I've learned that SAG has just hired Sitrick and Company, the big strategic communications firm, to help with media relations for its AMPTP negotiations. Whereas AFTRA has had the small strategic communications firm 42West working for it for months and months. So, depending on your POV, the screen actors guild either saved a bundle of dough or should have spent a bundle of dough much earlier. That said, both PR firms are located in Los Angeles. And, like SAG and AFTRA, they have a history with one other. 42West's Allan Mayer worked for Sitrick and Company for 9 years, five of them as a partner. 
Sitrick's firm has long specialized in worldwide crisis PR, but Mayer became tired of the oops-we've-got-to-quickly-clean-up-this-mess stuff that sends major moolah Sitrick's way. It was an amicable parting: though Sitrick wasn't thrilled at losing Mayer, the boss did let Allan out of his contract in October 2006. And then Mayer started the LA-based strategic communications outpost of NYC showbiz flackery 42West founded by Leslee Dart. Sitrick then went on a hiring binge, and now a lot of ex-journalists work on his showbiz-related accounts. Though Sitrick and Company has a much bigger strategic communications business, 42West is an entertainment powerhouse. This'll be the Olympics of union PR games!
(See my two SAG/AFTRA/AMPTP articles in LA Weekly: here and here.)
more desperation. How sad.
Comment by just a thought — July 1, 2008 @ 10:54 pm
I don’t care how much money actors in old or new media. I just want to watch RSL and HL on House. However there are things that I do care about. People who have lost everything they had to a natural disaster. People living in tents because they lost their homes due to predatory lending practics. The mental patient in New York who died on video while hospital employees ignored her.
There’s not a whole lot in this world to be happy and hopeful about (except Sen. Obama). So I’m asking you to find another way to settle your differences so we can season 5 start as scheduled.
Comment by MaryKay — July 1, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
It makes you wonder why the guilds need PR firms in the first place. The big actors are big enough PR.
Comment by Jessy S. — July 2, 2008 @ 12:49 am
phew! thank god they are blowing several million on PR in order to gain a million more in a contract negotiation. /sarc
Why don’t they take this cash they are blowing, because that’s what they are doing, and put it into the pension/health insurance fund? Oh that’s right, because it’s Hollywood and vanity is paramount and hypocrisy reigns supreme.
Comment by manny — July 2, 2008 @ 3:53 am
Pr firm for what? Game over SAG. Send the deal to the membership for a vote. Let the membership decide. Is the PR firm so that leadership can save face? The contract is expired, you have an offer send it to membership. Even the WGA held a meeting with membership to get a consensus about the AMPTP final offer.
The IA, AMPTP, and AFTRA should sue SAG leadership to put the offer in front of the membership for a vote.
This is what happens when actors are in charge. There is a reason we put tape on the floor to show you where to stand.
Comment by notgoingtoTip — July 2, 2008 @ 6:03 am
notgoingtoTip
“There is a reason we put tape on the floor to show you where to stand.”
Yeah. So when you fuck the lighting and the sound up and miss the shot we can do it over again so you can get the overtime that your union bargained for so you can pay your mortgage and your kids’ education so they don’t have to put tape on the floor for a living.
Comment by woody — July 2, 2008 @ 7:04 am
Actors are not in charge. Two-thirds of SAG’s members , roughly 80,000 members make LESS than $1000 a year from acting. These are not actors. These are loser wannabes that have nothing at stake. And the sad reality is that’s who led us into this mess.
Comment by LP — July 2, 2008 @ 7:22 am
Woody-
We have the highest production values in the world bar none. If you’re looking for a weak link in the chain you’re barking up the wrong tree my friend.
The tape on the floor is to remind you that you’re not in charge. We are not there to capture your “moment” where ever it may happen and record what ever stream of consciousness that spews from your mouth. We have a plan BEFORE we start shooting. Unlike your union-NO PLAN. On your next job go sit in on a pre-production meeting as they dissect every line of the script. We know what we are doing. 99.9% of the time take 2 isn’t for a technical reason, it is for performance. We get fired if it isn’t perfect, you just get to do it over and then take a nap in your trailer.
Comment by notgoingtoTip — July 2, 2008 @ 7:39 am
This is what happens when actors are in charge. There is a reason we put tape on the floor to show you where to stand.
Thanks for the laugh.
Oh and Woody, I suppose you’ve never forgotten a line.
Comment by BTL Mom — July 2, 2008 @ 7:43 am
NotgoingtoTip-
At first I found your comments mildly shrill and annoying, but over the last few days, you’ve really come into your own!
Your last “stand here” comment was pure genius, and pretty much typifies this entire mess.
Excellent work, my friend.
Comment by now that's funny — July 2, 2008 @ 8:51 am
They couldn’t have done this BEFORE the AFTRA ballots were in the mail ????????
Peggy Lane O’Rourke
Comment by Peggy Lane O'Rourke — July 2, 2008 @ 9:19 am
Notgoingtotip-
Sorry if I touched a sore spot. I’d have replied sooner, but I was napping in my trailer. : )
Comment by woody — July 2, 2008 @ 9:51 am
Great. Spending more of our money on nothing useful, like the losing war with AFTRA!
Just make the damn deal. If it’s good enough for the DGA, WGA, and AFTRA, guess what? It’s not going to change appreciably. Just make the dame deal!
Rosenberg and Allen said the WGA fight was our fight, their negotiations were our negotiations, their strike was our strike…so guess what, morons? When you join yourself at the hip with them, THEIR DEAL WAS OUR DEAL! Just make the damn deal!
If you’re going to let AFTRA take over all our prime time shows because they have a contract and we don’t, you’ll destroy SAG forever. You made a huge tactical blunder. You lost! Just make the damn deal now!
Comment by Scott — July 2, 2008 @ 10:32 am
This is becoming the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. Both SAG, AFTRA and the AMPTP are all becoming a joke.
Plus why waste my dues money to payoff a PR firm this late in the game. We are not troops at war in Iraq hoping for the best planning for the worse. We are negotiating an actor’s contract with the producers. We are not trying to be loved in the press - I saw my old a SAG board member on channel 5 last night and she hasn’t look that good in a long time. Man, I would vote for her as Obama’s running mate in a second, but we are not trying to win against McCain. We are not running a popularity contest against the AMPTP.
Remember, 15 minutes of fame can be highly addictive let us not try to make our negotiators stars in the press.
The AMPTP hired their PR firm months ago, it would have been a good idea for SAG to hire a PR firm before the end of the contract.
Comment by CHRIS JACKSON — July 2, 2008 @ 10:48 am
Oh, that’s what the tape is for…. All these years I didn’t want to stand on it and get it dirty.
Very funny, sir.
For the record, though, just because they say it’s the same deal as WGA and DGA doesn’t mean it’s the same deal.
1. The New Media residual formula guarantees writers something on the order of $300 per cycle. Directors get more than that. Actors would get $23 per cycle. That’s NOT THE SAME DEAL AS THE WGA AND DGA. IF IT WERE, WE’D TAKE IT.
2. Product Integration is NOT THE SAME for actors as it is for writers and directors:
A WGA member can write the line, “Hey I think I’ll have a delicious Coca-Cola! It’s my favorite thirst-quenching beverage!”
A DGA member can direct an actor to say it.
Then they can BOTH go to work next week and do the same for Pepsi.
A SAG member, once he or she SAYS the line for the camera, CAN NOT. Pepsi will not hire that actor for their commercials, they will not want that actor for their shows. Just ask Will Arnett.
3. Nobody ever refused to hire the writers or directors of The Brady Bunch (or Gilligan’s Island, or the Partridge Family, or Hogan’s Heroes) because they were sick to death of a particular storyline or dolly move. ABUSE OF RERUNS HURTS ACTORS CAREERS in a way that doesn’t apply to writers and directors.
4. If the AMPTP wanted SAG to take the WGA or DGA deal, THEY SHOULD HAVE INVITED THEM INTO THE ROOM WHEN IT WAS NEGOTIATED. For years now, the unions have tried negotiate jointly, so as to address concerns together, with the least amount of disruption to the rest of the community. The talks have been spread out over the better part of a year at great cost to the creative and craft community BECAUSE THAT’S THE WAY THE AMPTP WANTS IT.
5. Residuals protect EVERYONE, not just actors.
Cheap residuals = Cheap reruns
Cheap reruns = MORE reruns
Who here gets hired to work on reruns? NOBODY
End of tirade.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 11:39 am
Notgoingtotip:
Man, you really HATE actors. I am one, and I admit we can be a pain sometimes, but wow, do you dislike us. And just so you don’t label me as a loser wannabe, I make my living as an actor, or did up until this last year when the bottom dropped out of everything and I had to take a Post PA job. Like most actors I know will do when times get tough. Does this make us any less of an actor. No, it means we do what we have to do. I’m sorry if you feel that because someone has to wait tables or park cars that they are a wanna be actor and don’t deserve a tip, eventhough they may have provided you with excellent service. I’ve gone from being a recurring character on a top rated TV show to having to wait tables, work in an office, and now PA work. Does that make me a wanna-be? Maybe. But I’ll do what I have to do to keep doing what I love to do. I don’t want a strike, but I also don’t want to keep getting screwed by the Studio’s as they make tons and tons of money. Especially when everything goes digital - which it will eventually - and then you will have celebrities and people who act as a hobby. And if you think that won’t effect your BTL job as well you have very willingly pulled the wool over your eyes.
Lastly, I always understood that the X on the ground was not only to tell an actor where to stand, but was so the Focus Puller could get an acurate measurement and keep whoever or whatever is in frame in focus. As far as taking a nap in my trailer - where else am I supposed to go while the next shot is being set up? Sometimes for hours. Should I just hang out and watch? Or does it make sense to relax so that when I am called upon to do my job I get it right the first time. Don’t tell me every second or third or fourth or fifth take is because of an actor screw up. Plenty of times other things aren’t right in the frame. Or the camera move was shakey, or the light doesn’t look right. Or Sound was bad. So don’t blame everything on us.
Comment by JustSaying — July 2, 2008 @ 11:41 am
Okay, I’ll bite for the Devil’s Advocate.
I don’t mind the PR move IF it can allow leadership and negotiators to concentrate on doing those jobs without worrying about saving face in the corporate McNews. Yes, it’s a bit late. But so is everything about this “negotiation” thanks to the AMPTP forcing SAG to start from scratch.
The fact is any and all strike talk has come from the AMPTP and their in-house media echo chamber. When I see a CBS “News” Break anchor tell me that “actors could walk off the job tomorrow,” it makes me want to shoot the damn television that I wish to make a living on. Sure! We could have walked off the job Tuesday. We also could have done fucking cartwheels off the set, run over to Les Moonves’ office and taken a long piss on his front steps. But SAG has no plans on calling a vote for either option, despite the worthiness of the latter.
I don’t know how much leverage can be gained through the media, but SOMEONE has to be out there saying, look, SAG is not “strike-happy,” as evidenced by their continuing work under an expired contract. If SAG can gain any leverage by showing that they’re negotiating in good faith and offering the producers every opportunity to do the same, then all the better.
So I do not understand why there are so many vocal people airing out their wishes that SAG would “take the deal, give it up, bend over and say rollback,” or whatever other brilliant suggestions you have from your bleacher seats.
Comment by Jenius — July 2, 2008 @ 11:52 am
Just Saying-
Who says I don’t like actors? For your information I married one. So this household gets a SAG and AFTRA vote, as well as a DGA and IA vote. No Vanity card holders here.
My “tape” remark refers to the fact that you sent in actors to negotiate with professional negotiators. Obviously you need to re read it.
The Notgoingtotip comes from my disgust at vanity card holders who are making their living from jobs other than acting, thus sacrificing NOTHING in a strike. Conversely other members of the industry who will be directly impacted by a strike who don’t have a vote because they are in ancillary unions have EVERYTHING to lose in a strike. There is no jeopardy for vanity holders and the other 85% of SAG that does not make a living from union work. So when you are waiting tables and you expect to earn the same amount during a strike but know that everyone else is suffering damages, I am one guy that is going to make sure you suffer along with us. After all you voted for it. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Comment by NotgoingtoTip — July 2, 2008 @ 3:24 pm
Notgoingtotip is just a back peddling idiot - I don’t know why anyone has a dialogue with him. Nothing constructive comes out of it, just a lot of name calling, which is what I just did… lol. He talks about Vanity card holders - but who knows what card he’s holding and he’s obviously not working right now - why else would he being spending so much time on this blog. So he obviously has other income, which in his book would make him a vanity card holder. I can’t even keep up with all the CRAZY nonsense that come out of his mouth. Please save us all some time reading your CRAZINESS and go blog somewhere else - like the unemployment line…
Comment by Paul — July 2, 2008 @ 4:39 pm
Paul-
Keep guessing Paul.
I work in studio features. You know the de-facto strike effected part of the biz. I also told you what cards I hold. Plus I don’t get unemployment. Im paid as a corporation, just like Clooney and Soderbergh. Gee they hold the same cards that I hold.
So Paul, why doesn’t SAG give the offer to the membership?
Can anyone tell me why SAG doesn’t take the deal to the membership for a vote?
Is that the CRAZINESS your talking about? Voting on the offer?
Thats constructive.
Unlike your blog, lacking any facts, solutions, or ideas. Relying instead on guess work. Are you sure your not part of SAG leadership?
Comment by notgoingtoTip — July 2, 2008 @ 5:37 pm
Notgoingtotip:
“After all you voted for it.” As far as I know we haven’t voted for anything yet — much less a strike. I don’t think SAG leadership would get a yes vote — not after the damages the 2000 commercial strike caused. But I would also not vote “yes” if the current contract came to me for ratification. It stinks, and it won’t get better in three years. The studio’s will never renegotiate once the precedent is there - just look at basic cable and DVD. As far as I know, and I could be wrong, the reason the DGA took the deal from the producers is because most of it’s members don’t live on residuals — which like it or not are how most actors are able to make a living, but you know this because you are married to an actor. Should the actors take the same deal just because? “Oh it’s the best deal you’re going to get.” Who says? Maybe it is maybe it isn’t. But we should be able to go through our own negotiations (albiet botched by leadership).
Comment by JustSaying — July 2, 2008 @ 7:53 pm
“No Vanity card holders here.”
No, just plenty of vanity.
And apparently, enough time to spend at least eleven hours of posting on this blog today alone.
Comment by Jenius — July 2, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
Justsaying-”“Oh it’s the best deal you’re going to get.” Who says? Maybe it is maybe it isn’t. But we should be able to go through our own negotiations (albiet botched by leadership).”
Its the best deal you’ve EVER been offered.
You should also weigh that against the damages already caused by the de-facto strike. People, lots of people are out of work right now because of this. Have you no conscious?
Should everyone stop working so you’re leadership can decide? SAG leaders are “deciding” like 15 year old girls picking out prom dresses, “Oh, this one is pretty, but this one is good too…..”
Let members vote. Why do you need to see how someone else votes before you can decide how you will vote?
Jenius-
Where is the vanity in asking a pointed question? Why won’t the leadership give the offer to the members to vote? When was any other offer better than the one you have now?
See Jenius, just like republican strategist Karl Rove, you would rather skirt around the issues, forget to answer the questions and instead attack the person on something you assume to be character based. Thus trying to create a diversionary new issue where there was none.
11 hours? See with these new fangle computer thingies, you don’t have to be present every minute to keep up to date on topics in a blog.
Is everyone done “guessing” about other bloggers to try to build your charactor assasinations so as to avoid discussing the real issues?
Comment by NotgoingtoTip — July 3, 2008 @ 6:45 am
How many of you have actually sat on a negoiating team and can talk about how they work. If you have not then you have no idea and should stay out of it
Comment by John — July 3, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
NotgoingtoThink:
Your vanity doesn’t stem from asking pointed questions. It comes from your condescending, arrogant attitude (all the way down to your alias) as you accuse others of having the same.
Why don’t they put it to a member vote? Having had not a minute in the room myself, fraid I can’t help ya. Maybe they need to look it over to make sure they aren’t insulting the membership’s intelligence with a cruddy deal full of rollbacks. I don’t buy for a second that it’s the best deal SAG’s ever been offered, not in the context of the record revenues and untapped potential of new media that the producers love to trumpet to their shareholders.
Even an armchair labor negotiator as astute as yourself would have to admit that taking the first deal presented to you would be moronic.
John above couldn’t have said it much better. Why do you think you’re going to get an answer that satisfies your obviously superior grasp of all the issues in the comment section of this blog?
You want an answer to your question? Ask them yourself: contract2008@sag.org. Maybe they’ll waste their time on a response and you could learn something and actually contribute some commentary worthy of reading.
I’m not diverting the issues with character assassination, you’re doing a fine job yourself with your self-righteous mission to starve local waitstaffs. I didn’t answer the question because I didn’t care about it, it was an irrelevant question for the reasons cited above.
Finally, anyone who compares me REMOTELY to Karl Rove is simply showing themselves to be completely divorced from reality. Especially from someone who’s questions are of a Jeff Gannon depth. Or maybe, like Karl, you’re a master projectionist.
Comment by Jenius — July 3, 2008 @ 7:44 pm
Jenius-
Well boo hoo. You comments are full of just “beliefs”. Whereas mine are full of facts. You call facts arrogant and condescending? Where did I say I was better than you? I just know how money works in this town, i.e… bond issues and I have research the gains made in every sag contract. You think my name is condescending? Well maybe i should call myself JENIUS!(change one letter to play the word-but come on) now that would be a name not to be confused with someone’s “having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one’s own importance or abilities”. Isn’t that the direct definition of arrogance?
Well blog, Jenius, you say things like, ” I don’t buy for a second that it’s the best deal SAG’s ever been offered” What do you mean you don’t BUY it? Its a fact. Look it up. Do you often not BUY facts? 2 plus 2 is 4, but you don’t BUY it. That’s the height of arrogance, touting your beliefs over facts. Bush did the same thing with global warming. He didn’t buy it either. Also WMDs. “I know every report states Iraq doesn’t have them but I don’t BUY it, we’re gonna attack anyway.”
Let’s take another example from your blog and see if arrogance can be combined with hypocracy. You say, “I’m not diverting the issues with character assassination”, yet you start your blog by calling me “NotgoingtoTHINK”. Let me guess you don’t BUY that you could have said those things in the SAME blog, directly contradicting your phypocrisyoint.
Oh, and this is NOT the first deal presented. Everyone including SAG is referring to the current offer as, “Last Best Final Offer”, not First Best Final Offer.
If you can Jenius, dispute my blogs based on facts, so at least you can gain some credibility. Choosing charactor assasinations instead of doing some research is really hurting your position. What is your position by the way? Just to attack?
So why wont SAG put it to a vote? The deal points have been posted. You don’t have to be a Jenius to read them. You don’t have to be a Jenius to figure out if it’s a good deal or not. You don’t have to be a Jenius to research deal histories either.
Comment by NotgoingtoTip — July 4, 2008 @ 6:12 am