Sources who attended Jon Stewart's The Daily Show taping today got an earful of complaining from the comic host about his dealings with the Writers Guild. This was his show's first day back after its strike hiatus and Jon's jawing came prior to taping. That's when audience coordinator Teri Abrams, and then Stewart in more detail, talked about how they joined with cable channel Comedy Central to lobby the WGA to accept the same deal that the writers guild made with David Letterman's Worldwide Pants. Stewart told the audience that he was turned down by the WGA last Thursday.
It was apparent that Stewart was completely flummoxed by the Guild's decision and questioned the logic behind the rejection. But what the audience wasn't told, however, is that the two situations are very different: Comedy Central, a division of Viacom, owns Stewart's show, whereas Worldwide Pants owns The Late Show with David Letterman as well as the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson. Viacom is one of the 8 biggest members of the AMPTP which is refusing to bargain with the WGA at present.
During the pre-show, Stewart became serious and said he believed what the writers want is important and he supports them all the way. Asked what he did during the strike hiatus, he said without the show he's just an old guy yelling at the TV.
FWIW, the WGA said all side deals would be strategic– meant to split the AMPTP’s resolve. As much as I love the Daily Show, maybe a side deal with them wouldn’t be politically significant enough to justify the deal?
An all-round deal with Comedy Central might be bigger than a deal with a single show, for example.
Don’t know. Just speculating.
Comment by WGA writer — January 7, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Maybe the Guild could post the list of requirements to qualify for a side deal. I know it must be a show owned by a smaller company, but what are the other conditions acceptable to whoever it is at the WGA that makes these decisions? Or is it an arbitrary buddy buddy thing?
Clarification of what it takes might actually make the WAG look objective and fair - or not….
Comment by transpobill — January 7, 2008 @ 4:52 pm
Stewart’s behavior here is really disappointing to me.
Comment by velveeta — January 7, 2008 @ 5:01 pm
That pesky guild leadership. Somebody tell them next time there’s a strike that they can worry about the plight of the American writer all they want, just don’t inconvenience Jon.
Comment by An Observer — January 7, 2008 @ 5:08 pm
Stewart sucks. Wow, he’s going to make fun of the president without WRITERS? Big deal.
Comment by talkshow jon — January 7, 2008 @ 5:30 pm
Stewart and Kimmel think that because they were mensches for the first few months of the strike, they deserve waivers, like it’s some sort of merit system. But at the end of the day, their shows are owned by Viacom and Disney, so tough shit.
Comment by Archie Berman — January 7, 2008 @ 6:02 pm
I truly don’t understand how turning down an entity of Viacom or any entity at ALL is helpful to the divide and conquer strategy. I would appreciate an explanation, as it would appear, at least, that striking a side deal with The Daily Show might have had a sort of Trojan Horse effect on the parent company.
Can someone shed light on this?
Comment by barney — January 7, 2008 @ 6:09 pm
Disappointing behavior on Stewart’s part. Of course his show couldn’t get a deal …. Time Warner is the most hard line of the corporations. If TW wants to settle for all their shows, fine. But they can’t just pick and choose their most lucrative shows.
Comment by sitcom writer — January 7, 2008 @ 6:12 pm
I understand Jon’s frustration, for that matter the other Late Night Hosts frustrations, but Nikki’s right, he should have mentioned Viacom is a struck Company and that they own his Show.
There is very little any one can do about that, except Viacom.
Comment by PJ - Writer — January 7, 2008 @ 6:20 pm
I don’t really understand the confusion on this… Leno, Stewart, Comedy Central, etc. can’t make contracts for their shows because they don’t own them! I can’t rent out the house next door either, because I don’t own it. This isn’t rocket science.
Comment by A viewer — January 7, 2008 @ 6:23 pm
Is there some little known provision that states all talk show hosts must be pathologically self-centered, delusional weenies?
Hey Jon, you know how you idolize David Letterman? Maybe you should start acting more like him and stop chanelling Leno. Repeat after me, cutthroats, cowards, weasels, and it’s NOT all about me!
Comment by For real — January 7, 2008 @ 6:35 pm
I doubt the scab will miss me but I won’t watch him again. TiVo went from Season Pass to Three Thumbs Down.
Comment by writer — January 7, 2008 @ 6:46 pm
Why would they decline to give them an independent agreement as long as Viacom agrees to the terms? Isn’t this a great way to show that these deals are reasonable for all involved? If you want to have a “divide and conquer” approach, how are you going to accomplish this if you don’t go after any AMPTP members?
Comment by KW — January 7, 2008 @ 7:00 pm
A couple of weird jump-cuts / bad edits in the first few minutes of the show… anyone heard why? Not something you normally see on TDS.
Comment by MildApplause — January 7, 2008 @ 7:11 pm
WTF was Jon doing during the tirade, except going in circles? Is he for the strike, or against it? Does he like writers or hate them? Is he allowed to think over what he’s saying before he goes on the air?
I couldn’t follow him at all, and I’m a fan of his.
Comment by Tom Carten — January 7, 2008 @ 7:15 pm
S C A B.
Plain and simple. To hell with him.
Comment by unionguy — January 7, 2008 @ 7:19 pm
Well that was weird. I really expected better from Jon Stewart. Does he really not understand the difference between an interim deal with a company and a waiver for one specific show? Why would the WGA let his writers go back to work unless Viacom is willing to make an interim agreement?
Come on, Stewart.
Comment by Fan — January 7, 2008 @ 7:32 pm
Tom Carten @ 7:15 -
Jon is simply expressing the opinion of many people who actually know what’s going on… he supports the cause of the writers but is frustrated with how selfish, fameseeking and arrogant Young and Verrone have acted in this whole thing.
Notice the lack of grandstanding statements made my the DGA in the lead up to their negotiations. They are handling themselves with distinction and class; something so rare in this town.
Comment by Elliott — January 7, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
It’s expected when Leno acts like a schmuck, but disappointing and surprising when Stewart acts like one
Comment by TV Viewers — January 7, 2008 @ 10:05 pm
Are these people calling the various talk show hosts (who shut down production for two months in solidarity with the WGA) scabs actually AMPTP plants?
Comment by Steve Peterson — January 7, 2008 @ 10:05 pm
What I find absurd and disappointing is:
“..how they joined with cable channel Comedy Central to lobby the WGA to accept the same deal that the writers guild made with David Letterman’s Worldwide Pants.”
Wouldn’t they have needed the approval of their parent company Viacom to pursue a separate interim agreement? Think Redstone said
” Sure, go for yourself” ? NFW ! First question the WGA would have asked is “Does Comedy Central have the authority to sign this deal?”
End of discussion.
Why then would Stewart make any mention of it. Claim to having been turned down and in so doing, subtly imply, foster a false impression that the WGA was somehow playing favorites.
This strike is a test.
Some of the scores on personal integrity have been disheartening.
Comment by timbrehse — January 7, 2008 @ 10:06 pm
What great ad-libbing.
Comment by glad strike rules haven't stopped free speech — January 7, 2008 @ 10:13 pm
I don’t understand why nobody is discussing the fact that Stewart and Colbert are screwing the writers and being scabs, making money for their parent company that is also screwing the writers. Am I missing something? Are the only people who are awake the ones commenting on Nikki’s blog? Can someone please explain why this is not being discussed? I am genuinely confused.
Comment by MJ — January 7, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
I love how “supportive” talk show hosts are … until they’re inconvenienced. We’re still walking the picket line for your benefits, Jon Stewart while you’re collecting a big paycheck. Excuse me if I don’t have time to feel sorry for you.
Comment by Poor Jon Stewart — January 7, 2008 @ 10:21 pm
c’mon people. stewart is allowed to have his own opinion. unless you are in his shoes and know what conversations he’s had, quit slamming him. if you weren’t there, don’t have a videotape of what he actually said or are a little bird on his shoulder, back off. also, one would think that readers of dhd would be slightly less ridiculous than name calling. suck it up and get some perspective - not everyone is out to get you.
Comment by ad — January 7, 2008 @ 10:33 pm
Jon Stewart is an overrated blowhard anyway. Personally I’ve quite enjoyed not having “The Daily Show” on the air for the past couple months. This way I don’t have to hear an entire writer’s room go on & on about what happened on last night’s episode.
That is if there were writer’s rooms right now anyway.
And that is if I had a writer’s room to show up to anyway.
I’m going to cry myself to sleep now.
Comment by One Time Sitcom Writer — January 7, 2008 @ 10:46 pm
At the end of the day all the only allegiance these guys have is to themselves. Jon, Ellen, Oprah, Leno, Colbert, Kimmel…they’re SCABS. In essence they are saying “f-k you” to their writers.
Comment by bonnie — January 7, 2008 @ 11:07 pm
I am WILDLY angry at Stewart and Colbert. They obviously wrote stuff for their shows tonite - otherwise how could they have video clips at the ready! SHAME! SHAME on them both. They’re scabbing against their own writing staffs! I’m through with both of them. I was a HUGE Daily Show fan. No more. Finito.
Comment by Jack — January 7, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Actually the daily show was very funny tonight. Funnier than it has been in a while. All of the late night shows have been funny actually. Well all but Letterman but he can have a thousand writers and his same tired shtick and irritating noises will never be funny.
Comment by Steve — January 7, 2008 @ 11:21 pm
I understand the WGA’s logic, but considering how huge TDS is on the internet, getting them on the deal I would think would be huge. I would have thought The Daily Show would rank up there with Lost and The Office for internet “gets”.
I don’t know…I can see advantages both ways. Having JS with writers attacking the studios every night wouldn’t suck either.
Comment by Paul — January 7, 2008 @ 11:28 pm
Ok, am I catching something that no one else is or am I missing something. Jon said that his parent company agreed to deal with the WGA and the WGA declined. He even said that they thought he was crazy but he talked them into it anyway. So, is he making that up or did the WGA really turn down an opportunity to turn a show associated with Viacom. Honestly if we are counting coup here, Viacom is a huge kill for them. The WGA should be falling all over themselves to turn any one of those shows. I mean, if the strategy is divide and conquer then why aren’t we picking apart the alliance using a popular show that is partly owned by a huge hold out?? WHO were they negotiating with anyway?
Comment by Queentitania — January 7, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
“Notice the lack of grandstanding statements made my the DGA in the lead up to their negotiations. They are handling themselves with distinction and class; something so rare in this town.”
Most DGA members are not above-the-line Directors, they’re UPAs, 1st and 2nd ADs, etc. In the dust-up over residuals, it is important to remember that those people — who make up a lot of the DGA membership — don’t get residuals in the first place. Big deal, star Directors who are DGA may get residuals, but their points off gross are where their real money comes from (and the large up-front fees that stars can command). DGA therefore has little incentive to negotiate a contract that deals with residuals, which is a major sticking point for WGA’s negotiations. DGA isn’t making grandstanding statements because they are a weaker guild (believe it or not), with less on the line, and therefore have less incentive to drive a hard bargain. DGA will probably cave on many points that are important to WGA, leaving WGA (and SAG, soon enough) in a bad negotiating position by setting a weak precedent.
Many WGA and SAG members (particularly the large numbers of members of those guilds that aren’t stars) live off residuals for extended periods of time in-between assignments, which is not the case for DGA members who don’t even get them. So WGA (and SAG) are negotiating for a part of the contract that is relevant to the lives of large numbers of their members, whereas DGA has different priorities.
Looking to DGA as a class act hides the reality of the fact that they are a weaker guild, with less on the line, and therefore less of a reason to try to drive a harder bargain with AMPTP.
Comment by Stephan — January 7, 2008 @ 11:36 pm
Oh, Jon. Can’t you learn from Conan? You don’t need writers. In fact, your show might even be better without them.
Comment by Watcher in the Dark — January 7, 2008 @ 11:57 pm
I can totally relate to Stewart’s frustration, and I applaud him for not taking the ‘politically correct’ route of blindy agreeing and mutely acquiescing with everything WGA does. Anyone demanding unquestioning obedience makes me uncomfortable. Stewart has every right to express his incomprehension about the non-deal, that does not make him a scab. Personally, I don’t understand WGA’s decision, either. ComedyCentral was willing to make concessions that would have went against Viacom’s stance, and the WGA said they want to fracture the AMPTP small company by small company. So, it’s OK for the WGA to give United Artists a separate deal, which splits them from their MGM parent company, but it’s not possible to do the same for ComedyCentral, splitting them from their Viacom parent company? I don’t get that logic.
Comment by Mala — January 8, 2008 @ 2:19 am
I still don’t get the distinction. CBS benefits from new episodes of Letterman & Ferguson since their writers are now back to work, i,e., they get to sell ads and promote other CBS shows, even though CBS is a struck company. How is that different from NBC benefiting from the Golden Globes or Viacom benefiting from Comedy Central/Stewart/Colbert?
Comment by yyet another striking writer — January 8, 2008 @ 2:27 am
Personally I think he should have let his entire production staff from both shows get fired, what a bastard.
Comment by Will — January 8, 2008 @ 4:11 am
Nikki, you’re missing the point here… We have Jay Leno openly breaking the strike rules and pushing it in our faces… We have the guild who’s looking the other way, not wanting to take on Leno. At least Jon, for the most part, defended the writers… As for his not getting an interim deal, I think someone has to explain to him that his company, Viacom, won’t allow him to sign a deal like that… The guild would love to sign Viacom… with it comes networks and cable companies. And let’s not forget the Daily Show is a huge money maker with Internet downloads… one of the biggest… Viacom surely doesn’t want to share in that revenue. D.
Comment by David G. — January 8, 2008 @ 4:22 am
Doesn’t he understand they will only cut side deals with small independent companies like UA… wait, that doesn’t sound right.
Comment by tenpercenter — January 8, 2008 @ 4:27 am
I’m sorry, but I think a lot of people here have it wrong. Jon Stewart wants to get the same agreement as Dave’s company (as I’m sure the other hosts do). People shouldn’t get on Jon for being frustrated. I commend him for still doing a show within the strike rules. Same for Kimmel and Conan.
Leno on the other hand keeps plowing along breaking the rules and acting as a scab. And he’s getting away with it.
He is selling out the cause of his own writers by writing his monologue in clear violation of the strike rules.
WGA- I thought you were going to put your foot down? Since you haven’t, Jon Stewart and all the others might as well start writing their own material because the WGA leadership isn’t willing to enforce their own rules.
Comment by Jon'sFineBut... — January 8, 2008 @ 5:03 am
Stewart is such a phony. He claims to admire union organizer Eugene Debbs, but he plays the scab when his own pocketbook is threatened–not much different than some corporate raider. Jack London wrote a story called “Dream of Deggs, about the day the workers stopped producing. Jon just keeps making money Viacom, making him Eugene Debbs worst nightmare.
Comment by M. Cerasini — January 8, 2008 @ 5:10 am
Stewart is a typical democrat-hypocrite. He’s 100% conservative all the way when it’s HIS money on the table. That’s the essence of being a dumocrat.
Comment by JCJ — January 8, 2008 @ 5:26 am
So when the WGA makes a deal with WWP isn’t it CBS that benefits the most? When they make a deal with a small compnany like UA won’t the distributers really be the big winners?
If those of you that are calling Stewart, Leno, Kimmel and Colbert would look at the WGA rules then you would know that they are allowed to write for themselves if they are the ones that read the jokes on screen.
Truth is that Stewart (and Colbert to a lesser extent) punctured and made fun of a lot of the WGA’s postions and weren’t just pointing the finger at the Alliance.
Comment by schmuley — January 8, 2008 @ 5:28 am
How are the situations very different?
Because Dave owns the company that produces the show for a network?
That’s your definition of very different?
Seriously?
Comment by GarySparkle — January 8, 2008 @ 6:04 am
Although Comedy Central does own a percentage of TDS, Stewart has ownership via Busboy productions. That’s somewhat different than a show completely owned by one of the big 8, and his ownership was the reason he was able to get CC to agree to go along with the WGA’s demands. I would think that someone who has enough leverage to get CC to come to the table (and did) would be a valuable move to give an interim agreement to. I understand the WGA’s position on the big 8 but in this case I think it was a missed opportunity.
Comment by nyc — January 8, 2008 @ 6:42 am
Jon Stewart, who is your idol? Well, mine just plunged from grace.
Comment by sad — January 8, 2008 @ 6:49 am
I don’t find anything arrogant or selfish in Young & Verrone’s stand. If selfish means acting in the best, strategic interest of the writers & the fair deal we deserve, then the word selfish is sufficient. Stewart can justify going back to work w/out writers all he wants; his lack of eloquence is expressing himself justifies why he needs them.
Comment by e — January 8, 2008 @ 7:24 am
Uh, Elliott — you do REALIZE that the Writers Guild handled themselves with class throughout the summer… and that the companies kept putting off and avoiding negotiations? Until the 11th Hour, when the companies gave the WGA their opening offer, and it wasn’t even a status quo offer, it was an enormous, contract-wide rollback?
Please. I agree with you: distinction and class are rare in this town, and we certainly didn’t see it on the part of the companies when the WGA was trying to negotiate in good faith.
Comment by Anonymous — January 8, 2008 @ 7:35 am
It’s so incredibly disappointing to see Jon Stewart like this. I mean, this is one of the smarter guys on TV. The fact that he doesn’t get the difference between his show and Letterman’s is just astounding. I mean, he doesn’t own his own show, plain and simple. If the WGA starts making deals with individual shows, the whole purpose of divide and conquer is lost. We’d essentially be helping Comedy Central and Viacom and taking away any chance of pressuring them to come back to the negotiating table. Just because the logo for your company is at the end of the show, it doesn’t mean you can make an interim agreement with the guild. Why don’t we just make deals with J.J.Abrams and David E. Kelly? Because their companies are just loan outs to the bigger companies. Worldwide Pants is not. Perhaps people like Jon Stewart (who have some leverage on the networks they work for) should be putting their energy into convincing their ultimate bosses to negotiate a fair deal instead of trying to point fingers at the WGA. It’s going to be so hard watching him knowing this is the kind of person he is at the end of it all.
Comment by disappointed — January 8, 2008 @ 7:50 am
I used to think Jon Stewart was smart. Now I know it just his with the sharp minds and wit. PLEASE could one of his writers pen something logical for this prompter reader?
Why are all these so called WGA/Writer supporters whining to get back on the air without their writers? The truths is the Daily Show was non-union for so long because Jon Stewart dragged his ass in helping to get his writers under the WGA umbrella.
Now we know why…Jon Stewart is an asshole.
Letterman - Conan - Ferguson and Maher…could one of you call this fool and school him on how to act.
Comment by writers make it rain — January 8, 2008 @ 8:21 am
Perhaps the comments to which you refer weren’t aired, but I watched the show and Stewart was extremely supportive of the WGA. There were a few oblique references to his disappointment at not being able to make a deal, but mostly it was AMPTP bashing (unabashed?).
Comment by Howard — January 8, 2008 @ 8:41 am
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Worldwide Pants doesn’t just produce the two late night shows. They also do other scripted series as well, (Ed, Everybody Loves Raymond, Knights of Prosperity) so wouldn’t the interim deal they struck also cover these shows? Or was the deal just for the late shows? If its just for the talk shows then Stewart is right to be pissed. But if the deal covers everything WWP does (late shows, sitcoms, etc) then he’s just being bitter and cranky and while I understand his frustration its not directed at the right place. He needs to be ripping on the parent company of his show for not dealing with the WGA like grownups.
On a side note, will the WGA be investigating his opening segment? With the photos and such he had last night it sure seemed like he had something scripted. Who wrote that? Stewart? Isn’t that the same situation Leno got into last week? If the WGA does come down on him for that THEN he can call bullshit and wave the double standard in their face. But as I see it he’s in the wrong right now. He needs to use his pulpit of wit and sarcasm to help the cause, not just bitch and moan.
Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
Comment by Chris — January 8, 2008 @ 8:45 am
What I don’t think the writers understand is that outside of say the top 10%, the rest of the writing community is completely and utterly replaceable. Talk all you want about the benefits of unions (drastically overstated in many industries due to increase federal labor laws) but in this case its really just a hindrance to free markets. The obvious criticism of what’s written above is that unions contributed a great deal to the current labor law structure. While this is certainly true, the dynamic should be changed (as it has in other industries) to touch points between labor unions/lobbyists and elected officials, and not via direct contracts. Long-term labor contracts create cost-push inflation, as wages fail to fall when productivity and profit falls.
Get back in your cages, monkeys, and write me a joke.
Comment by terd furgeson — January 8, 2008 @ 8:45 am
i am surprised how many here are missing something vital. Jon isn’t looking for a waiver. he was asking for the same deal letterman has, meaning that they would pay what the guild is asking for. A waiver, if I’m not mistaken, would mean they pay whatever the recent contract was, or agree to pay whatever shakes out in negotiations. in the WWP agreement, WWP is giving what we are fighting for. If that is coming from Viacom, that seems positive to me. the more writers working under a deal that holds the principals we are fighting for, the better. Right? Otherwise I really don’t get the point of the letterman strategy.
I read so many people on here say that the point of it was that Zucker would want so badly to compete with dave, that he would let Jay make the same side deal, and the dominoes would fall from there. Isn’t this a form of that, with a different show, and a very high-profile show?
Comment by onewriter — January 8, 2008 @ 8:48 am
He is actually funny without his writers finally a whole episode without relying on a bush joke(it was funny the 1st 10 times but 100 times later it was getting stale)he did a good job.
Also the WGA turned him down not vicaom for the waver which in my opinion is a dumb idea because a lot of people are influenced by the daily show and this would be a chance to hammer home there point to a mainstream audience which hasn’t been getting news on the issue. Making a waver would be a minor setback for the WGA but will overall help them win the strike. The WGA cannot hold out as long as the AMPTP can (AMPTP is still getting an income and was richer in the 1st place) so the WGA needs to get the public behind them fast and help end the strike fast.
Comment by Diffrent opinon — January 8, 2008 @ 8:59 am
I don’t understand why Dave got a deal and Jon didn’t. You talk about how Dave “owns” his own show, but that show is on CBS, a network that has other shows that have not made deals with the WGA.
And I completely sympathize with Jon being frustrated at the AMPTP and the WGA leadership. I guess you guys think he should quit. Easy for you to say. I watched Jon and Stephen last night, and looked at the credits at the end of the shows. No writers listed, of course. But there were a bunch of other people. Remember them?That’s why they went back.
Really classy of you guys to call them “scabs” with the protection and anonymity the internet gives. Would you call Jon a “scab” to his face, I wonder?
Comment by jdarkling — January 8, 2008 @ 9:00 am
Verrone and Young: “Selfish, fameseeking and arrogant”
I seem to hear this stuff being tossed around by certain people about our leadership along with the idea that if they had been civilized to the task like good club members, the studios would negotiate with them. It feels like these personal attacks are an attempt to divide the membership. Verrone and Young are not saints. But they are doing much better for the membership than Welles and Company did.
Comment by Big Boy Now — January 8, 2008 @ 9:07 am
I will now watch him every night.
Comment by Filo — January 8, 2008 @ 9:14 am
I couldnt follow Jon last night either. I thought he would be the most outspoken in support of the strike, but he clearly wasn’t. I don’t know how to feel about it. But its not as if he came back to work of his own free will. They were all forced back on the air. This whole thing is really starting to suck.
Comment by Anonymous — January 8, 2008 @ 9:24 am
Personally, I think that WGA should cut a side deal with TDS/TCR. Why? Because they are in the unique position to actually help the strike and the nation understand the strike more so than any other late night show(s)- including Letterman and Leno. It was painful to watch Jon Stewart last night. I fully agree with the writers and what they are asking for. I am also of the opinion that if the WGA really wants some mass exposure outside of the blogosphere it would behoove them to figure out a better plan. Conceding to the late night writers would be a start. They’ve got fresh voices, on a daily basis, and are more than eager to talk.
Comment by webdunce — January 8, 2008 @ 9:42 am
First of all, he’s not a scab, and anyone who’s still saying it now has obviously not looked at the issues. Secondly, I think it’s obvious why the WGA wouldn’t agree to the deal. I love Jon, but surely he can understand that it doesn’t matter if Comedy Central agrees to the deal, because Viacom is the one holding all the power. I’m curious if there was something else going on behind the scenes, because he’s such a bright man that I can’t see him missing that distinction.
Comment by Katrina — January 8, 2008 @ 9:48 am
I used to see Jon around NYC when he was still a stand up - now that you are the big man you don’t care about the little guys? The strike is for all of the writers, not just yours and the rich folks.
Your show is owned by Viacom - Come on now. You really thought a side deal was possible? Really?
Grow a set Jon. I did not expect this from you.
Comment by sidelined — January 8, 2008 @ 9:50 am
I would rather a full deal workedout, as TDS writers are some of the best in the buisness, however everyone who complains that he’s a scab etc.etc. what about the other 60 people who aren’t writers that are out of jobs? What about the 2nd gaffer and assistant sound technician who can’t pay rent because the WGA and AMPTP can’t get their act togeather?
TDS and The Colbert Report are dispraportionatly hurt by the strike because a rerun of a topical show just doesn’t cut it.
Comment by Scott Sampson — January 8, 2008 @ 9:52 am
Stewart is a scab. It’s bad enough he went back on at all. There was a lot of obviously written material on that episode and he’d better catch the same hell that Leno is catching right now.
Comment by Former TDS Fan — January 8, 2008 @ 9:58 am
Could someone explain to me how it would be bad for the WGA for The Daily Show to have an interim agreement? The writers on that show write for a same-day broadcast. That broadcast is available immediately on iTunes and other internet sources.
The WGA could then get people to buy those sanctioned episodes in droves and you would see residual payments for the Daily Show writers in a matter of months.
Yes, Viacom and Comedy Central would make money, but the writers would make money too (possibly a great deal of money). Isn’t that what the WGA is striking for?? Or are they striking simply to hurt the big companies?
To a lay person it looks like the writer’s have no idea what they want.
Comment by Mark — January 8, 2008 @ 10:14 am
If Comedy Central (and thus Viacom) was agreeing to the terms of the WGA, why (as others have asked) is that not good for the WGA? It sets a precedent that Viacom HAS agreed to the terms in some cases. One would think that makes it harder for them to refuse to agree in other cases, yes?
Comment by redreader — January 8, 2008 @ 10:23 am
No one seems to be mentioning that the show was largely in support of the WGA strike and spent most of the time explaining the ridiculousness of the AMPTP’s position. Stewart’s frustration with the Guild’s decision to not give him an exception aside, he was clearly supportive of the strike. And I think any sort of mainstream publicity of the WGA’s position is good, since the AMPTP is apparently blocking as much mainstream coverage of the strike all together as they can.
Comment by Name — January 8, 2008 @ 11:05 am
Hi there.
I work for Comedy Central from time to time and I just spoke with an executive at the network and they were trying to find a way for TDS and CR to return with their writers because Busboy (Jon Stewart’s production company) does have shared ownership of the shows, but the various lawyers couldn’t come to an agreement because he does not have full ownership of the shows like WWP does.
Comment by Derek — January 8, 2008 @ 11:08 am
I watched both shows and wondered “does this really qualify as ‘not written?’” Are you telling me every non-interview word on those shows was off-the-cuff? All those cued cut-aways to clips? All those apparently pre-existing graphics? Please explain to me the real, nuts-and-bolts WGA rule against writing while on strike or I’m gonna start thinking Jay Leno got screwed. And I hate Jay Leno.
Comment by Maynotlast — January 8, 2008 @ 11:16 am
If he can go back to work why can’t the rest of us? Come on, I’m about to lose my house. Enough.
Comment by nlc — January 8, 2008 @ 11:24 am
This is my first and last post here. You people are disturbing. Yeah, go ahead and call JS a scab while the remainder of his people are about to get shitcanned. Oh right, the guild folk so conveniently forget about *everyone else* they’re taking down with them.
Comment by Dolah — January 8, 2008 @ 12:37 pm
Colbert was funnier.
Comment by Dr. Kenneth Noisewater — January 8, 2008 @ 12:38 pm
@Elliott,
Yeah, ’cause it was real classy when the AMPTP walked away from the table.
I hope the DGA negotiates itself a fantastic deal, but don’t make the AMPTP out to be saints here.
Comment by Asterios — January 8, 2008 @ 12:38 pm
I’ve seen no evidence of Young or Verrone grandstanding.
And frankly, it’s beside the point. If the AMPTP would bargain in good faith for one day, a deal could be made and the strike would be over.
Comment by Archie Berman — January 8, 2008 @ 12:47 pm
@ sitcom writer: Don’t you mean VIACOM? TDS adn Comedy Central are VIACOM
Comment by ExitPassa — January 8, 2008 @ 1:09 pm
@Union guy: When did Jon go non-Union? That’s what a Scab is. A non-union replacement worker.
Comment by ExitPassa — January 8, 2008 @ 1:11 pm
I am sad.
I really loved Stewart and Colbert and now I will never watch them again because they are fucking scabs.
Comment by Ashley Gable — January 8, 2008 @ 1:21 pm
I can’t believe there aren’t more comments on this. I found Stewart’s behavior last night BIZARRE. So much for him using his show to bring it to the producers, as so many here believed he would. Also, both shows — Stewart and Colbert — were clearly working with scripts. So who was writing them? The WGA can’t have any beef with Jay now unless they also go after these two. Stewart had written, produced comedy. Not very funny written, produced comedy as it turns out.
Comment by eastcoastwriter — January 8, 2008 @ 1:34 pm
Oh, Nikki…there is NO difference between the two deals. CBS (Viacom) still has a cut in Letterman’s show and profit from it as much as they do from the Daily Show.
Comedy Central is a subsidiary of Viacom but they operate semi-independently (I know, corporations are hard to understand but it’s not that difficult if you try) if Comedy Central bankrupts themselves they are F’d. Viacom can’t just dump a load of money into them. They have to borrow like anyone else would have to borrow from them. It’s essentially like a lease agreement if that makes it easier to understand.
Bottom line: Letterman shouldn’t have gotten a deal. It fattens Viacom’s pockets and weakens the guild’s stand. It’s surprising to me that there haven’t been any signs of a Federal arbitrator getting involved yet.
Comment by MTvA — January 8, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
The deal the union struck with WWP is either a good deal or it isn’t. If it’s a good deal, why not do that same deal with whomever else wants to sign up. The fact that the union is picking and choosing which companies can get this deal show it for the sham that it is. I aplaud Stewart for going back on the air — no reason to punish the majority of the show’s employees just because the writers are trying to punish Viacom for daring to stand up to them.
Comment by john — January 8, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
“Stewart and Kimmel think that because they were mensches for the first few months of the strike, they deserve waivers, like it’s some sort of merit system. But at the end of the day, their shows are owned by Viacom and Disney, so tough shit.”
Letterman and WWP may OWN his show but its shown on CBS a struck entity it is CBS a Struck entity Les Moonves and that Mail order bride of his that are making the ad revenue. It is a very semantical issue that Lettermans Lame Ass show is allowed to go on with writers and Kimmel and Leno, Stewart and Colbert arent. Honestly I would be interested to see if the WGA leadership isnt pocketing side money to make these deals and screwing their entire membership to do it.
Comment by Steve — January 8, 2008 @ 3:17 pm
He’s being ambiguous, which he tends to be on a lot of issues. I think the show came across pro-WGA overall, since he pointed out that their basic demands are sensible and the interview helped get that across, but he did take a shot or two over not being able to get a deal himself and about what he perceived as the over-seriousness of one of the “Speechless” ads.
Comment by Evan Waters — January 8, 2008 @ 3:28 pm
Isn’t this exactly what the writers want? A TV show realizes the importance of its writers and cuts them into its profits. Who cares who owns what?
The WGA should be willing to work with anyone under the appropriate terms. “Pay residuals in these ways: … and our writers will work for you.”
Also, Jon didn’t seem to understand that iTunes shows are paid under the DVD formula. So far as I can tell, this is only about sites like Hulu that transplant the TV experience online without paying TV rates.
Comment by anonymous — January 8, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
ELLIOT: “he supports the cause of the writers but is frustrated with how selfish, fameseeking and arrogant Young and Verrone have acted in this whole thing.”
1) Oh…is THAT how he feels?
2) Are you joking?
3) If you’re not joking… HA HA, you fell for those lame personal attacks.
Oh wait…it’s ME and other writers that get screwed by you spreading that crap. Forget the “ha ha”.
Comment by Lame & Untrue Talking Point Killer — January 8, 2008 @ 4:16 pm
What is hilarious to me as that all these negative responses from writers are completely reactionary and unfounded.
Look guys, I support what you’re doing, but give me a break. Of COURSE Jon is trying to get a deal for his show, who in their right mind wouldn’t? It would let his writers come back to work, get paid, and put out a quality product.
It baffles me that many writers turn on the blinders when it comes to their own guild. Your leaders are almost as bad as the Producers. Arrogance abounds. Jon isn’t allow to be frustrated by the situation? He’s not allowed to support your cause, but be frustrated with the people running it? That sounds an awful lot like saying I can’t be an American because I don’t like Bush.
Comment by Brandon) — January 8, 2008 @ 5:03 pm
What, exactly, is John supposed to do to “act like Letterman” as everyone here is suggesting? Get over yourselves already.
I’m sure if he was rich like Letterman he WOULD buy his show. So you are saying Letterman is good because he is RICH? Jon bad because he is POOR?
Man, sometimes, I wonder why I still support these guys.
Comment by togo — January 8, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
Some of the responses don’t seem to understand that Stewart said (in his _allegedly_ hypothetical scenario) that the parent company agreed.
So even though he obviously doesn’t own the show, the bigwigs were trying to get the same agreement as Worldwide Pants for the Daily Show.
Comment by mattack — January 8, 2008 @ 6:47 pm
happy to pick at a scab till it bleeds. see you tomorrow, jon.
Comment by r. mutt — January 8, 2008 @ 6:55 pm
It’s becoming very obvious that the “deals” and “waivers” are on a buddy/buddy system.
The public was 99% behind the writers when it began, but now you’ve lost them.
Comment by kris — January 8, 2008 @ 9:14 pm
Oh, Elliot, give us all a break with your promo for the DGA and their classiness. If they had class, they’d wait to negotiate their deal instead of stepping in early.
Young and Verrone have the balls to stand up to the companies that have been stealing from us for years and tell them: NO MORE. You’re a fool if you think this fight is about their personal goals. The writers support the WGA leadership. And this writer is downright proud of them.
Comment by lkb — January 8, 2008 @ 9:24 pm
STEPHAN WROTE (and was wrong): “Most DGA members are not above-the-line Directors, they’re UPAs, 1st and 2nd ADs, etc. In the dust-up over residuals, it is important to remember that those people — who make up a lot of the DGA membership — don’t get residuals in the first place.”
Uh…actually no. EVERY member of the DGA gets residuals…in the form of contributions to their pension fund. Actually, 71% of the fund.
A QUESTION POSED TO THE DGA NEGOTIATING CHAIR: “Is it true that Residuals are less important to our members than to the members of other Guilds - as has been claimed in the press?”
HIS ANSWER: “This has got to be the most ridiculous statement I have seen in the press this year.”
Click my name to read it yourself. The DGA cares about residuals. Or should. And will.
Comment by Do Better Research — January 8, 2008 @ 11:02 pm
If little Johnny Boy was on the side of the road and on fire. I wouldn’t piss on him to put it out! Sure the midget talks a good game when it comes to elephants and their greed, but he’s no f’ing diffent than the folks he rips every night.
He’s a scab and should be remembered in this tough time as such forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can tell a lot by a person when the going gets tough. Stewart just showed the type of person he really is. I hope you guys, I’ll say it again: I hope never forget how he’s handled himself in this turberent time.
And don’t forget, he’s got the Oscar gig once again this year. And you know he wants to take center stage and be right in the thick of things.
Comment by GQtaste — January 8, 2008 @ 11:20 pm
just to echo a lot, but unfortunately not all of what was said here- Stewart does NOT own his show- his whiny rant was not only ill-informed, it was written, as was the act 1 of both of the shows he did since he was back. That’s a disgrace. He can’t make a deal b/c he doesn’t own his show- Comedy Central does, and therefore Viacom- this is not like the Letterman situation at all.
If we crap on Carson Daly, and Leno, we need to crap on JS and SC. You can’t “improvise” a fake beard prop.
Wake up commenters, JS has betrayed us- over at United Hollywood, they’re celebrating an AIDS joke he made about the speechless campaign. Very sad.
Final point- right out of the union busting playbook, the moguls are putting out disinformation on these boards, then sitting back and hoping we implode. Screw them. And, anyone complaining about losing your job, while I really am sorry about the nightmare you’re in, its the moguls who are being irresponsible here- unlike Jon Stewart reported, it is THEM who won’t go anywhere near a table, and therefore prolonging this.
Comment by nick — January 9, 2008 @ 4:34 am
Can’t help but wonder whether a undisclosed portion of the WWP side-deal was that it be exclusive — i.e., no other late-night show may make a similar deal. Seems like a position Letterman’s camp would want, as it could potentially help the show in the ratings; and it seems like a position the WGA would agree to in an eagerness to start its “divide and conquer” tactic.
If that’s not the case, then the WGA’s denial of a side-deal for the Busboy productions is a real head-scratcher. As others have noted, CBS is a struck company and certainly benefits from having original written material on its nightly Letterman broadcasts. (And, lest we forget, Letterman and Carson “scabbed” during the last strike in a manner no different than Leno and company are doing today).
From here, the WGA’s decision seems arbitrary. Not good.
Comment by Geeze, Ease Up on Jon — January 9, 2008 @ 5:25 am
Comedy Central would not agree to a deal covering all their WGA shows. That’s why the WGA turned Jon Stewart down. WWP did agree to a deal covering all their shows, and since they have a history of producing very successful network sitcoms, it made sense to sign with WWP. What’s the incentive for CC to deal honestly about its weaker shows if they’ve already gotten TDS and TCR, the jewels in the crown, on the air? Why would the WGA agree to something that clearly takes away any leverage they have for the whole company? It’s not arbitrary, it’s absolutely sensible. Jeez.
Comment by R.B. — January 9, 2008 @ 5:33 am
If you have read accounts of the WWP deal, WWP not only agreed to all of the WGA New Media demands for itself, but agreed to pay CBS’ share of New Media. That is what clnched it. Do we have any evidence that Jon’s company offered to pay Viacom’s share? Or is his wanting a deal just pure entitlement?
Comment by uh....wait — January 9, 2008 @ 5:46 am
All of these idiot comments about Jon being a scab, and how “I’m never going to watch his show again,” ring as hollow as people claiming to be pissed off about the strike and saying they’re done picketing. Grow up!
Comment by Max — January 9, 2008 @ 6:40 am
Night II seemed VERY written to me. Esp the first eight minutes. And the John Oliver bit.
Think, think, think.
Oh, bother.
Q: Are these guys afraid of brow-beating their bosses? Does anyone know if the Com Cent or Viacom execs have said anything to Stewart & Colbert? (”Don’t grandstand, or else.”)
I just want them to point out the fact that the studios are refusing to even negotiate. On a nightly basis.
Man…
Comment by Brando — January 9, 2008 @ 7:08 am
Based on last nights show, the public doesn’t really care to hear the whining about the writers strike. JS started the show by making some comments about the amount of email from fans complaining about talking about the strike and labor issues for the full half-hour.
He then devoted the rest of the show, with the exception of one lame correspondent piece, to the election.
If you guys ever had the public, you’ve lost them.
Comment by studio guy — January 9, 2008 @ 7:27 am
a.) stewart’s got a lot of nerve even asking for an interim agreement or whatever you want to call it. why should he get one? because he has his own production company that gets to slap its logo on the end of the show? sorry, jon, you work for a giant corporation just like the rest of us.
b.) i don’t know verbatim the rules on performers writing their own material. but, whatever leno did that you all mentally marching to burbank with pitchforks and torches is certinaly being done by your precious jon stewart. topical jokes with accompanying doctored photos/video? where’s your indignation now, people?
c.) this fallacy that the daily show informs and influences the entire nation; it’s got to stop. the show gets about 1.5 million viewers a night. and those people are all on the same page to begin with. no “red stater” has ever watched the daily show and converted to stewart’s point of view. it’s all preaching to the choir, and that choir represents about 1/2 of one percent of america.
Comment by nametbd — January 9, 2008 @ 7:27 am
Can everyone please take the emotion out of this and look at the facts.
Three years ago when TDS went guild Jon was INSTRUMENTAL in making it happen. The guild wanted all of Comedy Central but they wisely started with the big prize. TDS. Guess what happened next. Colbert went WGA, then Sarah Silverman, then Mencia, then Showbiz show. You get the idea.
Small steps=big gains.
Jon fought hard to help get the Worldwide pants deal done. You know, Support the Guilds “strategy” of divide and conquer. Get as many shows/companies to work under this FAIR DEAL so it would become the industry standard and get as many guild members BACK TO WORK under a fair deal. Now the shows are back on the air and the networks don’t have to pay writers, oh and they reap the ad revenue of being back on with new episodes.
Comment by KORKS — January 9, 2008 @ 8:07 am
Wow, I don’t understand half you people. If Jon got the okay to do a side deal that met with the terms the WGA are demanding, good on him! He’s managed to accomplish something they could not - they should give him an interim deal according to their terms, the more people who make interim deals, the stronger the WGA position, I cannot understand how this could be a bad thing. These big companies should look at the music industry and realize that if they don’t accomodate the changing times, they too will lost their big house on the hill and the artists, the ones who actually create the content these guys peddle and claim as their own, will actually make a decent living. That sounds fair to me. Although I support the writers wholeheartedly, the guild is losing me. It’s nothing more than a pissing contest now, and nobody is thinking of the greater good! Sad.
Comment by scribe pride — January 9, 2008 @ 9:19 am
THE PUBLIC IS BEHIND THE WRITERS 100% !!!
We are an organization of viewers who virally have spread the word to SUPPORT THE WRITERS
We have stopped watching late night shows, which actually has been a blessing because it’s freed up time for productive things, including more sleep!
Honestly not sure if we’ll resume watching late night talk shows after the strike. There’s truth to the idea that people develop new habits.
WE DEFINITELY WON’T WATCH LENO EVER AGAIN. DON’T KNOW WHERE HIS RATINGS COME FROM, CUZ NO ONE WE KNOW WATCHES THAT BOZO.
Rock on, writers. Those who post that the public is turning against you are “shills.”
We are the public, we support writers more than ever.
We are not stupid or confused by twisted facts like the amptp’s PR agents bet on.
The writers strike touches on much bigger issues in this country - unchecked corporate greed and power, death of the middle class, corrupt lobbyists and PR crooks manipulating the truth and deciding our elections
We are also scrutinizing the political candidates on these issues closer than ever - no more hypocrisy [hello, Huckabee - you crossed a picket line and then played dumb. America’s had enough of leaders both corrupt and dumb]
Which political candidates employ Fabiani Lehane. We’ll find out, and those candidates won’t be voted for.
Comment by Viewers for Writers — January 9, 2008 @ 9:38 am
Apparently Jon Stewart is righteously pissed because when the WGA wanted to unionize his writers, the Guild had no problem setting up a side deal that let his writers join the Guild without requiring a master agreement with Comedy Central, MTV Networks or Viacom — but now that he wants a similar side deal to put his writers back to work under the terms the WGA is demanding, he’s getting the brush-off. Not a good way for the Guild to make friends and influence people.
Comment by Stuart Creque — January 9, 2008 @ 9:59 am
Here’s why it would’ve been bad to cut a side deal with TDS: Because it’s the most successful show on CC. This is a MINIMUM basic agreement. If the WGA started cutting deals with the highest rated shows, without taking the rest of the company along, it would effectively make it a MAXIMUM basic agreement.
Comment by logicdude — January 9, 2008 @ 11:15 am
Ok people, remember that Stewart and Colbert are still under contract before you go dissin’ them. What good is it if the writers have no show to come back to.
Comment by Cintronite — January 9, 2008 @ 11:22 am
To clarify something about the DGA. UPMs DO get residuals and residuals are involved in DGA’s (and IA’s) pension, health and welfare arrangements. Residuals are a vital issue for many more people than just writers and directors.
Comment by writer — January 9, 2008 @ 11:55 am
Comment by sidelined — “I used to see Jon around NYC when he was still a stand up - now that you are the big man you don’t care about the little guys? The strike is for all of the writers, not just yours and the rich folks.”
So the ‘little guys’ you refer to are the writers I assume. The others who create this show BLT employees are somehow not worthy of Jon’s consideration, only the writers and the rich guys.
I think Jon very much cares about the little guys, in fact he’s got them back to work. So how is it you see this greater picture where there is the writers and the entertainers, but apparently no one else worthy of consideration?
Just another case of arrogance on writer’s behalf, you would think that only thier interests are of any concern. I gather the staff are all considered collateral damage in your master battle plan.
Comment by Chips Down — January 9, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
Jon’s parent company agreed - ComedyCentral/Viacom/CBS and just fyi: Letterman OWNS his show, under Worldwide Pants - CBS (only) AIRS his show.
Comment by devin — January 9, 2008 @ 2:47 pm
I’m sorry but the “writers” on this site come across as arrogant morons who need a lesson in humility.
Why don’t any of you answer the valid points that Jon and co returning to work benefits the crew workers as well, at the risk of tarnishing their own reputations?
Comment by Justin — January 9, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
I took both Stewart and Colbert off my TiVo today. They’re clearly writing and there’s no doubt they have scab writers also doing some of the writing for them. Stewart’s even having correspondents (using some bullshit “deportation” excuse), etc. etc. Both Jon and Stephen are an embarrassment and neither has been at all supportive of the writers since going back on the air.
Why? Stewart wants to host those Oscars soooooo bad it hurts. That’s all this boils down to. Jon and his ego wanting to be put on display in front of a billion people in February. No writers, that won’t end up happening. So Jon is going to sink to any level of lowness he needs to to break up the guild and get his slaves … er … writers back to work.
Comment by sloopydrew — January 10, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
Did anyone here even read the papers and the WGA owns site. The WGA supports Colbert and Stewart because they were forced back on the air. Basically Comedy Central said after the talks broke off if they do not come back on the air then everyone involved with the show, save for themselves would be fired. Something Leno and the others didn’t face, and thats why the shows are so random cause Stewart said he wouldn’t do a true show until his writers were back.
Plus he has to make a living himself, if your place of employment went on strike and you havn’t been paid in 2 months and they said you can come back legally, wouldn’t you.
Comment by AG — January 10, 2008 @ 4:55 pm
So let me get this right about the people crying, “Scab!” Let’s say you’re a show producer. You’ve hired a couple hundred people who aren’t on strike and their jobs depend upon you going on the air. They aren’t striking, they didn’t have a voice in whether the writers went on strike, and they don’t have a strike fund that will pay their bills if they are FIRED. They will have to find new jobs or starve if you fire them, they have no guarantee that they will ever have jobs after the strike, and NOBODY is engaged in collective bargaining on THEIR behalf. They’d be collateral damage, road kill victims of both Big Media and the writers.
Are you really saying that given the choice between finding a way to keep them working while following the letter of WGA rules, or firing them all just to stick it to “the man” …. you’re going to trash their lives? And you REALLY think that you’re on the side of labor and the little guy? I don’t think so, you’re just a bunch of knee-jerk poseurs.
Comment by GettingReal — January 10, 2008 @ 11:20 pm
Seems like the WGA is also being selfish, showing a complete lack of concern for the staffs and crews who work these shows. Say what you will about the late night “scabs” but their return to the airwaves put people that don’t make nearly as much money as the writers back to work.
Comment by bobj — January 11, 2008 @ 9:09 am
You “scab” people are really nuts. I mean come on, this guy stood by you, paid some of you, has to think about his crew and this is how you treat him? Remember this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102×2480861
Gee, if Jon was only more of a bastard his show never would have had to deal with you union pricks right now.
Comment by axionjaxson — January 11, 2008 @ 9:27 am