are often written so that while companies own the characters used in a piece of material, the exact script or story is owned by the writer, and that neither gets any usefulness out of a piece until they both get that work out together).
Mike, I don't think the studios have much in the vault at this point, but there was a story earlier this week (in variety.com I think) about how the studios might be looking to import UK product and/or writers to help tide them over during the strike. I don't know how much of that is actually true, but it will be interesting to see what, if anything actually happens.
And the studios lose ownership as well as the cut to writers they are fighting for. If the studios could have made the same money from the import approach they get from the absolute control they are fighting for now, they would have a long time ago.
The studios have made a fortune from importing just British TV show ideas. Examples include All in the Family, American Idol, Three's Company, Trading Spaces, Cosby, The Weakest Link, Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, Whose Line Is It Anyway?, Dancing with the Stars, The Office, Queer as Folk, and Sanford and Son.
Should the strike go on for long, Joe's scenario seems likely. I don't know how much money they are losing from not having come up with the idea for American Idol on their own but does anyone seriously believe they aren't thrilled with the truckloads of money they are making from it?
Bill, the examples you gave were all of shows where the ideas were imported, but the shows were still remade by American crews, including American writers.
And importing stuff isn't a guarantee of sucess. There are a lot of other British imports that failed. The same people who turned "Steptoe and Son" into "Sanford and Son" also brought over "Coupling". Coupling was a terrific show on the BBC, but the American version did terribly even though it had virtually the same scripts.
Somebody get me a picture of a cat so I can LOL CAT it with:
BLADESTAR FIZED MY COMPUTER!
(yes, I know it was a typo, but comedy, inadvertent or not, demands proper presentation)
PAD -
I don't listen to Howard Stern (I find nothing appealing or entertaining at all about him) so will never see/hear the interview with you.
But I'm curious. What was did your answer to the UPS question?
- Sean
PAD -
I don't listen to Howard Stern (I find nothing appealing or entertaining at all about him) so will never see/hear the interview with you.
But I'm curious. What was your answer to the UPS question?
- Sean
Jason, I agree--I was just pointing out that the idea that Hollywood would resist bringing over foreign shows for financial reasons seems dicey at best, given the track record.
And if they bring over British shows and british writers...especially "reality" shows that are supposedly non-scripted (although we all know that's a lie)...
I mean, is American Idol really in any danger of being canceled due to the strike?
And if they bring over British shows and british writers...especially "reality" shows that are supposedly non-scripted (although we all know that's a lie)...
...but not with the money the studios are withholding from the writers, otherwise there wouldn't be a strike. English scabs aren't going to solve things for the studios any better than American scabs.
Bill, sadly none of the 'reality' shows are in any danger because of the strike. The writers on reality TV are not part of the union, and so aren't part of the strike.
I'm not sure how they get away with using non-union writers, though I expect the why has something to do with onscreen writing credits. Though, I have very little love for reality TV, and so don't really pay much attention to it, to know more. Anyone out there have a clearer picture?
"Jason, I agree--I was just pointing out that the idea that Hollywood would resist bringing over foreign shows for financial reasons seems dicey at best, given the track record"
That's just the thing, Bill. The track record clearly shows that the studios *don't* consider it a good idea, financially.
All the shows you listed earlier could have been broadcast on American TV. They would have had to pay licencing fees, but they would not have had to pay for sets, actors, crews, or anything else. So it would have been much cheaper for them to bring shows over than to make new shows.
But they haven't, because they don't think they can make money off of that.
The belief is that Americans are very reluctant to watch anything from another country, even one that speaks the same language. For years the only place to watch Doctor Who was on PBS, and that was the most successful direct import. Now we have "BBC America" on cable, but how many cable stations even run it? And Doctor Who is on Sci-Fi, but far less people watch it in this 300,000,000 person country than watch it in 60,000,000 person Britain.
Plus, it's not something that can be done super fast or super short term. BBC America and Sci-Fi channel had to work out contracts with the BBC for all those shows. I've read BBC producer interviews talking about that, and it isn't an especially long process, but it definitely isn't an overnight solution. It would take a few weeks or months. Then the BBC producers would want contracts for a decent commitment of runs, meaning that if the strike ended the next day, the American stations would still have to run the BBC shows they signed up for.
There could have been an influx of British shows in the last strike, but there weren't. They could have used those shows directly even without the strikes, but they haven't. If they've never done it before, I doubt they'll start now.
It was Sal Governale who asked you the Questions. They played the recording of it on Howard Stern this morning, then Howard interviewed the writer/producer of The Illusionaist about the Strike. I can't believe that was you!
I went back and looked up the news item I referenced earlier, which was posted Thursday:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117975626.html?categoryid=2821&cs=1
The article actually starts out talking about how studios could turn to top-tier British screenwriters to work on their projects, but by the end, it’s also discussing television as well:
“The London grapevine is abuzz with gossip that marquee American producers have been scouting for non-WGA writers for film or TV projects they would funnel through British production companies. Hollywood's majors have lodged discreet inquiries with agents and lawyers about the availability of their clients.”
But as it applies more directly to television, the article goes on to say:
‘In the U.S., it's clear that WGA members shouldn't take non-union work. In the U.K., it's far from clear where to draw the line. A British writer, whether a WGA member or not, is surely free to write a local TV drama for the BBC or Channel 4. But what if that drama is sold to a U.S. network to fill a gap left by strike action? Or what if it's co-produced by HBO?”
Now that I read this piece again, it actually raises more questions than it answers, some of which have already been brought up on this site by previous posters. Even if the US networks ended up in London with a blank checkbook, it seems unlikely that we would see any British product on our screens very quickly. And by the time those deals were finally signed, the strike could well be over, which means the studio is suddenly stuck with product that they didn’t really want.
All of that being said, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Variety (who haven’t exactly been pro-writers in their coverage) could have been fed the whole British Invasion story by one or more studio heads who wanted to get that veiled threat in print. Only time will tell if any of it proves to be true.
> the writers are owners of valuable property
In point of fact, the most valuable property is the original concept for the show/film. Yes, the writers can then make or break it depending on their skill in bringing the characters and story to life, but without the original creator, they'd all be out of work. Yes, there are writers who, as with JMS come up with the concept, flesh it out, and then write for it, but just as often, if not more so, someone else does the first and others then work in their playground.
>It's really not the same thing. *Somebody* is going to get paid every time a DVD is sold.
And the cab driver keeps getting paid every time he gets a fare which he wouldn't if the cab hadn't been fixed. Should the mechanic get a cut of the fare?
> If more people buy the DVD, then those people pay more money.
The same can be said of comic books. Yet, whether the book sells 5, or 500,000, the writer still gets paid the same, agree-upon-in-advance sum as far as I know. Of course should a writer demonstratably aid in seeing a series' popularity go through the roof, they're free to negotiate for more money when their contract is up for renewal. Why should it be any different for DVDs?
>Plus, it's not something that can be done super fast or super short term. BBC America and Sci-Fi channel had to work out contracts with the BBC for all those shows.
One has to wonder. These strikes aren't something which comes up literally overnight. The potential is there some time in advance. You'd think the studios would have contingency plans in place. Of course, if they don't then they deserve what the strikers can do to them, if only for stupidity compounding their greed.
And the cab driver keeps getting paid every time he gets a fare which he wouldn't if the cab hadn't been fixed. Should the mechanic get a cut of the fare?
I'm not sure I understand the analogy. The mechanic does not create--he fixes something that has been created. That he does so helps the cab driver make his or her living but that's why they can charge what they do--when your car breaks and the mechanic gives you the estimate you have to decide whether or not the benefit of the fixed car is worth the price. I don't see any valid argument that the mechanic deserves anything above and beyond that compensation.
The writer creates. The actors--who often get residuals--are mouthing the words the writer creates. The directors--who sometimes get residuals--are visualizing what the writer created. Etc etc.
I don't think it's wrong that the producers get the lion's share of the booty. They took the risk. But the writers have every right to ask for as much as they are willing to fight for.The strike is unfortunate and the fact that so many are losing their livelihood because of it is even more unfortunate--but isn't the fact that so many people, big and small, are in trouble because the writers are refusing to write just proof of their value?
And the one thing I have no doubt about is that the producers are lying through their teeth when they say that there is no point in asking for a cut of money from the internet because there IS no money being made from the internet--if that were true then they must be stupid--this has already cost them a fortune. Why would they take that hit over something that would not cost them money? If I were a boss and my workers threatened to strike unless I guaranteed that they would get a cut of any future dirigible movie showings I'd gladly agree in exchange for some small concession on their part. We'd shake hands and I'd think "Idiots..."
No, their are fighting any concession on this "money losing" medium because they have a pretty good idea of where things are heading and there's a load of money to be made.
The same can be said of comic books. Yet, whether the book sells 5, or 500,000, the writer still gets paid the same, agree-upon-in-advance sum as far as I know. Of course should a writer demonstratably aid in seeing a series' popularity go through the roof, they're free to negotiate for more money when their contract is up for renewal. Why should it be any different for DVDs?
Actually, There was a time when writers did get paid a good bonus for books that sold over a certain number. Don't know if it's still in place or if any books even sell enough to trigger it any more.
Also, you can argue that the comic writers--at Marvel and DC at least--are creating an addition to an already created Universe. If I create the next great Spiderman villain and it becomes as popular as Venom is the credit all mine or do I have to admit that in large part he's popular because he fights Spiderman?
At any rate, the writers ARE negotiating for more money now that their contract is up for renewal. Increased residuals seems as good a expectation as any, given how many others participates get them.
Heard the Howard Stern interview this morning and was not impressed by the writer who was actually responding to those questions (pretty sure it wasn't PAD). Yes, I realize that this is very serious to those involved in the situation--and that a goofy question can sometimes throw somebody for a momentary loop--but to simply repeat over and over again in an annoyed tone of voice that the questions were "frivilous" isn't exactly a first-rate, writerly response.
And the cab driver keeps getting paid every time he gets a fare which he wouldn't if the cab hadn't been fixed. Should the mechanic get a cut of the fare?
The creative solution of navigating the laws of mechanics to propel a car to deliver people does not belong to the mechanic who fixed the cab. The rights of the car-configuration belongs to the patent-holder for the life of the patent, and patents don't obstruct the application of the car in harvesting revenue by delivering people. Therefore patent-holders have no leverage in taking a cut of cab fees.
And no patent-holder operates without teams of engineers, and no engineer works for a patent-holder for free. They all get paid as writers get paid for their creative contributions. car manufacturers take care of their creative contributors with merit-based compensation in ways the studios seek to deny their writers. Your analogy does not apply.
The same can be said of comic books. Yet, whether the book sells 5, or 500,000, the writer still gets paid the same, agree-upon-in-advance sum as far as I know.
Sorry, what you know is not what is happening.
Titles above a certain level do get royalties (not as many as in past years, true, but still). Titles below a certain level do not get royalties, but I'm pretty sure when they get reprinted in trade, writers/artists get a cut of that.
Now, for a philosophical point...
In point of fact, the most valuable property is the original concept for the show/film. Yes, the writers can then make or break it depending on their skill in bringing the characters and story to life, but without the original creator, they'd all be out of work.
THis is soooooo wrong. The writers and actors DO make or break a concept. Thee is no concept that is so powerful that it can exist in isolation; it is ENTIRELY in the execution of the idea where a series lives or breathes. Ideas are dime a dozen---the real key is when an artist (writer, artist, actor) breathes life into it and makes it live for an audience. And THAT'S what makes an idea or concept valuable--how it is brought to life
Any fool can have an idea. A studio doesn't pay for that. Nobody buys DVDs for ideas. Studios pay and consumers buy because the way the ideas are brought to life and resonate with an audience.
Or, to put it another way....
The studio owns the characters, and they make money on that---nobody disagrees on that. But a script is usually copyrighted by the writer (he/she are expressing a non-unique situation in a unique way, after all--basic copyright law), and the studio CAN'T use it without permission of the writer. Reissuing those shows in DVD form is like reprinting the script---and it's long established that writers can and should get reprint fees if their articles get used again or is reprinted. So why is there such a resistance to writers getting their deserved reprint fees?
Posted by The StarWolf
In point of fact, the most valuable property is the original concept for the show/film. Yes, the writers can then make or break it depending on their skill in bringing the characters and story to life, but without the original creator, they'd all be out of work. Yes, there are writers who, as with JMS come up with the concept, flesh it out, and then write for it, but just as often, if not more so, someone else does the first and others then work in their playground.
Uh huh.
Producers - even if they have good ideas - would be pretty well out-of-luck without writers. As Willie Nelson's song "Write Yur Own Songs" (from the film "Sonwriter", which, despite being Very Funny, is almost a thoroughly-depressing textbook documentary on how the creative people get screwed): "If you think that's easy, Mr Music Producer, why don't you wite your own songs?"
And, speaking as someone who *is* a computer tech and also knows something about writing (both as a sometimes-practitioner-without-the-personal-discipline-to-actually-succeed and as the brother of one of the top-selling writers in the SF field and the friend/acquaintance of several others) - and about the music indusrty, for that matter - i can tell you that the reason mechanics and computer techs don't generally get royalties and writerd and other creative types *do* is that there are a *hell* of a lot more acceptably-competent mechanics and techs than there are writer, musicians and artists.
And have you looked at what unionised mechanics - especially in the airline industry - make as straight pay?
The same can be said of comic books. Yet, whether the book sells 5, or 500,000, the writer still gets paid the same, agree-upon-in-advance sum as far as I know.
Guess what? Comics creators have had royalty contracts for years. And then there's creator-owned properties like, oh, "Fallen Angel".
And writer whose books actually *sell* make most of their money off royalties - i forget what book it was that Stephen King took a one-cent advance on to make the contract binding; he knew he was going to make millions on royalties anyway and the tax picture was better if the whole thing came in in royalties over time instead of in a huge lumpadvance and somewhat lesser royalties...
Except on work-made-for-hire, generally what an author gets paid for a book on delivery is an advance against anticipated royalties.
Yeesh, Mike Weber, your brother isn't David Weber, or the Honor Harrington and other series, is he? I love those books.
This WGA strike, and the idea of writers getting larger residuals, is a complex issue. I've probably gone back and forth as for being for it or against it at least half a dozen times.
Most of us being comic fans, we should be somewhat familiar with the idea of a creator getting credit...and money...for the continued success of their works. While on the contract side, we understand that creators like Kirby, Kane, Lee, and others in some cases "signed away" or sold their rights to their creations, fairness seems to dictate that they get more than an acknowledgement in the form of a credit when those creations go on to make hundreds of millions of $ over years and decades of publication. That sense of fairness leads to today's greater acceptance and understanding of the retained ownership a creator has over a character.
Balance this against the workshop rules that developed legally, where the product of an employee while engaged in his job, using the tools provided by his employer, are at best jointly held, but in most cases the sole property of the employer.
Granted, WGA members are contractors, usually, and a different set of rules applies there, but it highlights how even the law shows this contrast when it comes to who can own an idea.
I'll say I'm unhappy that this strike is causing non-union members to lose work. But I can't say that the strike is totally unnecessary. Ideas are a dime-a-dozen...but good ideas are more rare. Unfortunately, the fickly American TV audience has shown that they aren't necessarily interested in watching shows based on good ideas. And since the point of mainstream entertainment is to sell adds/make money, the studios aren't interested in good ideas...they are interested in shows that sell air time.
I think it's pointless to try and decide which creative person is most responsible for the success of a show. True, without the writer, there's no idea to work on. But wihtout the actors, there's no person to deliver the lines...without a director, nothing gets done. Wihtout the producer and studio, there's nothing at all, because there's no money to finance the thing. Without the set, costume, makeup, and sound people, there's nothing to support the others into creating the illusion of reality, just actors up on a blank stage. It ALL has to come together in a seamless way.
And then, the audience has to like it.
I just don't think the strike will be all that effective. My wife watches many of the so-called Reality shows of MTV. I joked with her last night that she's the reason the strike won't work, because it's too easy for the studio to put on some garbage reality show...or even a good reality show...and people will watch. All the studios need are shows that pull in their 8-14 ratings share to maintain their current ad rate, and at least CBS could get that showing re-runs of CSI. The WGA needs to get the TV audience invested on their side, and I don't think they've done enough to do that.
It was Sal Governale who asked you the Questions. They played the recording of it on Howard Stern this morning, then Howard interviewed the writer/producer of The Illusionaist about the Strike. I can't believe that was you!
Aw God. Did I come across as a total moron?
PAD
The clip they played from the picket line was with a really uptight guy who was clearly not amused by the line of questioning. He used the word frivolous like a dozen times. Based on your description, I'm guessing the clip they used was from the first interviewee, not you.
Marvel just announced they're charging $5 subscriptions for access to their comics they've started digitally archiving: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139548-c,onlineentertainment/article.html
Posted by bobb alfred
Yeesh, Mike Weber, your brother isn't David Weber, or the Honor Harrington and other series, is he? I love those books.
Yup, that's Rotten Kid Brother. Back in the late 80's when his first book was languishing as other publishers (which ones deponent sayeth not at this time) either just sat on it for months without saying anything, or kept saying "Well, if you just made a *few* little changes ... and shortened it by about 50%...", and someone recommended trying it at Baen, i encountered Toni Weisskopf (who, as a regular at SF cons in the South for years, i'd known since she was 18) and she mentioned that Baen was actively looking for unpublished authors, and i said "My brother has this manuscript..."
(BTW - that first book, "Insurrection" - a collaboration with Steve White - paid out its advance, a rather unusual circumstance for first novels, and did it *fast*, too.)
Hmmm Well as a big David Weber fan, all I can think of is when will we see the next Honor novel.
Sigh. I always thought that Claudia Christensen would have made a great Honor years back.
The clip they played from the picket line was with a really uptight guy who was clearly not amused by the line of questioning. He used the word frivolous like a dozen times. Based on your description, I'm guessing the clip they used was from the first interviewee, not you.
Oh lord, no, that wasn't me. Not remotely. I think the only time I use the word "frivolous" is in conjunction with the word "lawsuit." Nor was that St. Germain. Must have been someone else altogether.
PAD
Well, Mike, if you don't mind, let Rotten Kid Brother know I'm grateful that he and Baen met up, as I've really enjoyed the Honor Harrington books a ton.
Are you really a professional writer? Howso? "I WAlk THE LINE..." is horribly written. It's loaded with sentence fragments and crappy grammar. "You're from Howard Stern, aren't you?" is an interrogative, and as such should be punctuated with a question mark, not a period. Que basura.
Posted by bob
Are you really a professional writer? Howso? "I WAlk THE LINE..." is horribly written. It's loaded with sentence fragments and crappy grammar.
It's informal writing that reflects speech. And even if it *were* formal writing, if it were intended to reflect actual speech, your creebing would still not be valid.
"You're from Howard Stern, aren't you?" is an interrogative, and as such should be punctuated with a question mark, not a period.
Actually, it's a declarative statement couched in the verbal form of an itnterrogative. I.e. - "I know who you are."
As Heinlein says in The Mon is a Harsh Mistress, people with a grammar/syntax fetish are annoying to those of us who actually *use* the language, but harmless - "Like dead yeast in beer."
Posted by J. Alexander
Sigh. I always thought that Claudia Christensen would have made a great Honor years back.
I don't see her as tall enough. Also, i visualise Honor as slimmer - more a young-Diana-Rigg type.
Now, Angelina Jolie, complete with eye patch, in Sky Captain was just about perfect - but that ain't gonna happen, no matter what.
Ah yes, The Mon is a Harsh Mistress, that great Rastafarian masterpiece.
:)
The writers and actors DO make or break a concept. Thee is no concept that is so powerful that it can exist in isolation ...Ideas are dime a dozen--- ...Any fool can have an idea.
Sure, and many do. Good ones? That's a whole other story. Also one forgets another element: the studio. Ever see the original pilot for LOST IN SPACE? MUCH better than what eventually made it on screen. Blame the studio execs screwing things up. The writers had nothing to do with that execution. Or the otherwise superb MURDER ONE which got fiddled with so much by the studio that it did the crash-and-burn by the second season. Since the studio heads had that much input, shouldn't they also be getting royalties?
Acts of destruction are much easier than acts of creation. Just because someone is capable of messing up a show doesn't mean he is as important to the good shows as the writers or the actors.
Jason-
I thought it was The Mon is a Hash Mistress....ducks and runs
Since the studio heads had that much input, shouldn't they also be getting royalties?
In my not so humble opinion, all the studio execs should get is a smack upside the head for making the product worse.
Actually, isn't it studio and actor "changes to the writer's script" that made Star Wars 4-6 great, and then when Lucas was virtually "untouchable" that episodes 1-3 sucked?
Bladestar-
Sort of sideways on the Star Wars.
The Studio had jack all to do with any of the scripts no matter which one you are talking about.
There were a few adlibs yes but that was pretty minimal and typical for the time.
He had other people write (yes writers) the scripts for New Hope;Empire;Return and a good set of actors that could pull off the dialogue (Like Alec Guinness who made some really crappy lines sing like Shakespeare). Remember Harrison Ford threatened to strap Lucus to a chair and make him listen to his own script.
For 1-3 he wrote it and didn't have a writer come in and clean it up for him. So the director/producer wrote the script and the Studio did have some say in the final product.
They played the clip on the Stern show this morning. Was that you talking PAD? "typist strike" that was pretty funny. After the fact were you amused by the questions?
Many people on this board have mentioned the prospect of scab writers coming in and either taking over the writing work on shows or creating new shows.
Although that is a possibility, i think that it is a remote one. Many production companies have to work within the union system as part of their rules and regulations and also writers know that there will be repercussions to their strike breaking. I remember hearing stories in the past of writers, actors or other unionized entertainers working as scabs. The unions found out and banned them from ever being part of the union.
If their not a part of the union once the strike is over and the union workers go back to work they'll be put out of a job and will never have a chance to work again.
They played the clip on the Stern show this morning. Was that you talking PAD? "typist strike" that was pretty funny. After the fact were you amused by the questions?
I have no idea if it was me because I don't have Satellite and even if I did I don't listen to Howard Stern. I found the questions amusing at the time, although I was aware that they were designed to elicit confusion or fumferawing or otherwise make the person being interviewed sound like a jerk. So that shades one's opinion.
Yeah, he tried to frame it as a "typist's strike" when talking to me. My response was that you could refer to writers as "typists" in the same sense that you could refer to highly-trained and skilled surgeons as "cutters," but it wasn't a terribly comprehensive description, to which the guy responded--much to my surprise--"Okay, that's a fair point."
PAD
Also, as much as I think this might be a really good time for me to finish my screenplay and truck on up to say "Hey, I'm a writer, I'm not on strike, buy this!" I don't think that I'd be looked on very kindly by, well, anyone. If people are going to hate me and say nasty things, I'd want it to be for the USUAL reasons.
Remember Harrison Ford threatened to strap Lucas to a chair and make him listen to his own script.
Did he really? LOL! I knew I liked Harrison Ford for a reason. :)
Bladestar - I'll give you that the studio execs changes sometimes have a positive effect. But I have heard more examples of negative than positive. I cannot give specific examples at the moment (I'm at work), but I can say based on some interviews with Joss Whedon, that a studio's influence is not always for the good.
Bladestar - I'll give you that the studio execs changes sometimes have a positive effect.
Well, you know what they say about an army of monkeys and typewriters....
Bladestar - I'll give you that the studio execs changes sometimes have a positive effect. But I have heard more examples of negative than positive. I cannot give specific examples at the moment (I'm at work), but I can say based on some interviews with Joss Whedon, that a studio's influence is not always for the good.
I think that's an understatement. Almost all of the time, changes done for marketing reasons will weaken a script. And almost all of the studio changes for "artistic" reasons don't work out either.
How about the studio insisting that the devil-like "Spock" character had to be dropped? How about any number of studio executives, from before Trek to today, who have clamped down on a show or a creator because the writing was "too smart" or "too clever" for the dim bulb fans? How about the editor telling Chris that, despite how it was written and despite the plans he had laid out, Jean had to die/be executed at the end of the Dark Phoenix Saga? How about JMS fighting with Turner executives because they thought the plot resolution for an episode of Crusade was too subtle for the average viewer and wanted it substituted with the Captain baiting a trap with the attempted rape of one of his crew? How about TV execs at Fox deciding that they didn't like what they already couldn't change, so they screwed Firefly up by running the shows out of order/in the order they felt was best for the narrative of the story? How about Marvel derailing writer's story arcs for the latest pointless crossover?
Hey, what about all those TV and movie trainwrecks created by studio or executive committees to cash in on a popular movie, TV show or book that was birthed by a genuine creator?
I could add more and add lots more detail, but I have to get ready for work myself.
Later.
Even if the studios find replacement writers, I doubt many SAG or union directors would work with them.
Kath, you're thinking of The Mon is a Hash Minstrel, the musical!
Re: All the examples Jerry gave
Thanks! My mind was drawing a blank on specifics aside from the Joss Whedon ones (must've been due to all these people at work who want me to do stuff on my breaks... What do they say? No rest for the weary.)
Roger wrote: Well, you know what they say about an army of monkeys and typewriters....
Yeah, and the monkeys tend to be more gifted.
How about the studio insisting that the devil-like "Spock" character had to be dropped?
Oh, and don't forget the fight the studio won. That a female first officer wasn't acceptable. Bah!
Okay . . . while I understand and admire the fact that you writers are standing up for yourselves and trying to get what's rightfully yours, part of me would really just like you to get back to work and write stuff to entertain me.
Okay . . . while I understand and admire the fact that you writers are standing up for yourselves and trying to get what's rightfully yours, part of me would really just like you to get back to work and write stuff to entertain me.
Here's the funny part: so would the writers. They'd just like to actually get paid of fair amount for what gets sold via DVD (the place where most of the money is increasingly coming from) and anything at all on material that is streamed over the internet (the medium that everyone expects to be the next area where all the revenue is going to be).
In other words, while I will find it annoying/frustrating to miss out on some material for shows that I like, everything that I've read/heard has convinced me that the WGA is doing what it has to. Heck, maybe they should have done this the last time that negotiations were going on.
That said, I'm at a loss for anything that I could do that would make any perceivable defference.
Here's a question--can the writers write for some of the alternative media forms? I know they can still write comics...how about radio? What about theater?
Imagine a strike lasting long enough that people actually turned to comics/radio/theater for entertainment. Not only would the writers be paid but the tv/movie producers would find themselves facing new competition, something that might continue after the strike ends.
(Admittedly, the possibility of a radio teleplay revival seems unlikely, though anyone who has sampled some of those old classics of yesteryear--Arch Obler is a personal favorite--knows that they could be great.)
"That said, I'm at a loss for anything that I could do that would make any perceivable defference."
So far as I can tell, the most direct thing you can do is stop watching TV, and let the networks know. Stop buying DVDs. Find out if your friends have Nielson boxes, and get them to stop watching TV, too. The only direct way the general public can voice their support of the WGA is to hit the stuidios and networks in the only place they care about...ratings/sales. And let them know what and why you're doing so.
Don't worry David, you'll do it naturally. When the reruns go on for ever and ever, we'll all watch TV a little less, thus hurting the studios' revenues.
Here's a question--can the writers write for some of the alternative media forms? I know they can still write comics...how about radio? What about theater?
Definitely theatre...there's a NY Times article on that.
Radio is dicier, but also more problematic, since there isn't any market for radio drama.
Magazines, of course, are no problems at all...
"can the writers write for some of the alternative media forms?"
I think the problem is time. The reports I've seen from the full time TV writers is that they are now full time picketers. So they don't have any more extra hours in the day to work on other projects than they did before. I don't know if everyone does it that way, but it seems like at least a significant number do.
"(Admittedly, the possibility of a radio teleplay revival seems unlikely, though anyone who has sampled some of those old classics of yesteryear--Arch Obler is a personal favorite--knows that they could be great.)"
Hey, half the reason I wanted my XM was for channel 164, Old Time Radio.
"Radio is dicier, but also more problematic, since there isn't any market for radio drama."
XM has an entire channel devoted to them (163, Sonic Theater) and NPR plays them from time to time. Beyond that, there's always web sales. Big Finish is doing well enough, the Atlanta Radio Theatre Company seems to be doing ok and you can find any number of other audio drama/comedy sales sites by using Google. Someone (besides me) is spending their $$$$ on that stuff.
It may only be my little pipe dream, but I would LOVE to see audio drama and comedy start coming back.
Earlier I wrote: "The reports I've seen from the full time TV writers is that they are now full time picketers."
Scratch that. I just read a new post in the blog I was thinkging of (Jane Espenson's blog) and I misunderstood. She's saying they're picketing in four hour shifts, not full days.
Love what the Daily Show writers have to say about this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzRHlpEmr0w&eurl=http://www.oliverwillis.com/
Wow, for not being the Daily Show, that was an incredible facsimile. I could practically hear Jon Stewart at times. Very funny stuff.
"fumferawing" is that REALLY a word? If so, I must use it. Even if it isn't I MUST use it.
Something interesting from EWOnline.com: Even with the writers strike keeping late night shows dark, employees of The Late Show with David Letterman and the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson will be paid through the end of the year. The programs' production company, Worldwide Pants Inc., informed employees on Tuesday (Nov. 13) that they would be paid regardless of whether their show returned. Worldwide Pants, owned by Letterman, is the first known company to guarantee its staff a paycheck during the writers' strike.
While I don't know where he stands on the strike itself, it's damned decent of Letterman to make sure the rest of his staff has a good holiday season.
The web address of the article is here: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20160243,00.html
I started watching Letterman around the time of the 80s writers strike. He went off the air for awhile too, then came back before the strike was over. He adlibbed the jokes and started doing stuff like "Hal Gurnee's Network Time Wasters" while constantly saying, "Sorry, folks, we have no writers."
A HUGE thumbs up and "attaboy, Dave!" to David Letterman for that - and thank you to Christine for bringing it to our attention!
On Huffington Post, Trey Ellis writes:
One-Third of One Penny
The AMPTP took out a full-page ad today in the New York Times that convinces me that they have either completely lost their grip on our fact-based universe or they have absolutely no shame whatsoever.
In attempting to prove that the writers are evil blood-sucking leeches for demanding a 700% increase in royalties (that is, from .3% to 2.5%), AMPTP yet again proves the old adages:
There are lies, damned lies and statistics.
and
Figures don't lie, but liars figure.
and
As through this world you travel, you meet some funny men: Some rob you with a sixgun, some use a fountain pen...