Variety is a news publication. Most people expect a news organization to actually tell the truth–report the news, report both sides of an argument, and if something doesn’t add up for one of the sides, for the news organization to dig deeper and research.

For a normal news publication/program (e.g. anything other than Fox News) it is expected that there will be a solid brick wall between the advertising and news departments. If not, why publish at all? In your world, Dreamworks could take out an ad saying “Shrek 3 made more money than any other movie,” and Variety could then print this as if it was fact, ignoring “Titanic.”

I don’t think people are shocked, just disappointed. Variety used to be a reputable news organization.

Oh, and Manny–can you quote something that Nikki’s said that’s blatantly untrue or skewed? You’ve claimed she’s “biased,” but it appears she’s just telling the truth.

Troll.

Writers do hire writers. In feature writing, producers by scripts. On television series, the showrunners are writers and they hire the writing staff. Television writers work with each other and network with each other. Usually fi-core writers are television writers. And in television it’s not about buying a script. It’s about hiring a writer to write future scripts. So, being a scab television writer won’t get you far.

So what’s the negative in going fi-core?

According to you, the only negative seems to be that other writers won’t like you. Yeah well writers tend not to like each other. Mostly because there are so few writing gigs, everyone rewriting each other, and someone’s always getting paid more than you for even worse scripts.

It’s not like the writers are the ones that buy the scripts so I think a writer would only care about what a producer thinks of them. Not one of their fellow writers who would bust their knee caps and kicks them in the balls if it meant a two-week rewriting gig.

Here’s a suggestion: Get your “news” from their websites on the internet — yes, that crazy newfangled uncharted territory that the studios use profits from our “promotions” to pay for their ads in the trades. Just like our work that the studios post on line….it’s free! You can read the front page and nearly all of the relevant stories, daily, for free.

COME ON WRITERS! CANCEL YOUR VARIETY SUBSCRIPTION MONDAY MORNING. Let’s send a message about whose side we’re on. Cause they’ve been sending one loud and clear about whose side they’re on!

Still…the Writers deserve a reasonable cut of DVD and New Media and the Studios need to do the right thing.

“Fi-core” is short for “financial core,” the federally-protected right of any union member to resign from (any) union but continue to pay union dues. The resigned member is then on “financial core” status, which means that he/she may work for whom he/she chooses (including non-signatories and during strikes) and may not be disciplined or prevented from working by the union.

The ex-member has no voting rights in the union, can’t attend meetings or otherwise participate in union activities, and essentially pays dues only for the union’s administrative and collective bargaining activities, not the “political” activities.

The ex-member has all of the benefits of any collective bargaining agreement (in the Guild’s case, the MBA), including P&W, etc. but is technically not a member of the union any longer.

This is legal thing but highly ethically suspect, since it amounts to betraying the union in its organizing (or here, strike) activities.

Unless there’s a strike, it’s hard to find out who has chosen fi-core status — certainly in this town there are very few fi-core ex-members of the Guild even with the anonymity. Professional writers appreciate and depend on the Guild, imperfect as it is.

But during a strike, people who go fi-core are the only ones working and are no different than scabs, so it’s very visible and will be very tough on them within the creative community….

BTW, I’ve been at the center of this business for a long time and have never seen a guild action with such united membership. I think it’s unique in the last 30 years.

What is one to do?

Reach for a Trade.

pb

“‘Most shows fail, and the television business — with the audience splintering thanks to all the channels out there — must establish some controls over what we pay people in success.’” (LA Times, 5/23/00)

Just a week earlier, he framed the story of the contract dispute entirely from the networks’ side, opening with:

“After a tense week of negotiations that no doubt had NBC wondering with ‘Friends’ like these who needs enemies …” (LA Times, 5/15/00)

And two years later, as the wildly successful actors of “Friends” used their marketplace power to negotiate better pay yet again, it drove Lowry to write of:

” … a simple (if confounding) dilemma — namely, how television can afford to produce shows for which there is a public demand but no clear financial model to support them.”

You recognize the language. It’s the language of an exec.

Lowry’s smart enough to rationalize to himself that he’s giving us “the truth,” as he wrote this week in a highly defensive piece — but he’s television’s Judith Miller, so deeply embedded with his administration sources that he cannot see how blindly they have taken everyone to war.

Full page ads in the Trades often tend to be vanity pieces at best. Bought by a studio to placate a producer, bought by an agent to satisfy a client. Sure, there are other reasons, but is the public swayed by these ads? Do they even see them?
So keep an eye on the Trades. It’s another “source” to add to the mix, but do so with a grain of salt at hand and an open mind.

And if you get enough salt… fire up that Mr. Margarita machine. It’ll make the Trades almost funny. Almost.

pb

That’s the thing that fascinates me most. It can’t be for the purpose of demoralizing the WGA. There are too many alternative means for literate people to communicate and verify assertions like these.

So is it to get their message out to the larger media outlets? If so, why do it by this method? What is it accomplishing?