Writer's Strike

David Carr has an excellent analysis of the ambiguous nature of the resolution of the writer's the strike. The Guild wrung concessions out of the studios, which is definitely a win, and they secured the key points of principle, so it superficially looks like a big win, but when you bore down to the details the didn't acquire a great deal of concrete significance.

Comments

Matt, is there a the proofreader's the strike as well?

Posted by Ted | February 12, 2008 12:46 PM

I'm just glad it is over.

Posted by 2cynicalbyhalf | February 12, 2008 12:58 PM

As a some-time contract negotiator, I would say that the writers were in a very very weak position against the studios going in. That they got a basic statement of digital rights somewhat along the lines of their proposal is a good win for them IMHO because it provides a precedent and a basis for future negotiations and lawsuits. They were never going to get a home run because the studios have infinite amounts of cash to wait out the writers (or anyone else), but the writers played it just long enough to get a double.

Cranky

Posted by Cranky Observer | February 12, 2008 1:02 PM

Ezra Klein had a link to an article about striking and the end results usually being neutral.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2007/11/19/071119ta_talk_surowiecki

What it boils down to is that strikes are more about fairness than the economics.

Posted by Alex | February 12, 2008 1:29 PM

The studios are making noises that they will just program more reality TV to avoid having to pay the writers, but didn't the lack of ratings for those shows help get the negotiations back on track?

Posted by Col Bat Guano | February 12, 2008 1:43 PM

Matt is just not understanding what the strike was about.

Before the strike the studios intended to give the writers nothing for digitally distributed media.

For example, imagine that Matt's income consisted of a quarter of a penny from each reader who was holding an actual newspaper and reading him, but nothing else. The studios wanted to give the writers a per cent of the take from the week or two that movies were in theaters, and nothing for the digital downloads.

As for the idea that television can do without writers, every time there's a writers strike, viewership lurches downward, and it never came back up after the last strike.

Without writers, tv would be just like us- but, y'know, without the taste or calories.

Posted by serial catowner | February 12, 2008 3:19 PM

Frankly I don't want to read any analysis, regardless of how well thought out, if it comes from a number 1 overall picked quarterback who managed to get replaced by a 43 year old has been and then an undrafted rookie free agent.

Nice hair though...

Posted by Davebo | February 12, 2008 5:52 PM