Wouldn't that be Disney PicketEARs?

I will say it is interesting to see that at least among the people I've talked to up here the response is much the same as for a sports strike.

That everybody involved are whiny people and that they should feel privileged to have the cushy lives of luxury they have and all they have to is provide a few hours entertainment for the masses.

Of course, unlike with a baseball players strike the assumption that everybody involved is megarich is a misapprehension. I think if you asked the average person they'd think that a writer on The Soup is making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

Even though I know better I'll admit to not really having any idea of how much many people involved make (not that is really matters to the question of whether that amount is fair within the industry). For example, Katherine Hegl's character in Knocked Up is a on-air personality for E! but still lives in the back yard guest house of her sister. That implies not much pay but I have no idea if that is right or not.

Normally, I don't support unions, because I feel that if people are unhappy with their jobs, no one is stopping them from finding a new one.

However, with this, the money is going to the big-wig execs who don't do anything but sit on their asses, planning which new yacht they want to add to their current existing fleet. I do think the writers should be paid for duplication of their work, regardless of the medium in which it is duplicated.

Being self-employed, I would be mighty upset if someone bought a production from me and went to duplicate it on their own, considering I don't charge much to begin with. Now, if I raised my prices, I probably wouldn't care what they do with it. But, I charge about 25% of the normal market prices for services, including post (editing). With that, my clients are usually understanding in buying additional copies from me for $5-$10 each, depending on how they're packaged.

Why do people think that "big wig execs" do nothing? Yes, they often make more money than seems reasonable (certainly more than you or I), but why does that mean they are lazy and just sit around?

I doubt that there are many people who got into a position of power in a major company without having worked their way there (yes, there are exceptions, especially with nepotism). They have worked their butts off to make things happen and make them happen successfully. Often these people put in tremendous hours. Their jobs are often far less secure than many of the people on strike and they are scrutinized much more than most.

Argue that they make too much money if you want, but don't say they are lazy.

It's more likely getting funneled into parent companies, anyway.

But no, writers do not make as much as people imagine. Screenwriters sometimes do, depending on their popularity - but the number of those are pretty small. They're picketing for the $30,000 a year staff writers on union cable shows. They're picketing for the people who aren't big-name big-wig writers.

Fair enough, KB. I just get agitated at seeing people buy multiple yachts and "summer homes", where the people who make that opportunity happen for them are barely making their rent or mortgage on their only residence.

There just seems to be no consideration of the "team" aspect to making things happen.

Now, I forget who got interviewed by one of the channels yesterday, but he's a director who was once a writer. He said it's not even the staff writer who works consistently, but the guy or gal that gets a job here and there when they're available. The people who are just starting out... someone he was just four years prior to today.

My sister gets to cross a picket line, ironically for a meeting about a topic very closely related to what the Office writers were talking about (great clip that was, btw).

She works for a company that makes software that can identify video clips by a sort of video signature. Their initial market was advertisers wanting to monitor broadcast signals and make sure the ads they paid for were aired correctly (in the time they paid for, not cut off, etc.). Recently, they've turned toward the networks as customers and their software's been used to comb YouTube (and other video sites) for copyrighted material to pull. But now they're hoping to change that model and instead of letting the networks know when their shows are on YouTube so they can demand they be taken off, they'll let them know so they can get a cut of the ad revenue that Google sells.

It's a better model for everyone than pulling the videos, and it's something concrete that the writers should be keeping an eye on in terms of the kinds of new-media revenue streams they should be working into their contract.

Having worked for E! what seems like a lifetime ago....I can completely and totally see Heigl having to live in her sister's guest house. ;)

Unless something had radically changed, most of the writers and production staff make enough to get by, but they won't get rich doing it. When I was there most of the staff was young, eager and just looking for a break into the business. Those are exactly the kind of people that would benefit the most from the new deal.

swanie

Alas, E!'s writers are non-union.