American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

OT: anything goes!

Moderator: Edi

User avatar
Big Orange
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7105
Joined: 2006-04-22 05:15pm
Location: Britain

American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Big Orange »

The Economist
The not-so-big four


Broadcast television is declining at an accelerating rate

“IT’S amazing how little has changed around here,” says a character in the final episode of “E.R.”, which aired in America on April 2nd. Indeed, it seemed like old times for the hospital drama: 16m people tuned in, not many fewer than it drew a decade ago. But the impression of good times is no more real than a stage set. For programmes like “E.R.”, and for broadcast television itself, much is changing.

The recession has been cruel to a business that depends almost entirely on advertising. Local television stations, many of them owned by or affiliated with national broadcasters, have seen advertising revenue fall by as much as 40% as car dealers and other retailers cut back. Later this month the national networks will test the market for advance advertising. It should prove better than the local market, but still difficult. And this painful cyclical problem coincides with a bigger, structural one: the audience for the “big four” broadcast networks is eroding (see chart).

It is not that people are watching less television. In the last quarter of 2008 the average American took in 151 hours per month, an all-time record, according to Nielsen, a market-research firm. The trouble is the growth of choice. More than 80% of American households now get their television via satellite or cable. To them, the broadcast channels are just items on a menu containing hundreds of dishes.

The networks can still produce hits. “American Idol” and “CSI”, respectively an amateur singing competition and a forensic-science drama, routinely attract more than 20m viewers—three times as many as the most successful cable shows. But occasional triumphs do not add up to a sustainable business model.

Chris Silbermann, president of International Creative Management, a talent agency, says the big change is that mediocre television now struggles to attract a healthy audience. The ratings seem to back him up. Between the first 12 weeks of 2005 and the first 12 weeks of this year, the audience for the top-rated broadcast show (often “American Idol”) fell by 9%. But the number watching the tenth most popular show was down by 17%, and the audience for the 20th in the list was 18% smaller.

So far, the big broadcast networks have been able to persuade advertisers to spend more for each eyeball they reach. Although they can no longer round up huge audiences, they are still the best way of reaching very large ones. And advertisers tend to see broadcast television, with its consistently wholesome quality, as a safe place to promote their products. Cable is still viewed as a rather wild frontier populated by wrestlers and televangelists.

Yet this, too, is changing. Last year’s Emmy awards were dominated by cable shows. “Mad Men”, which is set in an advertising agency, was voted best drama. It was the first time the award had gone to a show on basic cable (it is shown on the AMC channel) as opposed to a premium network, such as HBO. Such acclaim changes attitudes to cable generally. Bruce Rosenblum, the head of the television group at Warner Bros, reckons the growing profile of original cable shows may gradually erode the huge premium that advertisers will pay for broadcast.

Cutbacks are already under way. The networks have commissioned fewer pilot shows than usual this year, many of them relatively cheap half-hour comedies. With its broadcast network faring poorly, NBC plans to run Jay Leno, a talk-show host, five nights a week at 10pm—the slot where dramas such as “E.R.” once reigned. Some broadcast networks look enviously at cable channels, with their steady streams of income from distributors, and ponder getting out of broadcast altogether.

Such a radical change would involve difficult negotiations with local stations. In the meantime, the broadcast networks should be able to drive harder bargains with both local stations and cable companies. Television producers will find new markets abroad. But the good times appear to be over. Sometimes an industry can withstand pressure for many years, and then collapse abruptly. Just ask a newspaper proprietor.
With viewing habits changing (*cough*Internet*cough*) and the media getting more thinly spread since the last decade, both contributing to declining ad revenues, and couple it with arrogant, inept management (Moonves and Zucker, I'm looking at you) it looks like American network television is getting seriously corroded. Alongside the increasing pressure of the more sturdy paid cable networks, it seems like the Nielsen system is woefully outdated - to start with it only monitors tens of thousands of households (if that) and it didn't take students into account until only the last couple of years, for fuck's sake.

Looking at the ratings graph that goes with the article, it is likely no coincidence that CBS' ratings started to dip suddenly around the time they impatiently axed Moonlight, Jericho, and Shark, coupled with the ridiculous writer's strike, alienating millions of viewers. With the way shows seem to be more quickly turned over or/and abused with illogical scheduling, it is getting to the point where I'm convinced monkeys locked in cages and given targets (with the names of shows stuck on them) for them to throw their crap at would yield more coherent choices than those made by US network executives.
'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...' - Dr. Evil

'Secondly, I don't see why "income inequality" is a bad thing. Poverty is not an injustice. There is no such thing as causes for poverty, only causes for wealth. Poverty is not a wrong, but taking money from those who have it to equalize incomes is basically theft, which is wrong.' - Typical Randroid

'I think it's gone a little bit wrong.' - The Doctor
User avatar
Patrick Degan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 14847
Joined: 2002-07-15 08:06am
Location: Orleanian in exile

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Patrick Degan »

It's no surprise that network television is declining: look at the shit they air for the most part —xerox-copy "reality" shows, xerox-copy sitcoms and "dramas", none of which are really funny or clever or all that dramatic really; more style-over-substance than anything else. And an ever increasing number of commercials per broadcast hour which is really fucking irritating. Cable is about as bad or on some networks worse but you've got a smorgasbord of choices so the effect is not immediately apparent. The overall effect, though, is that television as a whole is becoming nigh unwatchable and the internet is now offering entertainment which is a lot less irritating and which delivers at your convenience. So why wouldn't millions tune out the networks who keep trying to ram shit down everybody's throats and tell them it's strawberry cheesecake when they know better?
When ballots have fairly and constitutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to bullets.
—Abraham Lincoln

People pray so that God won't crush them like bugs.
—Dr. Gregory House

Oil an emergency?! It's about time, Brigadier, that the leaders of this planet of yours realised that to remain dependent upon a mineral slime simply doesn't make sense.
—The Doctor "Terror Of The Zygons" (1975)
User avatar
Prannon
Jedi Knight
Posts: 601
Joined: 2009-03-25 07:39am
Location: Ontario

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Prannon »

Before too many people jump on the "Internet is the cause and doom of broadcast TV!" bandwagon, I do want to point out one statistic from the article.
It is not that people are watching less television. In the last quarter of 2008 the average American took in 151 hours per month, an all-time record, according to Nielsen, a market-research firm. The trouble is the growth of choice. More than 80% of American households now get their television via satellite or cable. To them, the broadcast channels are just items on a menu containing hundreds of dishes.
Indeed, the article mentions growth of choice as the prime reason for broadcast TV's decline. So really there's a menagerie of reasons behind this. Internet is one of them, not the only one.
User avatar
Oskuro
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2698
Joined: 2005-05-25 06:10am
Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Oskuro »

They cancelled Firefly. They threathen to cancel Terminator: SCC. Now they pay the price for their lack of vision!

Wait, what were we talking about?
unsigned
User avatar
Big Orange
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7105
Joined: 2006-04-22 05:15pm
Location: Britain

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Big Orange »

Another notable reason why American studios are tanking fast is because they're so selfish and short-sighted, willing to shoot themselves in the foot with a howitzer. Why the hell did they incur a writer's strike despite the ample warnings, perhaps damaging the production of scripted TV shows beyond repair, and why do they allow music clearance issues (or multiple ownership) to prevent the wider distribution of many great shows in the face of high consumer demand?

I've been banging on about it countless times, but it is grimly ironic that intellectual property laws, ostensively used to generate profit, when taken to the extreme produces the opposite intended effect: depressed innovation (why make something great out of multiple sources when it is too damn expensive?), cut off revenue (everybody loses after painting themselves into a legal corner), and rampant piracy (torrent downloads of unavailable shows).

Also American network censorship is quite hypocritical and dimwitted: I mean the TV censors are mortally afraid of foul language, pubes, and nipples, but don't bat an eyelid at a young woman having her head and limbs cut off. CBS aired Dexter during the WGA strike by cutting out the F-bombs yet leaving in the chopped up hookers. :wtf:
'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...' - Dr. Evil

'Secondly, I don't see why "income inequality" is a bad thing. Poverty is not an injustice. There is no such thing as causes for poverty, only causes for wealth. Poverty is not a wrong, but taking money from those who have it to equalize incomes is basically theft, which is wrong.' - Typical Randroid

'I think it's gone a little bit wrong.' - The Doctor
User avatar
Nephtys
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6227
Joined: 2005-04-02 10:54pm
Location: South Cali... where life is cheap!

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Nephtys »

I just can't be bothered to schedule my time around seeing a show I want to see. Which is why Hulu and other ways of getting video online are just so popular and appealing. I can play what I wish, pause when I need it, and watch when I want to watch.

All while not paying money for TiVo.
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Darth Wong »

Big Orange wrote:Another notable reason why American studios are tanking fast is because they're so selfish and short-sighted, willing to shoot themselves in the foot with a howitzer. Why the hell did they incur a writer's strike despite the ample warnings, perhaps damaging the production of scripted TV shows beyond repair,
Perhaps they should have followed the lead of GM and acquiesced to union demands without protest, thus laying the groundwork for great success in future? Oops.
and why do they allow music clearance issues (or multiple ownership) to prevent the wider distribution of many great shows in the face of high consumer demand?
They "allow" copyright law to limit their actions rather than ... what alternative? Defying the law? Shelling out whatever the music copyright owners demand, no matter how unreasonable it is?
I've been banging on about it countless times, but it is grimly ironic that intellectual property laws, ostensively used to generate profit, when taken to the extreme produces the opposite intended effect: depressed innovation (why make something great out of multiple sources when it is too damn expensive?), cut off revenue (everybody loses after painting themselves into a legal corner), and rampant piracy (torrent downloads of unavailable shows).
I agree there. But I don't see why the broadcast TV networks should be blamed for copyright laws.
Also American network censorship is quite hypocritical and dimwitted: I mean the TV censors are mortally afraid of foul language, pubes, and nipples, but don't bat an eyelid at a young woman having her head and limbs cut off. CBS aired Dexter during the WGA strike by cutting out the F-bombs yet leaving in the chopped up hookers. :wtf:
That's American family values for you. Again, however, I don't see any reason to single out the networks for criticism.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Thanas »

Darth Wong wrote:
Big Orange wrote:Another notable reason why American studios are tanking fast is because they're so selfish and short-sighted, willing to shoot themselves in the foot with a howitzer. Why the hell did they incur a writer's strike despite the ample warnings, perhaps damaging the production of scripted TV shows beyond repair,
Perhaps they should have followed the lead of GM and acquiesced to union demands without protest, thus laying the groundwork for great success in future? Oops.
Iirc, the writer's strike happened because the big studios refused to give any share of the online/DVD revenue to the writers as well as reneging on a deal that was struck several years ago.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Darth Wong »

Thanas wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
Big Orange wrote:Another notable reason why American studios are tanking fast is because they're so selfish and short-sighted, willing to shoot themselves in the foot with a howitzer. Why the hell did they incur a writer's strike despite the ample warnings, perhaps damaging the production of scripted TV shows beyond repair,
Perhaps they should have followed the lead of GM and acquiesced to union demands without protest, thus laying the groundwork for great success in future? Oops.
Iirc, the writer's strike happened because the big studios refused to give any share of the online/DVD revenue to the writers as well as reneging on a deal that was struck several years ago.
So? GM is in trouble because of deals they struck many years ago too. Look at their declining audience: their former largesses is unsupportable in future.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Thanas »

You'd still have to show me that the deal made with the writers would be as damaging as the deal GM made with the unions or that it would even approach that level.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Darth Wong »

Thanas wrote:You'd still have to show me that the deal made with the writers would be as damaging as the deal GM made with the unions or that it would even approach that level.
When you're looking at your market share declining to half of what it was, a serious cutback is pretty much inevitable if you want to save the business. It doesn't need to be just as bad as GM.

Sometimes, businesses undergo permanent shrinkage. When that happens, they are typically forced to re-evaluate decisions they made in rosier times. This happened to GM. It is happening to network TV now. Why must I show that the financial situation is just as dire in order to show that the same basic mechanism is at work?
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Thanas »

Darth Wong wrote:Sometimes, businesses undergo permanent shrinkage. When that happens, they are typically forced to re-evaluate decisions they made in rosier times. This happened to GM. It is happening to network TV now. Why must I show that the financial situation is just as dire in order to show that the same basic mechanism is at work?
Because I have seen little to no evidence presented in this thread that the royalties paid to the writers are so damaging to the network's profits.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Kanastrous »

Royalties are not a fixed cost; they only get paid when profit is made. So the writers' deal is nothing like the UAW's; if the UAW's members only got benefits calculated based upon the actual number of cars sold and dollars earned, you'd have a comparison. Since writers' royalties are based upon actual performance rather than being fixed, you don't.

Not to mention that the basic expenses associated with production are declining, not increasing, as a result of continually improving technology as well as the metastisization of 'reality' programming. The Producers' Guild poor-mouths even as they pull in proportionately more profit than ever before.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Darth Wong »

Why should any particular cost be established to be "damaging" to profit, when all costs are, by definition, damaging to profit? GE has announced that profits at NBC will be either flat or slightly negative in 2009. Obviously, in a situation like that, you look to cut costs. Contracts with labour are especially difficult because they create obligatory costs in future, not just one-time costs.
Kanastrous wrote:Royalties are not a fixed cost; they only get paid when profit is made.
Since when? I was under the impression that they are paid when a sale is made (or in the case of broadcast, material is broadcast or re-broadcast), regardless of whether the corporation is profitable at the time.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Kanastrous »

You're correct, my bad. I should have written sale. Still, they are only paid when there is revenue coming in on the product in question, as opposed to UAW-type benefits which are payable whether the company sells one million units, or none at all.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22442
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Mr Bean »

Darth Wong wrote:Why should any particular cost be established to be "damaging" to profit, when all costs are, by definition, damaging to profit? GE has announced that profits at NBC will be either flat or slightly negative in 2009. Obviously, in a situation like that, you look to cut costs. Contracts with labour are especially difficult because they create obligatory costs in future, not just one-time costs.
I feel compelled to toss back up a link to an old 4 minute video explanation because the Writer's strike was one of the most justified strikes I've seen in a good ten years now.


Writer's do not get a large share of profit in fact they get a tiny ass share of the profit. And the end goal of the writer strike was an agreement to get a slightly bigger tiny ass share of the profit. When compared with other unions such as the UAW the WGA's demands seemed to be no brainers. They were not demanding heath care, guaranteed work or anything else. Just an that business honor an agreement where-in the studios convinced the writers o cut their tiny ass share of the profit to an even smaller share to help promote home movie sales and had agreed to do this two decades ago.

To say they were a little slow in striking is something of an understatement, they waited nearly ten years after the Home VHS market had blow up, and several years after the DVD market had gone crazy as well to make their claim because as they saw it, the terms of the agreement had been fulfilled. They cut their share of the profit, now they want their cut back and yet they were not being given it.

This is different from a GM strike Darth Wong because it's scope, they were not demanding large expensive benefits but a simple return on a promise made two decades ago and long ignored after the terms were fulfilled.

You must also acknowledge the different in costs. The entertainment is still one of the most lopsided industries out there where ten million dollars of investment might produce four hundred million dollars of return. Movies and TV shows might tank but they pretty often at least break even and just breaking even is considered huge flop. To give the idea how something like TDK can pull down a billion dollars alone and will still be pulling in money ten years from now with the ultra remastered special edition super-cut.

Cars? Not so much...

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Big Orange
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7105
Joined: 2006-04-22 05:15pm
Location: Britain

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Big Orange »

Darth Wong wrote: Perhaps they should have followed the lead of GM and acquiesced to union demands without protest, thus laying the groundwork for great success in future? Oops.
The TV networks were caught in a "damned that you do, damned that you don't" situation they could've easily planned to avoid a decade or so ago, if they seemingly failed to anticipate how much of a money maker DVDs were going to be.
They "allow" copyright law to limit their actions rather than ... what alternative? Defying the law? Shelling out whatever the music copyright owners demand, no matter how unreasonable it is?
We shouldn't forget the boundless greed and steadfast cuntishness the music industry is renowned for, what I find stupefying is that after the production studios and broadcast networks paid the music holders for having music content on their shows getting broadcast in the first place, they have to pay AGAIN for them to get published on DVD. The more music there is on a show, the more likely the publication of it is going to get fucked one away or another (Quantum Leap was published on DVD, but got heavily edited as a awkward compromise).

This failure of covering the bases is just one small part of a bigger and deeply ingrained problem that is pissing America's still strong economic and cultural potential down the drain: overweeing private ownership. With too many slices of the same pie belonging to too many players who are legally at each other's throats, it stops any of them from doing anything with the pie. This is elaborated in Michael Heller's Gridlock Economy.
Also American network censorship is quite hypocritical and dimwitted: I mean the TV censors are mortally afraid of foul language, pubes, and nipples, but don't bat an eyelid at a young woman having her head and limbs cut off. CBS aired Dexter during the WGA strike by cutting out the F-bombs yet leaving in the chopped up hookers. :wtf:
That's American family values for you. Again, however, I don't see any reason to single out the networks for criticism.
Who are the official censorship body for non-cable American television? I wouldn't be surprised if there are censorship lobbyist who are religiously conservative who were behind a major drive to "clean up" the cussing and smuttiness in broadcast television, with loopholes getting exploited in cable television to a great degree (see HBO and Showtime) and physical brutality not seen as a issue, unlike gayness (which could explain the odd content compromise in crime shows). Still, we've got unintentionally hilarious overdubbing for R-rated movies that get broadcast. :lol:
'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...' - Dr. Evil

'Secondly, I don't see why "income inequality" is a bad thing. Poverty is not an injustice. There is no such thing as causes for poverty, only causes for wealth. Poverty is not a wrong, but taking money from those who have it to equalize incomes is basically theft, which is wrong.' - Typical Randroid

'I think it's gone a little bit wrong.' - The Doctor
User avatar
Androsphinx
Jedi Knight
Posts: 811
Joined: 2007-07-25 03:48am
Location: Cambridge, England

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Androsphinx »

Sorry, but all the video did for me was to highlight the ridiculous position of writers.

What I never understood was why writers for TV or movies are treated differently to architects, or engineers, or lawyers, etc. who are paid to produce a certain amount of work, but don't then have any right to profits made off their work. The people who designed and built the Empire State Building don't get a cut from office rental and car designers don't get paid depending on how many units are sold. For sure teachers don't get a cut of their students' future earnings.

When the video complained that writers find their incomes insufficient, two thoughts come to mind:

1/ Why can't this be dealt with like in any other professions, by negotiating a fee/salary for a job which is sufficient to meet their means?

2/ Writers have 48% unemployment? Of course they have problems with money - the field is hugely overcrowded.
"what huge and loathsome abnormality was the Sphinx originally carven to represent? Accursed is the sight, be it in dream or not, that revealed to me the supreme horror - the Unknown God of the Dead, which licks its colossal chops in the unsuspected abyss, fed hideous morsels by soulless absurdities that should not exist" - Harry Houdini "Under the Pyramids"

"The goal of science is to substitute facts for appearances and demonstrations for impressions" - John Ruskin, "Stones of Venice"
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22442
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Mr Bean »

Because writers do not make ten million a movie. The entire writer staff is lucky to hit a million dollars in combined salary on your average movie. Extremely lucky because Writers salaries top out at around 70,000 a year and that's for twenty years experience. 34,000 is the average for writers, most of their money comes from residuals.

Take our TDK example, the film pulled down roughly a billion dollars. The writers share was roughly two million dollars spread over fourteen people or roughly a 160k payday to each writer for a movie that pulled down a billion dollars. Writers are not payed much in Hollywood

1/ Why can't this be dealt with like in any other professions, by negotiating a fee/salary for a job which is sufficient to meet their means?
See two
2/ Writers have 48% unemployment? Of course they have problems with money - the field is hugely overcrowded.
Writers get a job on average on once every year for about four months. They spend lots of time unemployed because demand for their services is tiny most of the year. A good famous writer might go two years between project due to demand. Writers don't spend lots of time on payroll if they did they would spend lots of time sitting around generating unread scripts.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Androsphinx
Jedi Knight
Posts: 811
Joined: 2007-07-25 03:48am
Location: Cambridge, England

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Androsphinx »

No, I understand all that. There are too many writers for them to get paid enough for the work they do to support them when they aren't working. I just don't see how that gets you to a requirement for residuals, as opposed to the conclusion that there are maybe too many people trying to be writers, which is why they are unemployed 2/3s of the time. Certainly I don't know any lawyers, doctors, teachers (ha!) or other professionals who expect to be paid in 4 months sufficient to live for a year.
"what huge and loathsome abnormality was the Sphinx originally carven to represent? Accursed is the sight, be it in dream or not, that revealed to me the supreme horror - the Unknown God of the Dead, which licks its colossal chops in the unsuspected abyss, fed hideous morsels by soulless absurdities that should not exist" - Harry Houdini "Under the Pyramids"

"The goal of science is to substitute facts for appearances and demonstrations for impressions" - John Ruskin, "Stones of Venice"
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22442
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Mr Bean »

Androsphinx wrote:No, I understand all that. There are too many writers for them to get paid enough for the work they do to support them when they aren't working. I just don't see how that gets you to a requirement for residuals, as opposed to the conclusion that there are maybe too many people trying to be writers, which is why they are unemployed 2/3s of the time. Certainly I don't know any lawyers, doctors, teachers (ha!) or other professionals who expect to be paid in 4 months sufficient to live for a year.
Or.... could it be that the companies that writers depend on are highly changeable and there are tons of programs that don't require writers and sometimes the whole line-up goes from requiring two hundred writers for five shows to twenty writers for six reality shows.

Now I'm not one of those that think writers should get money from their shows for life. But you have to understand to produce an entire run of shows(twenty one) it only takes a two to four months to produce scripts for said shows, film said shows and have them ready.

An entire years worth of entertainment takes far less time to produce than it does to show especially when it's one hour a week over half the year. You can't maintain 40 hour work weeks for writers for long. They are shall we say to productive for that?

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Androsphinx
Jedi Knight
Posts: 811
Joined: 2007-07-25 03:48am
Location: Cambridge, England

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Androsphinx »

Again, this is the sort of thing which can be handled - as with any other industry - by negotiations over salary. I don't see any evidence for writers to need residuals to handle that.
"what huge and loathsome abnormality was the Sphinx originally carven to represent? Accursed is the sight, be it in dream or not, that revealed to me the supreme horror - the Unknown God of the Dead, which licks its colossal chops in the unsuspected abyss, fed hideous morsels by soulless absurdities that should not exist" - Harry Houdini "Under the Pyramids"

"The goal of science is to substitute facts for appearances and demonstrations for impressions" - John Ruskin, "Stones of Venice"
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22442
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Mr Bean »

Androsphinx wrote:Again, this is the sort of thing which can be handled - as with any other industry - by negotiations over salary. I don't see any evidence for writers to need residuals to handle that.
How? The Free Market Magic? Government regulation? You sir need to explain how exactly we can go from the current system where movie/series writers will do an entire years work in a few months. Or how TV writers will produce 21 episodes in a few months then sit on it while they wait for the season to run, maybe pen an extra episode for next season but considering the show might not even last(Not all shows are the Simpsons or The Wire, they are granted only a season at a time, next year that job might be gone for good)

Unless you South Park the standard industry practice is to knock out a year of Infotainment in the summer or fall. Then sit back and watch how the season/movie/special did and if it did well next summer they will knock out another year's worth of of work and then again sit back.

Unless writers can get work on some other..
Oh wait! Again the entire industry is set up on this cycle. Movies are filmed year round but there are highly limited writers slot on movies since most job there are script editing, not producing a script. No one green lights a movie without a script ready to go that theoretically requires zero writers to modify. But TV writers outside of odd-man out shows like the Daily Show and South Park are not weekly, or monthly. Then spend two to four months crunching to get everything made, then have a good four to six months off before the cycle starts again.

Again your going to have to explain how the entire industry is going to go from current model to your new one and why it makes any kind of business sense.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Androsphinx
Jedi Knight
Posts: 811
Joined: 2007-07-25 03:48am
Location: Cambridge, England

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Androsphinx »

Expecting to make a living, year-in and year-out, in an industry where 48% are out of work at any time, and when what work is available is not full time, but seasonal, doesn't seem like a great idea. Ideally, I suppose, if a writer works for four months a year, his salary for those four months should be sufficient for him to make a living that year. If it's not, he should get another job the rest of the year, like everyone else does. He should negotiate for higher wages, like everyone else does.

But no-where have you advanced any argument for writers to be privileged over other professionals, except for their jobs being unreliable, short-term and in a market full of cheap labour. These are usually the reasons why people get paid less well, not why they have some special right to continued earnings from their work years after they've done it.
"what huge and loathsome abnormality was the Sphinx originally carven to represent? Accursed is the sight, be it in dream or not, that revealed to me the supreme horror - the Unknown God of the Dead, which licks its colossal chops in the unsuspected abyss, fed hideous morsels by soulless absurdities that should not exist" - Harry Houdini "Under the Pyramids"

"The goal of science is to substitute facts for appearances and demonstrations for impressions" - John Ruskin, "Stones of Venice"
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22442
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: American Network Television Tanking Fast (ZOMG surprise).

Post by Mr Bean »

Androsphinx wrote:Expecting to make a living, year-in and year-out, in an industry where 48% are out of work at any time, and when what work is available is not full time, but seasonal, doesn't seem like a great idea. Ideally, I suppose, if a writer works for four months a year, his salary for those four months should be sufficient for him to make a living that year. If it's not, he should get another job the rest of the year, like everyone else does. He should negotiate for higher wages, like everyone else does.
If there's not a full year of work how exactly can it be anything but seasonal. If the media companies demanded more full-time brand new shows. And as noted, most writers pull down about 34k a year.


Androsphinx wrote: But no-where have you advanced any argument for writers to be privileged over other professionals, except for their jobs being unreliable, short-term and in a market full of cheap labour. These are usually the reasons why people get paid less well, not why they have some special right to continued earnings from their work years after they've done it.
Because they created content? They have created something which makes money for the company they work for and continues to make money for that company?

Do you object to writers who write books getting payed royalties.
Yes/No?
If no
Why then do you object when those writers work get turned into visual media of some kind?

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Post Reply