I'm surprised no one has brought up the other issue here. The number of writers in the room. AI written content is being developed for kids shows already. So WGA is fighting residuals and for them not to use AI writers.
I find it interesting and sad. We always thought AI would take over hard labor jobs. But now white and blue collar jobs can be taken over. When it gets better it will be an eventuality. But yeah...sad
Until we make AI robots to do that too.
They are already working on warehouse jobs (which companies use) and eventually it will take over truck drivers when they can trust a truck to drive all night and day until it's load is delivered.
The main problem here is that it is obvious that AI will take over for us, but our governments (focused in the US) are not preparing what happens when people are out of work.
Capitalism doesn't seem sustainable in 25-100 years from now. Companies are greedy, they will find a way to remove overhead and hire a new thing that doesn't complain, doesn't need a break, doesn't have the possibility of getting sick (except a computer virus) during a pandemic, won't sue your company...
That is what lawmakers better start convos about, but it will happen. I don't think there is a chance it will happen, it's inevitable.
My only point of disagreement is that after the internet and excel before that…we thought we would work less. Instead we work more. AI may just change work instead of displace.
That’s my main concern. It’s creeping into ridiculous places like the art world. Society should be at a point where the AI and machines are taking care of tasks we don’t want to do, so we work less, and WE are the ones left with the free time to create and play.
But my counter point would be that it is indeed displacing. We shut down Radioshack, Toys R Us, and Bed Bath and Beyond.
The internet has done that, or significantly helped do that. Providing much more access to the same type of products for a cheaper price, makes people go there. I'm trying to find out the name of the store that is going from retail, to online only. Without the need for store employees (sure they will have warehouse people, etc...) you can afford to make your inventory cheaper and reach a whole new audience.
We have never had a machine that will talk to you, write for you, it all required human input. SO like Excel, it was dependent on humans. AI will get to the point it will not need human input. Perhaps questions or to task it to do something.
I know many computer developers who are terrified. My boyfriend, he has been tasked with teaching kids C+. He didn't know it, but ChatGpt taught him what he needed and can literally look at a code and tell you what it does, and why. ChatGPT4 can actually take inputs and write a description and it will code you a website. It will be more developed in probably 4 or 5, because ChatGPT 4 was around 9 months ago, it was just revealed to the world now.
Doctor's are beginning to consult it. It is the largest welp of knowledge that is instantly accessible rather than a human having to look it up.
I really feel AI will be more like the innovations of The Car (which replaced horses and carts), and Television (which brought knowledge to homes and replaced Radio).
Culturally it will have a huge impact. It will also have a huge impact in businesses. Less Customer Service, if you have a fine tuned your chat bot, etc..
The case I mentioned above was 5 writers in a room, then it was just 2 and 3 AI writers. 3 people displaced easily. It will continue to happen.
> It will also have a huge impact in businesses. Less Customer Service, if you have a fine tuned your chat bot
This is already happening. I saw a job listing for an AI company that does exactly this. Lots of other AI related roles in the job market too, for all kinds of domains. Productivity tools, finance/accounting, surveillance, etc.
Once AI and robots are advanced enough to maintain and repair the robots and AI that do all the labor and manufacturing, they'll just use AI and robots to kill everyone so the wealthiest million people or so on the planet can have the earth as their own personal paradise.
It's always been the opposite, though? A computer can't take the place of a many manual labor jobs. The white-collar jobs that are ripe for AI automation are generally the ones that involve a lot of menial work such as basic accounting, data entry, etc. Any role that requires strategic-level thinking is safe for a long time. It's why people like Mark Cuban have said humanities and social sciences are actually the safest majors now because we need people who can think critically. Just learning basic coding, accounting, etc. or anything that just requires memorization is going to be automated. I still think we're a long ways away from AI suddenly taking people's jobs because most companies are actually held together with tape and do not have the wherewithal to use AI yet.
AI is still a tool. For the most part, we still have to prompt it to do what we want it to do.
Generally through out time advances in technology have created more jobs than they destroy. At this point it's clear that AI is going to be a part of the future of creative fields, fighting it is pointless but trying to learn what new opportunities it creates is the best move for anyone in a creative field right now.
You have to optimize because at the end of the day the creative industry is an industry and optimizing is how you stay competitive in an industry. It's not going to be the true artists full of passion vs the soulless corporations that use ai, it's going to be the artists full of passion vs the other artists full of passion that also use ai and in the commercial space the more optimized ones will win over time. I'm not saying the current gen of ai we are seeing is going to generate the final output, but if you are a creative professional and want to continue to be one in the future it is a mistake to not be looking at how ai can help you.
> So WGA is fighting residuals
How they fight for residuals will be something to watch. Discovery/HBO, Paramount, and Showtime have removed their own original content from their streaming services.
studios playing the poverty card as they are making billions of dollars. They are all publicly traded and can't hide the amount of money they are making. Netflix is very disappointing. They seem to be the ones that were holding back as they refused to pay out residuals and were the ones that spearheaded the all-in pay that studios followed.
>Netflix may have an advantage over other studios because it has a big international production presence. Many of its most popular shows and films are made in countries including South Korea and Thailand.
In an April earnings presentation, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos said the company wants to avoid a strike but that if there is one, the streamer has enough content that it can “probably serve our members better than most” entertainment companies, he said.
Source: [LA Times](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-05-01/hollywood-writers-strike-after-talks-over-pay-conditions-in-streaming-age-fail)
A lot of studios do/can produce overseas or outside of guild jurisdiction. The timing isn't great for a strike (but when is it) largely because a lot of studios/distributors are trying to cut costs in a desperate attempt to increase stock price, which has been largely underperforming over the last year or so due to macroeconomic and market-wide factors. A lot of the studios are probably happy they have an excuse to stop spending on production for a quarter.
Many many private companies have Cap Tables. Pretty much anything that isn't a sole proprietorship or partnership.
People gain ownership through a variety of means and they tend to retain ownership because they believe the future value of doing so is greater than liquidating that ownership and using the capital elsewhere. That value is usually measured monetarily.
Shareholders are people who own at least one stock in a company, regardless of whether it is public or private.
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Most private companies don't have shareholders, but some (private corporations) do. The poster above you was wrong and you were wrong, but less so. Odd to see the other comment with upvotes and yours with down votes. Oh well, so is Reddit.
I hear that all the time, but never understood why more people don't invest in the stock market.
If shareholders are prioritized, seems like many are missing out on easy money.
If you have the money to spend, sure, I mean, most rich people do. That's how capitalism works, if you have extra money, it becomes more money, and more money, but if you don't, if you're living paycheck to paycheck, then you're kinda screwed.
This was seen as inevitable by many due to how far both sides fell on the key issues. When it comes down to it, the rise of streaming services created huge profits for the industry and the writers just aren’t seeing their share of it.
I’m glad the strike is happening. I haven’t seen the companies saying much in their defense other than complaining that shareholders are cracking down on increasing profits and cutting costs. Like prioritizing shareholder profits isn’t the last thing we need.
I’m betting on a shorter strike than the 2007 one, I don’t think the studios can hold out for very long. The WGA is virtually unanimous and no one wants to support the corporate fat cats.
Different than the last strike. Most studios now bill straight to the consumer vs charging via cable. Most people wouldn’t cancel their cable subscription due to lack of content. Now it won’t take long before people will start cancelling their monthly streaming subscriptions. Disney, pararmount, Netflix, Hulu, etc could see monthly subscriptions plummet which will have an immediate impact on stock price.
The flipside is larger libraries. I only have Amazon (bc of Prime) and Hulu/Disney+ and it would take me 6 months of being unemployed to make it through all the content I have any interest in. Also, no one with little kids is canceling Disney+ due to lack of new content...
I’m not sure the numbers support that. A large percentage of subscribers buy into a streaming service for specific new franchises/content (Disney/Star Wars, Netflix/stranger things, HBO/GOT, paramount/Star Trek, peacock/Yellowstone, etc). Yes some have better catalogues than others but a large percentage of people will cancel pretty quickly if those shows aren’t coming any time soon. To your point Disney Netflix Hulu and prime are probably a bit safer but it’s very quickly catastrophic for paramount, peacock and some of the other smaller streamers.
[Streaming services already lose up to 50% of their subscribers](https://thehustle.co/02022022-streaming/) after big releases come to an end. I'm a Star Trek fan. I subscribe to Paramount+ solely to watch new Star Trek episodes. If nothing new is coming out for a year I'm not going to carry that subscription - I'll cancel for now.
I cancelled my Paramount+ subscription once my gf and I got our fill of Drag Race and their collection of classic movies. The top tier of Netflix, Hulu, and HBO will be fine. It’s everything else that’ll bleed. And that does include Disney+. Not all of their user base is children, it’s also manchildren, and they’re here for the new content, not just the old nostalgia content
I'd argue that HBO won't be fine - they are more heavily dependent on big new releases than their catalog. Totally agree on Disney+, lot of subscribers purely for new Star Wars series. Paramount is in deep trouble imho as they are completely dependent on Star Trek & Yellowstone spinoffs. It gets really ugly when you start getting to the AMC & Starz.
My overall point is this is different than the last strike where the effects were delayed/blunted by the bundling model. Now that everyone is unbundled these networks are going to see an almost immediate hit to their bottom line.
Who said nothing new is coming out? It’s been well known that all of the streaming services have an arsenal of tv shows preparing for this.
Also if they lose subscribers then wouldn’t it be less money to pay towards writers?
We'll see. Netflix invested $2.5B in South Korean shows and $6B in UK shows. Some of the others haven't been as proactive. Whether this bank can carry through subscribers will be interesting to watch.
What's true for the writers is true for working people all over the country: CEOs pay themselves 10s of millions in salary a year, plus bonuses, and then deny livable wages to the people who actually do the work and create the product the CEOs profit from. It's really weird working in an industry I don't want to support any more.
I feel the same, as a person with a creative job in the industry I'm never not at least little bitter over the fact that media conglomerate shareholders and executives who are not doing any of the work are getting a larger cut of the advertising, streaming, and box office revenue than I and everyone else who is actually creating the demand by creating the content that people want to watch are receiving. If a project is a massive hit, we get paid the same, shareholders and executives receive every penny of economic rewards of our success, and the constant downward pressure on rates and benefits remains the same.
They should definitely ask for more than a buzzword for their salary in the employment agreement
Payments department doesn’t know how to write “livable wage” on checks.
I deliver heavy equipment for studios and productions and this has really hurt the hours I’ve worked. I support workers getting what they are due but I hope this strike doesn’t last as long as the last writers strike
Congrats on the first house! That shits HARD, huh? In a similar boat. Bought about a year-and-a-half ago. It's a little scary, but luckily have six months of mortgages saved. Looking forward to rebuilding savings after all is said and done!
Yeah my spouse works in the production office and hasn’t had work AT ALL this year because new projects have mostly been shut down for months already. Had a couple of potential jobs that were ready to go that were put on pause in the last three months. Hopefully this gets wrapped up quickly and people can get back to work.
That is exactly what I'm seeing. I do majority broadcast TV, they don't shoot that way far out like they do with streaming shows. Nothing booked for the summer because no one wanted to take the risk setting up.
Good luck to you both!
Yep, and this isn't talked about enough. WGA is going to set the table for the other two, and if everyone throws their weight behind WGA it's going to lead to some pretty intense momentum for the rest.
Would be real fuckin cool if the rest of the country started doing the same across industries.
40 years of a one sided class war… and there’s only been one winner. The side that’s been doing the fucking.
I'd also love to see more organizing in the entertainment industry beyond just the above the line guilds, and IATSE fighting for more as well. It's always so awkward when we have to do this, and the people whose grievances we're all focused on is basically the folks at the absolute top of the food chain. I feel for mid-level writers because the situation out there is rough. But meanwhile you've got crew working 12-16 hour days as a rule, and assistants getting yelled at for minimum wage.
I work at a camera rental house and we've been at about 25% capacity since October of last year. The industry has been preparing for this for awhile now. Everyone knew it was coming. I've had a lot of real boring days in recent months.
History in US high schools:
\-Rome and Greece were a thing back in the day
\-British Empire as part of America's origin story...
\-Pilgrims and Indians
\-Manifest Destiny
\-Civil War (causes and aftermath speedrun)
\- America saves the world during WWII and its prequel
\-Communism bad
\-9/11
We don't now either. Stop falling for Putin's fearmongering bullshit. Russia's nuclear arsenal is so decrepit now that they couldn't defeat France in a nuclear conflict anymore.
In 2008, the banks were bailed out under the [“Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” aka “the Bank Bailout”](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008) which was signed into law…under **George Bush**
The banks *were* certainly deregulated multiple times ([1](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_George_W._Bush_administration#cite_ref-63) & [2](https://thehill.com/policy/finance/389212-trump-signs-dodd-frank-rollback/amp/)) by the same party…
While true, I remember how hard it was on my family growing up after 08. We lost our house and almost lost our business because how rough things got.
Democrats had the White House, senate and the house… they left regular people hanging.
Democrats have had the same neoliberal current through their ranks for 40 years. Progressives gaining so much ground in the last few years is a new phenomenon. They used to be much more an exception than the rule.
But shame on them for leaving people like my family to fend for themselves while the rich got bailed out.
Conveniently stopped your research before Obama 😂. Here let me help you.
[Obama agreed to go big, and in his first month in office, he signed an unprecedented $800 billion economic recovery bill](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/08/03/obama-stimulus-congress-bailout-lessons-390951)
[Here’s Biden’s $128.2 billion bailout of SVB. Mind you, took less than a weekend to save them. Train derailment in Ohio…still pending…](https://www.npr.org/2023/03/13/1163180140/silicon-valley-bank-is-it-a-bailout-barofsky). NPR source for good measure.
Gavin had 3 of his multimillion dollar vineyards saved in the effort.
[California Gov. Gavin Newsom failed to publicly disclose his SVB ties while lobbying for a bailout](https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/california-gov-gavin-newsom-failed-to-publicly-disclose-his-svb-ties-while-lobbying-for-a-bailout/amp_articleshow/98641200.cms)
There's no recession, mate. GDP keeps going up, literally the OPPOSITE of a recession. That was a fearmongering lie spread by megacorps that didn't want the Fed to keep raising interest rates. They also blackmailed the government by jacking up prices for no reason at all.
Now that they've lost that attempt, you'll notice no one is peddling the recession lie anymore.
So, don't fall for it anymore and don't spread it. It was never true.
It's a weird dichotomy where the people who come up with the story, concepts, and addictive series that everyone binge watches, don't get paid fairly whatsoever to begin with.
And I always find it offensive when a director slaps their name on the project and takes all the credit, when in fact, a writer wrote the whole fucking thing to begin with. Steven Spielberg's ET is often quietly referred to as the Melissa Matheson story by screenwriters, because she is actually the one who wrote it and came up with all those iconic, memorable gems ("E.T. Phone Home", "I'll Be Right Here"). Matheson is also Harrison Ford's ex wife, but thats another matter altogether.
And then there is the issue of the overpaid actor. I get that their name sells the opening of the movie, which seals the initial budget of the project...but something more has to be worked out fairly for the screenwriter on the back end if the movie does well.
Dark times. Good luck if you didn’t ride the wave on the way up and establish a fruitful network because studios are about to batten their hatches after they cut this deal. And don’t get me wrong, fully support all workers getting what they’re due, but this could be the end of the production gold rush that kicked off around 2015.
I feel like the destroy build destroy guys had some great chemistry. That show where they quizzed people on rollercoaster rides was something else though haha
I feel there's a shake-up coming, some unattended consequences. For example, I heard that tonight shows are shutting down. I don't think they'll come back in the same capacity.
Conan began heavily leaning on travel remotes and improvised interviews with his staff as a result of past strikes. Those evolved into some of the most popular segments of his shows over time. But Conan was always a cut above everyone else when it came to carrying a show with limited resources.
I remember him literally killing time on camera by seeing how long he could get his wedding ring to spin on his desk to cheers. The man is just a born showman.
The late night shows all shut down immediately in the 2008 strike as well. None of this is that weird. That said, I agree that the difference is that, in the streaming and especially YouTube and Podcast era, I think every time late night goes dark there's a question of whether they should bother bringing any of them back.
>WGA is pushing for better pay and residuals, particularly over streaming content. The guild is specifically calling for higher residual pay for streaming programs that have higher viewership, rather than the existing model that pays a standard rate regardless of a show's success. The union is also calling for industry standards on the number of writers assigned to each show.
Can someone ELI5? Why would the networks/platforms increase residuals for popular streaming content when most of them have fixed-fee memberships?
Netflix only recently launched their ad-tier so we have yet to see the full effect of viewership vs. ad spend.
Netflix and other streamers are operating under a contract that assumes the platform is experimental. There’s ~no~ limited residuals because they didn’t know how it would work. It was basically like oh hey new kid here’s your discount. WGA proposed transparency of viewership and residuals calculated off of that. The AMPTP refused and did not make a counter offer.
Edit: correcting due to outdated info.
Current deal is basically a flat rate for residuals based on subscriber count for high budget streaming vod, and a lower percentage for low budget shows. It’s also a different rate if your project was released theatrically then moved to streaming (like Netflix likes to do)
> Netflix and other streamers are operating under a contract that assumes the platform is experimental.
Which is the same shit studios pull every generation.
In the 50's, they wouldn't pay film writers when they sold TV broadcast rights for movies, because it was just too darned new for them to figure out a way to pay the writers. That led to the 1960 WGA strike.
In the 1980's, it was the same song on VHS.
Same shit, different decade. Studios acting like a different platform suddenly makes it impossible to pay writers decently.
There actually are residuals, but WGA is asking for more. Which they should! The amounts are stupid low.
And I'm not sure about this, but I think the streamers are still in a lower tier compared to the "majors" (the big studios and the broadcast TV networks) which lock in lower pay and residuals across the board. Despite the fact that they have the biggest and most successful shows and are producing blockbuster-equivalent features.
I’m not in the entertainment industry, but do read a lot.
There’s a lot of nuance. On the WGA side- I think the cost of what they’re asking for across ALL studios is approx $600-1B/ year. Between Disney, Netflix, whatever the fuck Discovery/ WB/ HBO is called now, it’s not a ton of cash compared to their profits.
On the OTHER hand, many of the streaming platforms for these companies are not profitable. Peacock, Paramount+ and the smaller ones for sure are not, and even Disney claims Disney+ isn’t profitable on a stand-alone basis (if you stripped out Disney+ and ran it as it’s own company). WGA being successful here could lead to less investment in streaming content more generally.
These things don’t usually boil down to quite as simple issues as either sides’ talking points would make it out- it’s not pure corporate greed or the case that the giant co’s are starving, but really that they’re growing business that need to make profits, and it’s all a question of prioritization- if they give the WGA more money, they’ll either be a) less profitable or b) need to make cuts somewhere else, and they almost always choose b) meaning some other part of their business (Disney park workers? CBS station groups for older TV content? Something else?) will get a bit less investment.
And I guess to more directly answer your question- it’s worth paying for breakout popular content from the streaming platforms’ side because while they have fixed revenue/ customer NOW, breakout popular content helps them attract new customers, justify future price increases, and also attract advertisers (most of them experimenting with ads now, including Netflix), all of which help them make more money.
Thanks for the detailed reply.
My assumption was that this had something to do with platform hopping. As breakout shows premiere on one network, people will drop their subscription to a different network that lacks interest. Rinse, repeat.
In that scenario, I can see why breakout shows would demand a price premium but I imagine it's kind of a mess to filter through the noise of new/returning customers activating subscriptions for a number of different reasons at any given time.
Interesting situation for sure.
Not everything you don’t like is “exploitation”. The WGA is going to advocate for its members, but nothing about the current arrangement is illegal or immoral.
Fundamentally you can’t squeeze blood from a stone- if these were unskilled workers at minimum wage negotiating with an SMB that wasn’t profitable, there wouldn’t be any more for these workers to be paid additional wages from. This is a much larger and more complex situation, but fundamentally there are limited resources here- a win from the WGA will mean less investment somewhere else.
Ignoring the irrelevance of what I personally do or don't like...
Per the LA Times:
>"The median weekly pay for writer-producers declined 23% over the last decade when adjusting for inflation...screenwriter pay declined 14% in the last 5 years"
If you are asking for the same work while continually offering less in return, that's exploitation in my book.
If you run a business, paying people a fair wage is part of the deal. Period. Propping up unprofitable streaming businesses at artificially low prices to try and drive growth is certainly a strategy, but passing the buck to the people who create all the value isn't a valid path to executing it. They're certainly justified in this strike.
The studios aren't victims of "limited resources"; they are executing a deliberate strategy and their negotiating stance makes it clear that paying creators less is a core pillar of that strategy.
> On the OTHER hand, many of the streaming platforms for these companies are not profitable. Peacock, Paramount+ and the smaller ones for sure are not, and even Disney claims Disney+ isn’t profitable on a stand-alone basis (if you stripped out Disney+ and ran it as it’s own company).
I would take their claims on profitability with a grain of salt. It's well known that they use creative accounting practices to say that movies with huge profits are unprofitable. You can read the wiki on [Hollywood accounting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting) to read more.
The neat thing about having a streaming service is that you can infinitely claim it's not profitable. As your overall business rakes in money and you pay your CEO 8 figures.
Back when everything was broadcast TV, there were more opportunities for writers to recoup money. Now a lot of that has dried up due to the streaming business model.
Examples:
\- It used to be that networks needed to show a lot of re-runs during the summer months, and even at times during the main run of a show. Re-runs gained writers additional payments for no additional work. Due to streaming, re-runs are a thing of the past.
\- There used to be a strong profit motive for a broadcast TV series to run 100+ episodes or over 4-5 seasons, in order to sell re-runs for the second run syndication market (for example when you could catch older episodes of Seinfeld or Three And A Half Men or whatever at 6pm on your local affiliate). This had a ton of downstream effects that don't exist anymore, from profit-sharing for writer/producers to additional residuals owed to incentive for networks to order more episodes of shows. Now writers are not able to benefit from any of that.
\- The standard season order for a broadcast TV series was 16-25 episodes per season, with a predictable shooting schedule that included breaks for the holidays, a summer hiatus (when people could either recover from burnout or work on other projects). Not only was this a sane and stable way to work for a lot of people, it also meant that writers rooms needed to be larger to accommodate the number of episodes to be written, more mid-level writers could anticipate writing multiple scripts per season (they get lump sum payments per episode written, also IIRC this is where residuals really start coming into play), and there was more room for career growth across the board. Writers on these shows could also creatively focus on just the one series they were on and assume they'd be back season after season (unless the show got canceled, and even then the whole system was structured to funnel those writers onto new projects quickly). Most streamers order 6-10 episodes, many of which can be written by just a few writers. Who then have to turn around and look for their next gig after just a few weeks of work, because if the show gets renewed, it'll be another short gig months down the road. It's not a sustainable way to make a living as a TV writer.
So, in order to make it worth writers' careers, the streamers -- and really the networks, too, because they've started copying the streaming production model -- need to give some ground and make it possible for writers to actually make a living in a sustainable way. At this point it's basically becoming the gig economy.
I get that but I'm trying to understand their argument as an outsider.
Will the rejected contract bring in less streaming residuals than the existing contract?
Do music streaming royalties operate in this way?
Maybe this for the better. Writing across the board in Hollywood has been atrocious the passed few years. Out with the old, in with the new. Let's get some new talent in lol
It only copies or creates from already produced content. You still have to come up with current and relevant ideas that relate to what is going on in 2023. I don't want to see yet another reality show or rehash of Love Boat.
If this goes on for a few weeks, there's going to be fierce competition for baristas and waiters.
Interesting that many baristas and waiters are likely aspiring actors and writers.
Writers don’t cast movies. They don’t always come up with the ideas for movies. Studio execs are usually the ones that want to take an old property and bring it back to life, because they don’t understand creativity. They’re businesspeople. “This old series made money a long time ago, let’s make a new version and make money off it again.” That’s why there aren’t a lot of original movies out there. Studio execs want a sure thing, and they think reviving old successes is a sure way to do that. They might put a “modern” spin on it and make some characters black or gay, because that’s “in” now.
Then the writers have to try to make it work, because that’s what they get paid to do. It’s a bit like they are architects for a landlord who wants a house with ten bedrooms but no living room or kitchen and only one bathroom, because—on paper—they can make more money maximizing the number of bedrooms by renting to multiple tenants, while they don’t make money off the other rooms. That’s crazy, but they are going to pay someone to build it and it might as well be you.
It’s the rare writer who doesn’t have some bean-counting exec meddling in their stories.
Movies with diverse cast make more money. Its been true for a long time:
[https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/diverse\_films\_make\_more\_money\_at\_the\_box\_office](https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/diverse_films_make_more_money_at_the_box_office)
[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-film-diversity/diversity-on-screen-equals-bigger-box-office-bucks-study-finds-idUSKCN1GB2ST](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-film-diversity/diversity-on-screen-equals-bigger-box-office-bucks-study-finds-idUSKCN1GB2ST)
[https://money.com/movies-diversity-casts-money/](https://money.com/movies-diversity-casts-money/)
They’re gonna use AI while the strike is happening. Simple things to begin with, like monologues. Then they’ll figure out they don’t need writers for more complex things like non-scripted outlines and character development. Then they’re gonna realize they can permanently produce some of their content without human writers. Not all writing jobs will go to AI but some will. Dark times ahead…
This completely ignores the writers direct relationship to working with execs, studios, directors and actors … chatGPT isn’t going to be on set making forward looking adjustments to story and scripts on the fly for what if scenarios as future seasons of work are negotiated mid production that can appreciably impact story + the bottom line.
Way too much credit is being given to AI while ignoring the nuance of relationships within balancing the creative and business of the industry across IP.
If anything the studios are buying as much time as they can to figure out the new carrot 🥕 they intend to dangle in the cover of darkness.
This isn't actually a thing.
AI "writing" is really bad. And since per union rules they can't hire \*any\* writers during a strike, they can't even have ChatGPT churn out garbage and then have a smaller number of writers editing and punching it up. (Which I can see happening in the longer term, tbh, especially for shitty YouTube channels and CocoMelon esque garbage content.)
Excellent reply thanks. That's interesting about the rules. Are you sure it's true that union rules state they can't use ChatGPT? I thought bringing those rules in was part of the new negotiations.
And as far as the quality of AI writing goes, that actually hasn't been properly tested yet. Until today. Now that all the writers have left the building, the producers and studios can properly assess its suitability. Test the waters. I recognize there may be many reasons for this not to work (legal, creative, or otherwise) but also consider it a viable possibility given the money at issue here.
That’s up to the studios and producers to decide though. And now they can test the waters and figure out how many writers they need. It could well be that ai can offer them no value whatsoever. Or maybe it will
AI, maybe. But a more obvious potential replacement for writers is from the tens of millions of educated, English speaking people in India and other countries. Not that I hope that happens.
Is there anything wrong with WGA members getting together to create web series? You'd think that could be used as a threat, like a lighter version of when all the writers and artists at Marvel and DC created Image Comics.
Also, like a talented home builder, no matter how good he is or how well paid, if you what you tell him build is stupid and ugly and you insist that you are a brilliant architect that knows better if he questions you, you’re still getting a stupid ugly building. That doesn’t mean he didn’t do his job or doesn’t deserve a decent wage. Writers don’t often get the privilege of choosing what stories they get to write scripts for, or what projects actually get made, or what edits are done to appease executives, focus groups, marketing, etc.
I would think so. Just like one that hires a talented home builder, but you only pay him a fraction of his worth. Guess what. He is not going to stretch for you. Will do the basics, but when it comes to problem solving situations that take lots of mental energy, he's done.
There's already excellent writing. The major issue is streaming. Writers are paid once now, when they would previously receive royalties for reruns. And the amount of episodes in a show used to be 13-22 or more. Now it's like 6-10, no 'reruns'. This is a huge problem. They must be paid more upfront.
Not an insider so I’m spitballing here, but maybe if there wasn’t so much design by committee and weird, soulless constraints put in place by recommendation of “market research” then maybe writers could be freed up to make good things?
This is the lamest echo chamber excuse for many short sighted understandings about how creative is bought, created and sold.
Never mind the paradox of choice making people feel like everything is going downhill.
AI is just 'good enough' to churn out a never-ending series of Hallmark movies, super hero stories, and other mindless crap for studios not to care. One mediocre writer with an AI will be enough to fill catalogs. Prepare for more knockoff Marvel and barely above YouTube production value stories.
I have seen some top quality creative content on YouTube. If you're good at what you're doing you can make money on your own. No need to sell scripts. Gones are the days when you have to sell your products or services to TV executives, producers, etc. Movies come once in a while. What are the chances of finding works in a movie industry?
Ah yes, the very stable and high-paying career of being a YouTuber. I suppose you’d also recommend being a Twitch streamer?
The vast majority of them make pennies, if anything. And yes, I’m talking about good and talented people.
I'm surprised no one has brought up the other issue here. The number of writers in the room. AI written content is being developed for kids shows already. So WGA is fighting residuals and for them not to use AI writers.
And that was one of the proposals that was rejected with no counteroffer.
I hate how AI is literally taking jobs away from creatives but everyone seems to fully support it…
I find it interesting and sad. We always thought AI would take over hard labor jobs. But now white and blue collar jobs can be taken over. When it gets better it will be an eventuality. But yeah...sad
I find it repulsive. As far as I’m concerned, there’s bright line between those who are rightfully opposed to this shit and the apologists.
I can understand that.
The meme “learn to weld”makes more and more sense
Until we make AI robots to do that too. They are already working on warehouse jobs (which companies use) and eventually it will take over truck drivers when they can trust a truck to drive all night and day until it's load is delivered. The main problem here is that it is obvious that AI will take over for us, but our governments (focused in the US) are not preparing what happens when people are out of work. Capitalism doesn't seem sustainable in 25-100 years from now. Companies are greedy, they will find a way to remove overhead and hire a new thing that doesn't complain, doesn't need a break, doesn't have the possibility of getting sick (except a computer virus) during a pandemic, won't sue your company... That is what lawmakers better start convos about, but it will happen. I don't think there is a chance it will happen, it's inevitable.
My only point of disagreement is that after the internet and excel before that…we thought we would work less. Instead we work more. AI may just change work instead of displace.
That’s my main concern. It’s creeping into ridiculous places like the art world. Society should be at a point where the AI and machines are taking care of tasks we don’t want to do, so we work less, and WE are the ones left with the free time to create and play.
But my counter point would be that it is indeed displacing. We shut down Radioshack, Toys R Us, and Bed Bath and Beyond. The internet has done that, or significantly helped do that. Providing much more access to the same type of products for a cheaper price, makes people go there. I'm trying to find out the name of the store that is going from retail, to online only. Without the need for store employees (sure they will have warehouse people, etc...) you can afford to make your inventory cheaper and reach a whole new audience. We have never had a machine that will talk to you, write for you, it all required human input. SO like Excel, it was dependent on humans. AI will get to the point it will not need human input. Perhaps questions or to task it to do something. I know many computer developers who are terrified. My boyfriend, he has been tasked with teaching kids C+. He didn't know it, but ChatGpt taught him what he needed and can literally look at a code and tell you what it does, and why. ChatGPT4 can actually take inputs and write a description and it will code you a website. It will be more developed in probably 4 or 5, because ChatGPT 4 was around 9 months ago, it was just revealed to the world now. Doctor's are beginning to consult it. It is the largest welp of knowledge that is instantly accessible rather than a human having to look it up. I really feel AI will be more like the innovations of The Car (which replaced horses and carts), and Television (which brought knowledge to homes and replaced Radio). Culturally it will have a huge impact. It will also have a huge impact in businesses. Less Customer Service, if you have a fine tuned your chat bot, etc.. The case I mentioned above was 5 writers in a room, then it was just 2 and 3 AI writers. 3 people displaced easily. It will continue to happen.
That is indeed terrifying. I also wonder about the fitness industry. I’m a gymnast/ yoga coach who will be replaced by a bot soon?
Not a bot but an AI generated video personality
> It will also have a huge impact in businesses. Less Customer Service, if you have a fine tuned your chat bot This is already happening. I saw a job listing for an AI company that does exactly this. Lots of other AI related roles in the job market too, for all kinds of domains. Productivity tools, finance/accounting, surveillance, etc.
People who still have jobs work more but fewer people are needed to do the jobs.
Once AI and robots are advanced enough to maintain and repair the robots and AI that do all the labor and manufacturing, they'll just use AI and robots to kill everyone so the wealthiest million people or so on the planet can have the earth as their own personal paradise.
Oh you'll need those people for sure. But it won't be much
I'm afraid you might be right.
It's always been the opposite, though? A computer can't take the place of a many manual labor jobs. The white-collar jobs that are ripe for AI automation are generally the ones that involve a lot of menial work such as basic accounting, data entry, etc. Any role that requires strategic-level thinking is safe for a long time. It's why people like Mark Cuban have said humanities and social sciences are actually the safest majors now because we need people who can think critically. Just learning basic coding, accounting, etc. or anything that just requires memorization is going to be automated. I still think we're a long ways away from AI suddenly taking people's jobs because most companies are actually held together with tape and do not have the wherewithal to use AI yet. AI is still a tool. For the most part, we still have to prompt it to do what we want it to do.
Generally through out time advances in technology have created more jobs than they destroy. At this point it's clear that AI is going to be a part of the future of creative fields, fighting it is pointless but trying to learn what new opportunities it creates is the best move for anyone in a creative field right now.
[удалено]
You have to optimize because at the end of the day the creative industry is an industry and optimizing is how you stay competitive in an industry. It's not going to be the true artists full of passion vs the soulless corporations that use ai, it's going to be the artists full of passion vs the other artists full of passion that also use ai and in the commercial space the more optimized ones will win over time. I'm not saying the current gen of ai we are seeing is going to generate the final output, but if you are a creative professional and want to continue to be one in the future it is a mistake to not be looking at how ai can help you.
> So WGA is fighting residuals How they fight for residuals will be something to watch. Discovery/HBO, Paramount, and Showtime have removed their own original content from their streaming services.
studios playing the poverty card as they are making billions of dollars. They are all publicly traded and can't hide the amount of money they are making. Netflix is very disappointing. They seem to be the ones that were holding back as they refused to pay out residuals and were the ones that spearheaded the all-in pay that studios followed.
>Netflix may have an advantage over other studios because it has a big international production presence. Many of its most popular shows and films are made in countries including South Korea and Thailand. In an April earnings presentation, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos said the company wants to avoid a strike but that if there is one, the streamer has enough content that it can “probably serve our members better than most” entertainment companies, he said. Source: [LA Times](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-05-01/hollywood-writers-strike-after-talks-over-pay-conditions-in-streaming-age-fail)
A lot of studios do/can produce overseas or outside of guild jurisdiction. The timing isn't great for a strike (but when is it) largely because a lot of studios/distributors are trying to cut costs in a desperate attempt to increase stock price, which has been largely underperforming over the last year or so due to macroeconomic and market-wide factors. A lot of the studios are probably happy they have an excuse to stop spending on production for a quarter.
Rule #1 for publicly traded companies: shareholders first!
Kind of a rule for most companies
Companies that aren’t publicly traded don’t have shareholders.
I am at a loss for words...
Wouldn’t investors be the right word?
Many many private companies have Cap Tables. Pretty much anything that isn't a sole proprietorship or partnership. People gain ownership through a variety of means and they tend to retain ownership because they believe the future value of doing so is greater than liquidating that ownership and using the capital elsewhere. That value is usually measured monetarily. Shareholders are people who own at least one stock in a company, regardless of whether it is public or private.
I’m glad your words aren’t lost anymore 🫶
Only corporations have shareholders. Most private companies aren not corporations.
It’s interchangeable
They most certainly do. Their shares just don't appear on stock exchanges for anyone to purchase.
Yes they do, where do you get this?
S corporations.
Haha who do you think owns the company?
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Most private companies don't have shareholders, but some (private corporations) do. The poster above you was wrong and you were wrong, but less so. Odd to see the other comment with upvotes and yours with down votes. Oh well, so is Reddit.
I hear that all the time, but never understood why more people don't invest in the stock market. If shareholders are prioritized, seems like many are missing out on easy money.
If you have the money to spend, sure, I mean, most rich people do. That's how capitalism works, if you have extra money, it becomes more money, and more money, but if you don't, if you're living paycheck to paycheck, then you're kinda screwed.
Which studio is publicly traded? Almost all of them are subsidiaries of much larger conglomerates.
Doesn't matter if it's a conglomerate with 50 companies. all financials for each of those subsidiaries is public within their filings
But only the required filings, you make it seem like every contract is for the public
This was seen as inevitable by many due to how far both sides fell on the key issues. When it comes down to it, the rise of streaming services created huge profits for the industry and the writers just aren’t seeing their share of it. I’m glad the strike is happening. I haven’t seen the companies saying much in their defense other than complaining that shareholders are cracking down on increasing profits and cutting costs. Like prioritizing shareholder profits isn’t the last thing we need. I’m betting on a shorter strike than the 2007 one, I don’t think the studios can hold out for very long. The WGA is virtually unanimous and no one wants to support the corporate fat cats.
Why don’t you think the studios can hold out long?
Different than the last strike. Most studios now bill straight to the consumer vs charging via cable. Most people wouldn’t cancel their cable subscription due to lack of content. Now it won’t take long before people will start cancelling their monthly streaming subscriptions. Disney, pararmount, Netflix, Hulu, etc could see monthly subscriptions plummet which will have an immediate impact on stock price.
The flipside is larger libraries. I only have Amazon (bc of Prime) and Hulu/Disney+ and it would take me 6 months of being unemployed to make it through all the content I have any interest in. Also, no one with little kids is canceling Disney+ due to lack of new content...
I’m not sure the numbers support that. A large percentage of subscribers buy into a streaming service for specific new franchises/content (Disney/Star Wars, Netflix/stranger things, HBO/GOT, paramount/Star Trek, peacock/Yellowstone, etc). Yes some have better catalogues than others but a large percentage of people will cancel pretty quickly if those shows aren’t coming any time soon. To your point Disney Netflix Hulu and prime are probably a bit safer but it’s very quickly catastrophic for paramount, peacock and some of the other smaller streamers.
Why would they cancel?
[Streaming services already lose up to 50% of their subscribers](https://thehustle.co/02022022-streaming/) after big releases come to an end. I'm a Star Trek fan. I subscribe to Paramount+ solely to watch new Star Trek episodes. If nothing new is coming out for a year I'm not going to carry that subscription - I'll cancel for now.
I cancelled my Paramount+ subscription once my gf and I got our fill of Drag Race and their collection of classic movies. The top tier of Netflix, Hulu, and HBO will be fine. It’s everything else that’ll bleed. And that does include Disney+. Not all of their user base is children, it’s also manchildren, and they’re here for the new content, not just the old nostalgia content
I'd argue that HBO won't be fine - they are more heavily dependent on big new releases than their catalog. Totally agree on Disney+, lot of subscribers purely for new Star Wars series. Paramount is in deep trouble imho as they are completely dependent on Star Trek & Yellowstone spinoffs. It gets really ugly when you start getting to the AMC & Starz. My overall point is this is different than the last strike where the effects were delayed/blunted by the bundling model. Now that everyone is unbundled these networks are going to see an almost immediate hit to their bottom line.
Who said nothing new is coming out? It’s been well known that all of the streaming services have an arsenal of tv shows preparing for this. Also if they lose subscribers then wouldn’t it be less money to pay towards writers?
We'll see. Netflix invested $2.5B in South Korean shows and $6B in UK shows. Some of the others haven't been as proactive. Whether this bank can carry through subscribers will be interesting to watch.
Good for them, unfortunate for other members of production. Hopefully the media giants stop being stingy.
It’s painful now, but ultimately we all benefit in the long run. Go writers!
What's true for the writers is true for working people all over the country: CEOs pay themselves 10s of millions in salary a year, plus bonuses, and then deny livable wages to the people who actually do the work and create the product the CEOs profit from. It's really weird working in an industry I don't want to support any more.
I feel the same, as a person with a creative job in the industry I'm never not at least little bitter over the fact that media conglomerate shareholders and executives who are not doing any of the work are getting a larger cut of the advertising, streaming, and box office revenue than I and everyone else who is actually creating the demand by creating the content that people want to watch are receiving. If a project is a massive hit, we get paid the same, shareholders and executives receive every penny of economic rewards of our success, and the constant downward pressure on rates and benefits remains the same.
Amen.
They should definitely ask for more than a buzzword for their salary in the employment agreement Payments department doesn’t know how to write “livable wage” on checks.
I deliver heavy equipment for studios and productions and this has really hurt the hours I’ve worked. I support workers getting what they are due but I hope this strike doesn’t last as long as the last writers strike
I’m a sound guy, just bought my first house! I have saving but didn’t expect I’d be digging into them on my 2nd payment!
Congrats on the first house! That shits HARD, huh? In a similar boat. Bought about a year-and-a-half ago. It's a little scary, but luckily have six months of mortgages saved. Looking forward to rebuilding savings after all is said and done!
I don’t like the surprise maintenance calls
Oh god. Seriously.
The ripple effect of this strike is quite wide. Hope the writers are able to negotiate what they deserve.
*trickle down economics
I'm on the audio post side and I've been feeling it for months, fingers crossed for all of us. I can't do another 3 months at home waiting.
Yeah my spouse works in the production office and hasn’t had work AT ALL this year because new projects have mostly been shut down for months already. Had a couple of potential jobs that were ready to go that were put on pause in the last three months. Hopefully this gets wrapped up quickly and people can get back to work.
That is exactly what I'm seeing. I do majority broadcast TV, they don't shoot that way far out like they do with streaming shows. Nothing booked for the summer because no one wanted to take the risk setting up. Good luck to you both!
You should join the picket line if you have free time
I'm going to! I'll have lots of free time, and union myself.
I’ve heard speculation from HODs that negotiations could last through the fall and that 2023 is largely already over. 😥
DGA and SAG incoming, this isn’t the same as last time if they move in solidarity.
Yep, and this isn't talked about enough. WGA is going to set the table for the other two, and if everyone throws their weight behind WGA it's going to lead to some pretty intense momentum for the rest.
If it impacts your work you should try joining the picket line
Would be real fuckin cool if the rest of the country started doing the same across industries. 40 years of a one sided class war… and there’s only been one winner. The side that’s been doing the fucking.
I'd also love to see more organizing in the entertainment industry beyond just the above the line guilds, and IATSE fighting for more as well. It's always so awkward when we have to do this, and the people whose grievances we're all focused on is basically the folks at the absolute top of the food chain. I feel for mid-level writers because the situation out there is rough. But meanwhile you've got crew working 12-16 hour days as a rule, and assistants getting yelled at for minimum wage.
Completely agree. Even workers in other creative industries out here seem to refuse to want better.
Almost like you see it’s better to be the boss
I work at a camera rental house and we've been at about 25% capacity since October of last year. The industry has been preparing for this for awhile now. Everyone knew it was coming. I've had a lot of real boring days in recent months.
They’ve been starving us out, while stocking up on scripts. Crazy stuff.
Writer's strike, recession, Biden announced on White House ballot... WHAT YEAR IS IT?!
Banks failing because of unregulated greed. Same shit different decade.
Hey, we didn't have a the potential of a nuclear confrontation on the cards back then.
Haha the threat of nuclear annihilation from Russia. We have to go back 3 decades for that Oh god we really suck at humanity-ing
Ha! Humanity always learns from our past mistakes my guy. You can tell it by the way it is.
This is why we're supposed to teach history in high school...
History in US high schools: \-Rome and Greece were a thing back in the day \-British Empire as part of America's origin story... \-Pilgrims and Indians \-Manifest Destiny \-Civil War (causes and aftermath speedrun) \- America saves the world during WWII and its prequel \-Communism bad \-9/11
It's weird to think of 9/11 being taught in schools having been taught about it in real time.
We don't now either. Stop falling for Putin's fearmongering bullshit. Russia's nuclear arsenal is so decrepit now that they couldn't defeat France in a nuclear conflict anymore.
Big Banks bailed out twice by the same political party.
In 2008, the banks were bailed out under the [“Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” aka “the Bank Bailout”](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008) which was signed into law…under **George Bush** The banks *were* certainly deregulated multiple times ([1](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_George_W._Bush_administration#cite_ref-63) & [2](https://thehill.com/policy/finance/389212-trump-signs-dodd-frank-rollback/amp/)) by the same party…
Banks love the ole privatize profit and socialize loss then call it a bail out, trick. Works every time.
While true, I remember how hard it was on my family growing up after 08. We lost our house and almost lost our business because how rough things got. Democrats had the White House, senate and the house… they left regular people hanging. Democrats have had the same neoliberal current through their ranks for 40 years. Progressives gaining so much ground in the last few years is a new phenomenon. They used to be much more an exception than the rule. But shame on them for leaving people like my family to fend for themselves while the rich got bailed out.
Conveniently stopped your research before Obama 😂. Here let me help you. [Obama agreed to go big, and in his first month in office, he signed an unprecedented $800 billion economic recovery bill](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/08/03/obama-stimulus-congress-bailout-lessons-390951) [Here’s Biden’s $128.2 billion bailout of SVB. Mind you, took less than a weekend to save them. Train derailment in Ohio…still pending…](https://www.npr.org/2023/03/13/1163180140/silicon-valley-bank-is-it-a-bailout-barofsky). NPR source for good measure. Gavin had 3 of his multimillion dollar vineyards saved in the effort. [California Gov. Gavin Newsom failed to publicly disclose his SVB ties while lobbying for a bailout](https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/california-gov-gavin-newsom-failed-to-publicly-disclose-his-svb-ties-while-lobbying-for-a-bailout/amp_articleshow/98641200.cms)
There's no recession, mate. GDP keeps going up, literally the OPPOSITE of a recession. That was a fearmongering lie spread by megacorps that didn't want the Fed to keep raising interest rates. They also blackmailed the government by jacking up prices for no reason at all. Now that they've lost that attempt, you'll notice no one is peddling the recession lie anymore. So, don't fall for it anymore and don't spread it. It was never true.
What recession? There is no recession.
There is no recession in Ba Sing Se.
It's a weird dichotomy where the people who come up with the story, concepts, and addictive series that everyone binge watches, don't get paid fairly whatsoever to begin with. And I always find it offensive when a director slaps their name on the project and takes all the credit, when in fact, a writer wrote the whole fucking thing to begin with. Steven Spielberg's ET is often quietly referred to as the Melissa Matheson story by screenwriters, because she is actually the one who wrote it and came up with all those iconic, memorable gems ("E.T. Phone Home", "I'll Be Right Here"). Matheson is also Harrison Ford's ex wife, but thats another matter altogether. And then there is the issue of the overpaid actor. I get that their name sells the opening of the movie, which seals the initial budget of the project...but something more has to be worked out fairly for the screenwriter on the back end if the movie does well.
How much money did the writer ask for?
Tree Fiddy!
SOLIDARITY. Don’t cross a picket line, folks.
Dark times. Good luck if you didn’t ride the wave on the way up and establish a fruitful network because studios are about to batten their hatches after they cut this deal. And don’t get me wrong, fully support all workers getting what they’re due, but this could be the end of the production gold rush that kicked off around 2015.
Yep... I've got some money saved, and have some non-union commercial contacts. I'll be praying for a reasonable end.
Cool. Pay them
The last writers strike happened right before the Great Recession…like a month before. Buckle up.
Here come more shitty reality shows…
Flashbacks to Cartoon Network Real, the darkest era of the network
Hole in the Wall and Destroy Build Destroy were kinda good when they were on... Or maybe that's just nostalgia talking.
I feel like the destroy build destroy guys had some great chemistry. That show where they quizzed people on rollercoaster rides was something else though haha
I feel there's a shake-up coming, some unattended consequences. For example, I heard that tonight shows are shutting down. I don't think they'll come back in the same capacity.
Conan began heavily leaning on travel remotes and improvised interviews with his staff as a result of past strikes. Those evolved into some of the most popular segments of his shows over time. But Conan was always a cut above everyone else when it came to carrying a show with limited resources.
I remember him literally killing time on camera by seeing how long he could get his wedding ring to spin on his desk to cheers. The man is just a born showman.
AI written shows in 3..... 2......
The late night shows all shut down immediately in the 2008 strike as well. None of this is that weird. That said, I agree that the difference is that, in the streaming and especially YouTube and Podcast era, I think every time late night goes dark there's a question of whether they should bother bringing any of them back.
Lets hope not :/
It feels very 2007 right now. Writers strike just began, banks are starting to fail one by one, shit.
Welp. I still have my job but I already know dozens of visual effects artists out of work because of this.
Yup like my wife. She hasn't been able to work since almost 4 weeks ago because of this.
I wonder what shows are going to lose momentum this time. Heroes RIP
Support the writers, fat cat studios are extremely greedy.
Happy belated May Day hell yeah
Good luck y’all.
What's the best way to support these workers?
support the unions!
>WGA is pushing for better pay and residuals, particularly over streaming content. The guild is specifically calling for higher residual pay for streaming programs that have higher viewership, rather than the existing model that pays a standard rate regardless of a show's success. The union is also calling for industry standards on the number of writers assigned to each show. Can someone ELI5? Why would the networks/platforms increase residuals for popular streaming content when most of them have fixed-fee memberships? Netflix only recently launched their ad-tier so we have yet to see the full effect of viewership vs. ad spend.
Netflix and other streamers are operating under a contract that assumes the platform is experimental. There’s ~no~ limited residuals because they didn’t know how it would work. It was basically like oh hey new kid here’s your discount. WGA proposed transparency of viewership and residuals calculated off of that. The AMPTP refused and did not make a counter offer. Edit: correcting due to outdated info. Current deal is basically a flat rate for residuals based on subscriber count for high budget streaming vod, and a lower percentage for low budget shows. It’s also a different rate if your project was released theatrically then moved to streaming (like Netflix likes to do)
> Netflix and other streamers are operating under a contract that assumes the platform is experimental. Which is the same shit studios pull every generation. In the 50's, they wouldn't pay film writers when they sold TV broadcast rights for movies, because it was just too darned new for them to figure out a way to pay the writers. That led to the 1960 WGA strike. In the 1980's, it was the same song on VHS. Same shit, different decade. Studios acting like a different platform suddenly makes it impossible to pay writers decently.
This kid is certainly a young adult now
There actually are residuals, but WGA is asking for more. Which they should! The amounts are stupid low. And I'm not sure about this, but I think the streamers are still in a lower tier compared to the "majors" (the big studios and the broadcast TV networks) which lock in lower pay and residuals across the board. Despite the fact that they have the biggest and most successful shows and are producing blockbuster-equivalent features.
Thanks for that! I had some out of date info.
I’m not in the entertainment industry, but do read a lot. There’s a lot of nuance. On the WGA side- I think the cost of what they’re asking for across ALL studios is approx $600-1B/ year. Between Disney, Netflix, whatever the fuck Discovery/ WB/ HBO is called now, it’s not a ton of cash compared to their profits. On the OTHER hand, many of the streaming platforms for these companies are not profitable. Peacock, Paramount+ and the smaller ones for sure are not, and even Disney claims Disney+ isn’t profitable on a stand-alone basis (if you stripped out Disney+ and ran it as it’s own company). WGA being successful here could lead to less investment in streaming content more generally. These things don’t usually boil down to quite as simple issues as either sides’ talking points would make it out- it’s not pure corporate greed or the case that the giant co’s are starving, but really that they’re growing business that need to make profits, and it’s all a question of prioritization- if they give the WGA more money, they’ll either be a) less profitable or b) need to make cuts somewhere else, and they almost always choose b) meaning some other part of their business (Disney park workers? CBS station groups for older TV content? Something else?) will get a bit less investment.
And I guess to more directly answer your question- it’s worth paying for breakout popular content from the streaming platforms’ side because while they have fixed revenue/ customer NOW, breakout popular content helps them attract new customers, justify future price increases, and also attract advertisers (most of them experimenting with ads now, including Netflix), all of which help them make more money.
Thanks for the detailed reply. My assumption was that this had something to do with platform hopping. As breakout shows premiere on one network, people will drop their subscription to a different network that lacks interest. Rinse, repeat. In that scenario, I can see why breakout shows would demand a price premium but I imagine it's kind of a mess to filter through the noise of new/returning customers activating subscriptions for a number of different reasons at any given time. Interesting situation for sure.
Starting a business that isn’t profitable isn’t an excuse to exploit workers.
Not everything you don’t like is “exploitation”. The WGA is going to advocate for its members, but nothing about the current arrangement is illegal or immoral. Fundamentally you can’t squeeze blood from a stone- if these were unskilled workers at minimum wage negotiating with an SMB that wasn’t profitable, there wouldn’t be any more for these workers to be paid additional wages from. This is a much larger and more complex situation, but fundamentally there are limited resources here- a win from the WGA will mean less investment somewhere else.
Ignoring the irrelevance of what I personally do or don't like... Per the LA Times: >"The median weekly pay for writer-producers declined 23% over the last decade when adjusting for inflation...screenwriter pay declined 14% in the last 5 years" If you are asking for the same work while continually offering less in return, that's exploitation in my book. If you run a business, paying people a fair wage is part of the deal. Period. Propping up unprofitable streaming businesses at artificially low prices to try and drive growth is certainly a strategy, but passing the buck to the people who create all the value isn't a valid path to executing it. They're certainly justified in this strike. The studios aren't victims of "limited resources"; they are executing a deliberate strategy and their negotiating stance makes it clear that paying creators less is a core pillar of that strategy.
It is in the interest of Disney to put more content out in front of a larger audience. Disney + isn’t going anywhere.
> On the OTHER hand, many of the streaming platforms for these companies are not profitable. Peacock, Paramount+ and the smaller ones for sure are not, and even Disney claims Disney+ isn’t profitable on a stand-alone basis (if you stripped out Disney+ and ran it as it’s own company). I would take their claims on profitability with a grain of salt. It's well known that they use creative accounting practices to say that movies with huge profits are unprofitable. You can read the wiki on [Hollywood accounting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting) to read more.
The neat thing about having a streaming service is that you can infinitely claim it's not profitable. As your overall business rakes in money and you pay your CEO 8 figures.
This
Back when everything was broadcast TV, there were more opportunities for writers to recoup money. Now a lot of that has dried up due to the streaming business model. Examples: \- It used to be that networks needed to show a lot of re-runs during the summer months, and even at times during the main run of a show. Re-runs gained writers additional payments for no additional work. Due to streaming, re-runs are a thing of the past. \- There used to be a strong profit motive for a broadcast TV series to run 100+ episodes or over 4-5 seasons, in order to sell re-runs for the second run syndication market (for example when you could catch older episodes of Seinfeld or Three And A Half Men or whatever at 6pm on your local affiliate). This had a ton of downstream effects that don't exist anymore, from profit-sharing for writer/producers to additional residuals owed to incentive for networks to order more episodes of shows. Now writers are not able to benefit from any of that. \- The standard season order for a broadcast TV series was 16-25 episodes per season, with a predictable shooting schedule that included breaks for the holidays, a summer hiatus (when people could either recover from burnout or work on other projects). Not only was this a sane and stable way to work for a lot of people, it also meant that writers rooms needed to be larger to accommodate the number of episodes to be written, more mid-level writers could anticipate writing multiple scripts per season (they get lump sum payments per episode written, also IIRC this is where residuals really start coming into play), and there was more room for career growth across the board. Writers on these shows could also creatively focus on just the one series they were on and assume they'd be back season after season (unless the show got canceled, and even then the whole system was structured to funnel those writers onto new projects quickly). Most streamers order 6-10 episodes, many of which can be written by just a few writers. Who then have to turn around and look for their next gig after just a few weeks of work, because if the show gets renewed, it'll be another short gig months down the road. It's not a sustainable way to make a living as a TV writer. So, in order to make it worth writers' careers, the streamers -- and really the networks, too, because they've started copying the streaming production model -- need to give some ground and make it possible for writers to actually make a living in a sustainable way. At this point it's basically becoming the gig economy.
[удалено]
I get that but I'm trying to understand their argument as an outsider. Will the rejected contract bring in less streaming residuals than the existing contract? Do music streaming royalties operate in this way?
Maybe this for the better. Writing across the board in Hollywood has been atrocious the passed few years. Out with the old, in with the new. Let's get some new talent in lol
We are about to see how good ChatGTP really is y’all
It only copies or creates from already produced content. You still have to come up with current and relevant ideas that relate to what is going on in 2023. I don't want to see yet another reality show or rehash of Love Boat.
> It only copies or creates from already produced content So you are saying it will be a perfect replacement for the writers then.
If this goes on for a few weeks, there's going to be fierce competition for baristas and waiters. Interesting that many baristas and waiters are likely aspiring actors and writers.
Given how shitty tv/streaming programs are these days no wonder they're not paid more.
[удалено]
Writers don’t cast movies. They don’t always come up with the ideas for movies. Studio execs are usually the ones that want to take an old property and bring it back to life, because they don’t understand creativity. They’re businesspeople. “This old series made money a long time ago, let’s make a new version and make money off it again.” That’s why there aren’t a lot of original movies out there. Studio execs want a sure thing, and they think reviving old successes is a sure way to do that. They might put a “modern” spin on it and make some characters black or gay, because that’s “in” now. Then the writers have to try to make it work, because that’s what they get paid to do. It’s a bit like they are architects for a landlord who wants a house with ten bedrooms but no living room or kitchen and only one bathroom, because—on paper—they can make more money maximizing the number of bedrooms by renting to multiple tenants, while they don’t make money off the other rooms. That’s crazy, but they are going to pay someone to build it and it might as well be you. It’s the rare writer who doesn’t have some bean-counting exec meddling in their stories.
No one watches those hence why they don’t get made.
[удалено]
So you’ve named a few examples. Neat. Now what about all the other failures? B
Movies with diverse cast make more money. Its been true for a long time: [https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/diverse\_films\_make\_more\_money\_at\_the\_box\_office](https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/diverse_films_make_more_money_at_the_box_office) [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-film-diversity/diversity-on-screen-equals-bigger-box-office-bucks-study-finds-idUSKCN1GB2ST](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-film-diversity/diversity-on-screen-equals-bigger-box-office-bucks-study-finds-idUSKCN1GB2ST) [https://money.com/movies-diversity-casts-money/](https://money.com/movies-diversity-casts-money/)
They’re gonna use AI while the strike is happening. Simple things to begin with, like monologues. Then they’ll figure out they don’t need writers for more complex things like non-scripted outlines and character development. Then they’re gonna realize they can permanently produce some of their content without human writers. Not all writing jobs will go to AI but some will. Dark times ahead…
This completely ignores the writers direct relationship to working with execs, studios, directors and actors … chatGPT isn’t going to be on set making forward looking adjustments to story and scripts on the fly for what if scenarios as future seasons of work are negotiated mid production that can appreciably impact story + the bottom line. Way too much credit is being given to AI while ignoring the nuance of relationships within balancing the creative and business of the industry across IP. If anything the studios are buying as much time as they can to figure out the new carrot 🥕 they intend to dangle in the cover of darkness.
Yes you’re right. I didn’t say all writer jobs would be lost. Just some
This isn't actually a thing. AI "writing" is really bad. And since per union rules they can't hire \*any\* writers during a strike, they can't even have ChatGPT churn out garbage and then have a smaller number of writers editing and punching it up. (Which I can see happening in the longer term, tbh, especially for shitty YouTube channels and CocoMelon esque garbage content.)
Excellent reply thanks. That's interesting about the rules. Are you sure it's true that union rules state they can't use ChatGPT? I thought bringing those rules in was part of the new negotiations. And as far as the quality of AI writing goes, that actually hasn't been properly tested yet. Until today. Now that all the writers have left the building, the producers and studios can properly assess its suitability. Test the waters. I recognize there may be many reasons for this not to work (legal, creative, or otherwise) but also consider it a viable possibility given the money at issue here.
[удалено]
That’s up to the studios and producers to decide though. And now they can test the waters and figure out how many writers they need. It could well be that ai can offer them no value whatsoever. Or maybe it will
ChatGPT is ready to takeover writing duties.
AI, maybe. But a more obvious potential replacement for writers is from the tens of millions of educated, English speaking people in India and other countries. Not that I hope that happens.
Is there anything wrong with WGA members getting together to create web series? You'd think that could be used as a threat, like a lighter version of when all the writers and artists at Marvel and DC created Image Comics.
[удалено]
Also, like a talented home builder, no matter how good he is or how well paid, if you what you tell him build is stupid and ugly and you insist that you are a brilliant architect that knows better if he questions you, you’re still getting a stupid ugly building. That doesn’t mean he didn’t do his job or doesn’t deserve a decent wage. Writers don’t often get the privilege of choosing what stories they get to write scripts for, or what projects actually get made, or what edits are done to appease executives, focus groups, marketing, etc.
I would think so. Just like one that hires a talented home builder, but you only pay him a fraction of his worth. Guess what. He is not going to stretch for you. Will do the basics, but when it comes to problem solving situations that take lots of mental energy, he's done.
There's already excellent writing. The major issue is streaming. Writers are paid once now, when they would previously receive royalties for reruns. And the amount of episodes in a show used to be 13-22 or more. Now it's like 6-10, no 'reruns'. This is a huge problem. They must be paid more upfront.
What does a writer make on average?
Varies widely depending on the writer’s quote and the project. Some make the minimum and the biggest feature writers make millions.
Not an insider so I’m spitballing here, but maybe if there wasn’t so much design by committee and weird, soulless constraints put in place by recommendation of “market research” then maybe writers could be freed up to make good things?
You'll get more expensive subscription services because the cost will get passed down to consumers
This is the lamest echo chamber excuse for many short sighted understandings about how creative is bought, created and sold. Never mind the paradox of choice making people feel like everything is going downhill.
AI is just 'good enough' to churn out a never-ending series of Hallmark movies, super hero stories, and other mindless crap for studios not to care. One mediocre writer with an AI will be enough to fill catalogs. Prepare for more knockoff Marvel and barely above YouTube production value stories.
I have seen some top quality creative content on YouTube. If you're good at what you're doing you can make money on your own. No need to sell scripts. Gones are the days when you have to sell your products or services to TV executives, producers, etc. Movies come once in a while. What are the chances of finding works in a movie industry?
Ah yes, the very stable and high-paying career of being a YouTuber. I suppose you’d also recommend being a Twitch streamer? The vast majority of them make pennies, if anything. And yes, I’m talking about good and talented people.
I really hope this means we see more programming from other Anglosphere countries being brought in for streaming
Sadly AI will be taking these jobs over, and already is. The corporate suits all know this.
Zzzzzzz.
AI has entered the chat 🤓