From Harold Meyerson, The American Prospect <[email protected]>
Subject Meyerson on TAP: The Writers Walk
Date May 2, 2023 8:33 PM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
The Latest from the Prospect
 ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌


View this email in your browser
<[link removed]>

 

MAY 2, 2023

Meyerson on TAP

The Writers Walk

The nearly century-long war between the studios and the writers
continues.

Since the coming of talking pictures nearly 100 years ago, Hollywood
producers have never really liked Hollywood writers. When the
industry's various guilds formed in the 1930s, the studios signed
contracts with both the directors' and the actors' unions shortly
after the Supreme Court deemed collective bargaining constitutional in
1937. They recognized the writers' guild then, too-the law compelled
them to do that-but somehow didn't get around to agreeing to sign a
contract until 1942.

Part of their opposition was rooted in the writers' inability to shut
down production as quickly and completely as the actors and directors,
who could stop film production dead in its tracks by just walking off
the set. But the studios had a host of screenplays on their shelves, and
if the writers walked, it would take months before the soundstages grew
silent.

The other part of their opposition was rooted in the fact that both of
the Writers Guild's political factions-the liberals and the
radicals-were well to the producers' left. That didn't necessarily
have to lead to tumultuous labor relations; the West Coast longshoremen
were entirely controlled by radicals, but the owners of the ports and
docks, who were more right-wing than the studio heads, were able to deal
with that union nonetheless. But the writers were a lot more voluble
than the longshoremen, and the moguls often just wanted them to shut up.

In time, the Communists-most but not all of them Popular Front
Rooseveltians-were driven from the Guild leadership, and later
generations of producers proved to be well to the left of the studios'
founders. But even with ideological dislikes taken off the table, the
relations between the writers and their employers have remained
contentious, generating longer, more bitter, and more frequent strikes
than those of the other crafts. Even when some of the writers' onetime
weakness in bargaining was eliminated-today, writers can immediately
shut down the late-night talk shows-they still are prey to studio
exploitation to a greater degree than actors and directors. (Despite all
the changes in the industry, studios are still loath to trash-talk their
stars. No one but writers care if they trash-talk their writers.)

The strike that began last night is over many of the same issues that
occasioned the last writers' strike 15 years ago. Then, streaming was
just beginning, and payment for a streamed show or film was a bone of
contention between the writers and the studios. Since then, streaming
has become pervasive
<[link removed]>.
In the years before streaming, contracts stipulated residual payments to
writers when their show or film was revived in theaters or re-aired on
TV. Today, there are shows and films that become huge hits when
they're streamed-a number have been streamed more than 100 million
times-for which payments to writers are scanty, and nothing like the
residuals they once received. Meanwhile, TV series have far fewer
episodes per season than the 20-plus they used to have, and a much
higher share of writers are paid the minimum scale stipulated in
contracts than was the case before: both phenomena that have diminished
writers' incomes.

All that explains why 98 percent of the writers who responded to the
strike authorization ballot voted yes. It explains why they walked last
night.

Will the writers compel the studios to meet their demands (well, a
substantial share of their demands)? One of the factors in their favor
is their demonstrable solidarity. A couple of years ago, the Guild
suggested that its members sever their ties to their agents, as a
growing number of the big agencies had also gone in for producing, and
as such were sitting on the opposite side of the table from their
writer-clients when putting together the deals for pictures and shows.
The big agencies, with their massive capital funding and a wide range of
other clients (including star athletes), were widely expected to hang
tough and see their writers trickle back to them. But none of the
writers so trickled, and by the end of last year, all of the agencies
had agreed to the writers' demands.

If they could beat the agencies, the writers surmise, they can beat the
studios. Let's hope they're right.

~ HAROLD MEYERSON

Follow Harold Meyerson on Twitter <[link removed]>

[link removed]

Katie Porter Is Teaching the Government How to Govern
<[link removed]>

As she barnstorms the state, the Senate hopeful is making the pitch that
Congress and the executive branch have the power to fix their own
dysfunction. BY DAVID DAYEN

North Carolina Judges Give GOP Upper Hand in 2024 Election
<[link removed]>
The ruling enabling partisan gerrymandering in the state could deliver
as many as four seats to Republicans in next year's U.S. House
elections. BY MILES MOGULESCU

A Conversation With Susan Neiman About Left and Woke
<[link removed]>
Prospect Co-Editor Robert Kuttner hosted a podcast with the noted
philosopher and author. This is a partial transcript, edited for
clarity. BY ROBERT KUTTNER

[link removed]

 

To receive this newsletter directly in your inbox, click here to
subscribe.  <[link removed]>

Click to Share this Newsletter

[link removed]


 

[link removed]


 

[link removed]


 

[link removed]


 

[link removed]

YOUR TAX DEDUCTIBLE DONATION SUPPORTS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM
<[link removed]>

The American Prospect, Inc.
1225 I Street NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC xxxxxx
United States
Copyright (c) 2023 The American Prospect. All rights reserved.

To opt out of American Prospect membership messaging, click here
<[link removed]>.

To manage your newsletter preferences, click here
<[link removed]>.

To unsubscribe from all American Prospect emails, including newsletters,
click here
<[link removed]>.
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis