Writers Guild of America (WGA) strike news 2 2

[fantastic_four]

On 9/21/2023 at 12:13 PM, drotto said:

This will also require far more numbers transparency.

This is one of the areas where I'm most on the side of the writers and actors, but will the streamers ever publicly share viewing statistics?  My guess is no, but almost everyone else definitely wishes they would.  But even if they ever say they're going to start doing it I don't know that we will ever trust their numbers since they have EVERY incentive to lie about them.

[drotto]

On 9/21/2023 at 12:32 PM, fantastic_four said:

This is one of the areas where I'm most on the side of the writers and actors, but will the streamers ever publicly share viewing statistics?  My guess is no, but almost everyone else definitely wishes they would.  But even if they ever say they're going to start doing it I don't know that we will ever trust their numbers since they have EVERY incentive to lie about them.

Double edge sword for everyone on the numbers.  The writers asking for residuals bases on views may find their show is worthless, and deserves no residuals.  On thr other hand, studios will then have stock holders asking what the heck are we paying for, that is not making us money.

[Bosco685]

On 9/21/2023 at 12:13 PM, drotto said:

If I were the person that could solve this issue, I would be very rich.  The issue is the number of writing jobs is likely contracting over the next few years.  They days of streamers green lighting seemingly everything, and the need for that many writers has ended. So those 11500 members are going to be fighting for fewer jobs. That is a hard reality.

 

The second issue of "bad" content and poor job training is somewhat related.  In the rush to poor out content, writers who would never have gotten the opportunity or perhaps were less qualified were hired due to the shear number needed to pump out that content. Thus, the decline in quality, and ultimately the current fall.

 

A possible solution, bring back some of the old writers and show runners.  Less so to write, but more to train and control the writers room. Too many people without the needed skills were put into lead positions without the experience necessary. Those experienced people will then re-establish the training aspect. Get people ready to do the higher level jobs.  Also, establish a clear path for progression and promotion.

 

Second, establish a clear performance based residual system.  Writers that have worked on good shows, that make money, should get performance based residual incentives. This will help to insure good writers stay working, and people are encouraged to do their best work. This will also require far more numbers transparency. 

Other than the results of a show being poorly received, is there a metric that always points specifically to the writers only so as to gauge their payout? I think you are assuming this without realizing scripts may be changed on the fly throughout a movie or show, driven even by actors, directors and producers.

10 Actors Who Demanded --script Changes (And Got Them)

Authenticity Vs. Vision: The Tension Of Actors Re-Writing Scripts

Why Screenwriters Get No Respect And Directors All The Credit?

Tarantino's disdain for what Oliver Stone did with his screenplay is no secret

As far as getting rich with a resolution, I'm very disappointed. I was waiting for your solution to land at reincarnation and reproduction of famous writers that have passed on.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Bosco685

[drotto]

On 9/21/2023 at 2:27 PM, Bosco685 said:

Other than the results of a show being poorly received, is there a metric that always points specifically to the writers only so as to gauge their payout? I think you are assuming this without realizing scripts may be changed on the fly throughout a movie or show, driven even by actors, directors and producers.

10 Actors Who Demanded ---script Changes (And Got Them)

Authenticity Vs. Vision: The Tension Of Actors Re-Writing Scripts

Why Screenwriters Get No Respect And Directors All The Credit?

Tarantino's disdain for what Oliver Stone did with his screenplay is no secret

As far as getting rich with a resolution, I'm very disappointed. I was waiting for your solution to land at reincarnation and reproduction of famous writers that have passed on.

Really, other than viewership numbers, and revenue generated, there is nothing to gauge a shows success with the general public. Also, it is a team effort in the end and attempting to pull any one group out is futile. If stuff is being changed there is no way for the average person to know or even care. 

 

Therefor, we need real viewer numbers, or a meaningful metric. We need a relative ranking of a shows popularity on a service. It would follow a show that is getting a high percentage of view time would be more popular, thus driving subs. Finally, for services that offer ad tiers, we need what people are willing to pay for ad spots for specific shows. Again, more popular shows will have higher ad buys. 

 

As much a we would like a metric that measures talent, all we have is popularity, and profit. If a writer on a popular, money, making show, we must infer they are part of a good team, and they are doing good work. They will then get reworded with residuals and more work. If their next project tanks, they will get downgraded. It's how the real world works.

[Bosco685]

On 9/21/2023 at 5:09 PM, drotto said:

Really, other than viewership numbers, and revenue generated, there is nothing to gauge a shows success with the general public. Also, it is a team effort in the end and attempting to pull any one group out is futile. If stuff is being changed there is no way for the average person to know or even care. 

 

Therefor, we need real viewer numbers, or a meaningful metric. We need a relative ranking of a shows popularity on a service. It would follow a show that is getting a high percentage of view time would be more popular, thus driving subs. Finally, for services that offer ad tiers, we need what people are willing to pay for ad spots for specific shows. Again, more popular shows will have higher ad buys. 

 

As much a we would like a metric that measures talent, all we have is popularity, and profit. If a writer on a popular, money, making show, we must infer they are part of a good team, and they are doing good work. They will then get reworded with residuals and more work. If their next project tanks, they will get downgraded. It's how the real world works.

So with brevity, you mean to say in the end it would be difficult to narrow down if the writers are the sole failure contributor. Good on you.

[drotto]

On 9/21/2023 at 5:24 PM, Bosco685 said:

So with brevity, you mean to say in the end it would be difficult to narrow down if the writers are the sole failure contributor. Good on you.

Never claimed otherwise.  Failure can happen at many levels; poor casting, poor acting, poor design, poor writing, poor CGI, etc.  Sometimes, it is clear where the failure occurred, sometimes not. But ultimately, they have to be judged on the monetary success and viewership. More often then not, the better people will rise to the top with repeatable success. Some people will not survive in the job, and nobody should garentee those people jobs or monetary rewors.

[Bosco685]

On 9/21/2023 at 5:34 PM, drotto said:

Never claimed otherwise.  Failure can happen at many levels; poor casting, poor acting, poor design, poor writing, poor CGI, etc.  Sometimes, it is clear where the failure occurred, sometimes not. But ultimately, they have to be judged on the monetary success and viewership. More often then not, the better people will rise to the top with repeatable success. Some people will not survive in the job, and nobody should garentee those people jobs or monetary rewors.

Definitely agree with you nobody should be guaranteed anything without earning it.

I just wouldn't assume minimum staffing intends to pack the room with non-contributors.

[drotto]

On 9/21/2023 at 5:46 PM, Bosco685 said:

Definitely agree with you nobody should be guaranteed anything without earning it.

I just wouldn't assume minimum staffing intends to pack the room with non-contributors.

I continue to disagree with the staffing requirements, because a larger writer's room does not garentee success either. There are many formulas that can work, and it should be the showrunner that determines what is needed, not somewhat random formula in a contract. Forcing somebody to hire people they don't want and feel the do not need,  will not inherently make a show better and may make it worse. Only the showrunners and other creators know what their peocess is, what they need, what the flow of their writers room is, and how the different people slot in. It only , likely in a token manor, creates a small level of job security, and has little to do with the creative process. 

 

Other than that, I have little disagreement with WGA's demands. You can not gartentee your members job security in the current market. It is a shrinking market, and some members are going to get left out, and there is nothing they can do to stop that.

[Bosco685]

 

[Bosco685]

On 9/21/2023 at 6:11 PM, drotto said:

I continue to disagree with the staffing requirements, because a larger writer's room does not garentee success either. There are many formulas that can work, and it should be the showrunner that determines what is needed, not somewhat random formula in a contract. Forcing somebody to hire people they don't want and feel the do not need,  will not inherently make a show better and may make it worse. Only the showrunners and other creators know what their peocess is, what they need, what the flow of their writers room is, and how the different people slot in. It only , likely in a token manor, creates a small level of job security, and has little to do with the creative process. 

 

Other than that, I have little disagreement with WGA's demands. You can not gartentee your members job security in the current market. It is a shrinking market, and some members are going to get left out, and there is nothing they can do to stop that.

All you are doing is repeating the same disagreement: you don't agree with a minimum staff count.

Yet in any work setting, HR/recruiting has minimum staffing standards for an enterprise to function. Whether you recognized that or not. Including functional areas such as Finance/Payroll, Technology, Public Affairs. What the WGA is demanding is that producers cannot attempt to squeeze out more work with less staff, recognizing in the new environment (steaming) that operates with shorter seasons yet many parallel shows this has become a common trend.

You can disagree. But neither you or I work in those environments. And since you are more on the technical side of the workforce, imagine if enterprise executives decided to consolidate Network Operations, Cybersecurity, Database Operations, Datacenter Operations, Issue/Event Management and Implementation Management into one team going forward because it would make it easier for 'management' to get more work from them with less staff. Then at least they can eliminate any dead wood and operate a lean-mean technical staff without all the headaches of unique roles or departments. No recognition of speciality skills or functions - just tech people to do tech ouputs. Makes sense, right?

[CAHokie]

On 9/21/2023 at 6:11 PM, drotto said:

continue to disagree with the staffing requirements, because a larger writer's room does not garentee success either. There are many formulas that can work, and it should be the showrunner that determines what is needed, not somewhat random formula in a contract. Forcing somebody to hire people they don't want and feel the do not need,  will not inherently make a show better and may make it worse. Only the showrunners and other creators know what their peocess is, what they need, what the flow of their writers room is, and how the different people slot in. It only , likely in a token manor, creates a small level of job security, and has little to do with the creative process. 

I agree with this completely. More does not equal better. I would rather have 3-4 people that bounce ideas off of each other with chemistry than 8 people where everyone has to debate every little decision.  

[goblinjareth]

On 9/22/2023 at 8:24 AM, CAHokie said:

I agree with this completely. More does not equal better. I would rather have 3-4 people that bounce ideas off of each other with chemistry than 8 people where everyone has to debate every little decision.  

To be fair, that is how a writers room works. Very few people are writing on every episode. The showrunners oversee the overall story, and extra writers are often brought on to flesh out the sub-plots. For example, the first season of Stranger Things was either at the WGA minimum or one under depending on interpretation of the policy. The Duffer brothers wrote ep 1 & 2, episodes 3-7 all had different single writers, and episode had the Duffers plus one more. Oftentimes, the showrunning/directing/producing is what gives something its unified voice, not the scriptwriters. The Mandalorian S1 also had the same amount of episodes and writers as ST1. In that case, it was Jon Favreau's responsibilities as a showrunner, not a writer, that held it together.

I think there needs to be pre-set exceptions for what can have less writers, such deadline stipulations that can kind of "exchange" writers for a longer writing period. But having the WGA's requested amount of writers is not unprecedented in good television

[Bosco685]

 

[Eclipse]

Let's get this done with, i havent worked on a show since June, and as much as i liked the summer off it;s time to go back to work

[CAHokie]

If WGA settles that may help grease the wheels on a SAG agreement since a few of the issues are similar.

[drotto]

On 9/24/2023 at 2:12 PM, CAHokie said:

If WGA settles that may help grease the wheels on a SAG agreement since a few of the issues are similar.

Think SAG will get settled within 2 weeks if this goes through. They will use whatever is outline here for residuals and AI and slightly adjust it for the actors, which will likely be acceptable.  Plus, the studios will be able to point to this agreement and say, it is good enough for them, it is what we are basically doing for you.

Edited September 24, 2023 by drotto

[Eclipse]

They've came to an agreement. Now lets get SAG back to the table, us IATSE need to get back to work

[Bosco685]

[Sauce Dog]

Many are thinking that the studios broke down because of this upcoming bill that would make striking workers in California eligible to receive unemployment benefit - which means the studios know they wouldn't be able to wait out / starve out the strikers long term if they were all covered by EI.


https://deadline.com/2023/09/california-bill-wga-sag-unemployment-state-senate-vote-1235546032/

[CAHokie]

On 9/24/2023 at 11:12 PM, Eclipse said:

They've came to an agreement. Now lets get SAG back to the table, us IATSE need to get back to work

How does it work for the IATSE when SAG and WGA strike? It automatically puts them out of work at no fault of their own. Does it make them eligible for any type of unemployment or internal funding?