Deal Reportedly Reached In Writers' Strike

BlueshiftVFX writes to let us know that the writers' strike may be over. CNBC and other media are quoting former Disney CEO Michael Eisner: "It's over. They made the deal, they shook hands on the deal. It's going on Saturday to the writers in general... A deal has been made, and they'll be back to work very soon."

I guess...

[gEvil (beta)]

I guess this means the Colbert/Stewart/O'Brien fued has been resolved, too...

Re:

[mcmonkey]

Wasn't Stewart on Letterman's show before Conan was on Stewart's and Stewart could spawn Colbert?

(I don't have Sirius, but I'm sure Stern is taking credit for all of them.)

Re:

[eln]

Possibly, but Letterman has writers, so he didn't need to get involved in the fight.

Re:I guess...

[elrous0]

I guess now the shows can go back to the same tired old bits they were rehashing before the strike forced them to get creative for the first time in years. -sigh-

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[Thyamine]

This is exactly what I'm afraid of. I enjoyed Journeyman, and was disappointed that they decided to not even give it a full season, although they were blaming that on the writer's strike. There were some hopeful glimmers that if the writer's strike lasted through the spring pilot season, in the fall they'd have a good chance of getting at least part of a season again. Instead, they felt that having Deal or No Deal on extra nights somehow was a better choice. Thanks NBC for once again dropping a good sho

Re:

[glwtta]

Bionic Woman could not have possibly been affected by the strike - there is no way that someone was getting paid for writing that.

Curse you monkeys!

[IgLou]

You heard the man! Back to work and no one gets this banana until someone comes up with the next sitcom!

Re:

[reddburn]

Creative? Replacing one tired genre (a sitcom/hour long crime/medical dramafest) with "Reality"?

Re:I guess...

[zenkonami]

Actually, I think this past decade has been one of the most creative decades for Television since the medium began. Anywhere from BSG, The Sopranos and 30 Rock to Lost, The Office and Heroes. And let's not forget Firefly.

Now are the geeks happy?

-1 Redundant

[poot_rootbeer]

Didn't you post almost exactly the same sentiment just nine minutes previous? Talk about rehashing old bits...

Re:

[jacobw]

I guess now the shows can go back to the same tired old bits they were rehashing before the strike forced them to get creative for the first time in years. -sigh-

Heh. I'm amused that this came from one [slashdot.org] of [slashdot.org] the [slashdot.org] four [slashdot.org] people to make the same Onion reference!

Re:

[elrous0]

Maybe I should apply for a writing job at the Daily Show.

Re:I guess...

[moosesocks]

I've actually been rather impressed with some of the new TV programming over the past few years. Also remember that 99% of anything is crap (and that includes reality shows)

Lost is far from formulaic and repetitive, although the writers have been taking it a bit too far, and need to start winding down the series (ideally in one or two seasons, rather than the proposed three). I lost track halfway through the second season, so I can't comment on how it's been recently.

Heroes is one of the most popular shows today, and has terrific nerd-appeal. The current season has been somewhat subpar, but the original series was engaging and enjoyable.

Battlestar Galactica is easily the best-written and produced Sci-Fi series to air in years. It's also quite a bit more palatable for normal audiences.

24 is the best 80s action movie ever made. Although I don't particularly agree with its politics, it's quite an engaging storyline.

House is quite good. Perhaps becoming a bit repetitive, but definitely the best of the "medical" shows.

Mythbusters? How can you read slashdot and not love mythbusters, even in spite of their disregard for the scientific method?

The Daily Show and Colbert Report singlehandedly got an apathetic generation interested in politics. That's no small feat.

Over in the UK, they've got Top Gear, The Mighty Boosh, the current incarnation of Dr Who, along with a fantastic array of other programming that doesn't make it to the US -- Thanks to advances [youtube.com] in filmmaking technology, their documentaries and nature series are also absolutely captivating to watch.

(After writing this post, I feel the need to assert that I'm not a couch potato! The magic of TiVo lets me save the good stuff for saturday nights.)

Re:I guess...

[cayenne8]

I like all those shows, but, I gotta admit, I miss seeing Jennifer Aniston weekly, bra-less in tight shirts/sweaters.....

We need more shows like that on the air again.

Re:I guess...

[rkanodia]

Every time 24 goes over the top, you find out that it was just a local maximum.

Is it?

[porcupine8]

I've heard rumblings elsewhere that Eisner is spewing crap, and honestly he's not someone I'm going to trust without outside confirmation. When a writer says it's over, I'll believe it.

Re:Is it?

[NekSnappa]

Well according to the Writers Guild website

The Latest Word

(2/4/08)

Dear Fellow Members,

I would like to update you on where we stand with bargaining with the AMPTP. While we have made important progress since the companies re-engaged us in serious talks, negotiations continue. Regardless of what you hear or read, there are many significant points that have yet to be worked out.

In order to keep members abreast of the latest developments, informational meetings are being planned by both Guilds for this weekend - details to be announced. Neither the Negotiating Committee, nor the West Board or the East Council, will take action on the contract until after the membership meetings.

As the talks proceed, never forget that during this period it is critical for us to remain on the picket lines united and strong. We are all in this together.

In Solidarity,

John F. Bowman

Chair, WGA Negotiating Committee

Re:Is it?

[longacre]

That WGA post was made three days before Eisner's statement. Still, Eisner is the only one saying it's over. No one from WGA or any studios have said a word.

Re:

[andphi]

You're exactly right.

The story isn't that the strike is over or even that the strike might be over soon (though it might be). The "story" is that Michael Eisner thinks the strike is (or should be) over. Eisner sided with the AMPTP, so this announcement of opinion is no surprise.

The truth is, the strike ends when the WGA says it does. The WGA membership hasn't yet voted on the latest proposals, so the picketing continues.

Re:

[MightyMartian]

Michael Eisner, the Steve Ballmer of the entertainment industry.

Re:

[morgan_greywolf]

Some choice Eisner quotes:

"Writers, Writers, Writers!"
"I'm gonna fscking KILL the WGA!" *throws chair*
"The Creative Commons licenses are a virus that's destroying the movie industry!"

and, finally:

"Linux violates 439 Disney patents!"

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Terms?

[timeOday]

With no linked article and no information in the summary, I'm curious if the writers got their Internet distribution royalties after all?

Re:

[kellyb9]

While I understand the argument that they are "entitled" to Internet Distro Royalities, I can't say that I fully agree. I guess I tend to put things into the context of what would the average company do if I came up with something novel on their dime. Maybe, I'd see some of the profit, but probably not, I can't see why we hold these people to higher standards. In other words, if I work for company A and devise a really good process for something. That company can basically use that process or parts of that

Re:

[AndersOSU]

Is that true?

I haven't been following closely, but I'd expect that ratings would be down overall. I'd further expect that ratings would be way down on the flagship stations (NBC, CBS, FOX, and ABC), and up a bit on the cable channels (FX, USA, TNT, etc.) But that's still got to hurt the media companies right? The decreased value of an NBC ad wouldn't be offset by the modest increase in a BRAVO ad would it?

Does anyone have any links to any actual analysis of the financial effects of the writers strike on

Seems like noone won

[TheBiGW]

'As a result of studio cutbacks, however, many of the writers who went on strike are unlikely to return to the same big-money contracts they'd had as individuals with the studios.' It seems like no-one won from these strikes. TV companies take write downs, writers are not paid as well as they were, everyone looses.

Re:

[jandrese]

Depends if the writers are going to get new media royalties I guess. That could be a pyhrric victory for the writers.

Re:Seems like noone won

[dkleinsc]

'As a result of studio cutbacks, however, many of the writers who went on strike are unlikely to return to the same big-money contracts they'd had as individuals with the studios.'

That sounds a lot to me like "We fired these guys for supporting the union, but we can't say that because that would get us in trouble with the NLRB."

Re:Seems like noone won

[Sancho]

The studios weren't making as much money due to the strike. It's pretty reasonable for them to cut back on the budget. Now that the writers are willing to write again, they get to deal with the budget.

I was pulling for the writers from the beginning, but we can't pretend that money just grows on trees like the government likes to think.

Re:

[BeanThere]

It might be, but it's also just a fact that companies can't generate revenues without a product if the people creating the product are striking, and without revenues you really actually genuinely truly in fact can't pay people. The options for a business to keep pay people are pretty much to either sink cash (if they're lucky enough to have) or take out a loan. Such is the nature of striking.

Too late?

[n0dna]

I've nearly forgotten which couple of shows even held my attention.

Original story link

[TheBiGW]

This seems to be missing so here it is: http://www.cnbc.com/id/23057002/ [cnbc.com]

Sooooo....

[nickj6282]

We're just not going to get an article with this one? Are we supposed to take Kdawson's word for it? Way to go!

Darn

[hansamurai]

Part of me was hoping this would never be resolved and that this would eventually cause a media revolution. Whether it was the rise of local access channels or simultaneous live airing and official torrent release, I thought there was a small chance it might have really changed things from top to bottom.

Ah well, at least The Office will be back.

Oh No!!! What About The Great New Reaility Shows!

[webword]

Man, if the strike is over too soon then the new reality shows will get killed.

I mean, aren't you dying to see My Dad Is Better Than Your Dad [nbc.com]?

It debuts on February 18th! Don't miss it, kids!

Re:Oh No!!! What About The Great New Reaility Show

[0x15e]

I was really, really hoping you were joking about that. I almost hoped it was a rickroll or goatse or something. Anything would've been better than that.

It's all timing

[techpawn]

Like any good comedy it's all about timing. Writers used the directors deal as a template, or so it's rumored. Then again, now the studios have had a wonderful excuse to cut some dead weight and they'll have a deal in time for the Oscars.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

We know who did it

[eebra82]

Sources say that once Jack Bauer got bailed out of jail, he then met with the WGA to discuss the details over a friendly cup of White House approved [latimes.com] tea. Interestingly, it took only 30 minutes for the WGA to agree on a 30% salary cut.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[sconeu]

A lady in my Weight Watchers(tm) group was a production assistant on 24, and she got laid off due to the strike.

Not dead yet

[xsarpedonx]

Although it would appear that the strike is likely on it's way to being over, it's not quite over yet. [deadlineho...ddaily.com]

Here's the WGA's timetable [deadlineho...ddaily.com] for the next few days which may result in the actual end of the strike.

Lets hope...

[madhatter256]

Let's hope that the deal means no more crappy sitcoms that just take and take from old favorites like Seinfeld, Friends, & Cheers. That type of workmanship is why they've been getting crappy pay in the first place.

Re:Lets hope...

[elrous0]

As a Hollywood writer, I am intrigued by this concept of "originality" that you speak of. But I can't quite wrap my head around it. Can you explain it in terms of other things that I'm already comfortable and familiar with?

Oh boy! I can't wait...

[jbarr]

...for all of that quality programming to return!

slashdot, i'm disappointed

[circletimessquare]

whenever the subject matter of tv comes up, i can count on someone in the comments smug enough to loudly announce that he doesn't watch or own a television. who do i get to ridicule now?

where oh where is my favorite smug stereotype? [theonion.com]

Outsourcing Scriptwriters

[initialE]

It was either that or outsource scripts to India. Imagine Bollywood style comedy on American TV...

Slashdot Users, Yall Let Me Down! :-)

[tjstork]

40 comments about the writer strike ending and not a single one of you posted the obligatory:

That's Great, When's Battlestar Galactica Going to Be On Finally?

They just don't make geeks like they used to, I guess.

Go Battlestar!

[BlueshiftVFX]

actually I Included that when I submitted the article! since BSG is in it's final season it currently got cut short to 16 eps. now hopefully it can go out with the full 20-22 eps. and finish as intended.

(I used to work on the show)

So what does this mean

[Rik Sweeney]

for shows like Prison Break, Ugly Betty* and Lost? Will their seasons just end as they are or will they just have a little hiatus and continue the season in a few weeks?

*obviously I don't watch the show, as charming as it is. I'm asking on behalf of others

Pity It's Over

[Phoenix666]

I had a dark horse hope that perhaps the writers would learn to disintermediate the studios. The reason is a friend recently turned me on to BBC's "I.T. Crowd," which you can only watch in the States over the intertubes.

There are no commercials in the webcast, of course, but the BBC shop sends me emails advertising box DVD sets of Doctor Who and the like; definitely a fave show and the sort of message I'm open to, as opposed to endless commercials on regular TV for cars and feminine hygiene products, which I'm not in the market for.

Re:

[Rik Sweeney]

<PEDANT>Just a quick note, The IT Crowd is on Channel 4, not the BBC.</PEDANT>

Disintermediating the Studios

[jacobw]

There has been some movement in that direction. For example, screenwriter John August [imdb.com] recently decided to start shooting a "short-film-slash-web-pilot" on DV. Here's how he explained his decision [johnaugust.com] to take production into his own hands:

The message from writers to the studios had been, "Come back, baby. We can work this out." But after the second time negotiations fell apart, the message became, "Maybe we should see other people."

I decided to start seeing other people.

And then there's StrikeTV [myspace.com]. As Strik

Does that Mean Fred Thompson Will Comeback?

[CR0WTR0B0T]

I heard he dropped out because without writers he had nothing to say. :) Think he will make a comeback?

Whew...

[CannedTurkey]

I had begun to worry that my supply of fresh books might dry up any day now.

Great

[slapout]

Now we can get new episodes of our favorite reality shows. Oh wait...

The strike is NOT over.

[VValdo]

Guys... Eisner proclaiming the strike over is just part of a PR effort to attempt to pressure writers to vote for the strike proposals by creating the wide expectation that the strike is over, that it's a done deal. That way, if the writers turn the proposal down, people feel let down.

The strike is NOT over.

If you watch the video [cnbc.com] where Eisner insists the strike to be over, he says quietly at the end that he is really just passing on a rumor. He also points out that the writers have to vote on the offer. He says the writers would be "insane" not to take it, but he also previously had stated [wikipedia.org] that the entire strike was "insanity" so he's not the most unbiased person on this.

The strike is not over until the full WGA membership votes on the proposal. They may do so, but they may not. The terms of the contract proposal have not even been seen by the writers, so there's no way to know right now what's going to happen.

If you don't believe me, may I recommend this post by Joss Wheden [blogspot.com], or this one [deadlineho...ddaily.com], or this one [deadlineho...ddaily.com].

W

It's not over yet....

[steppin_razor_LA]

WGAW is having a meeting Saturday night with its members to discuss the deal points proposed by the studios. I don't know if the studios have finished "inking" their proposal (i.e. I believe that there was a verbal "fuzzy" agreement but specific legal language is still being drafted).

The deal will be presented to the membership on Saturday where I believe an informal vote will be taken. I believe that a full ratification vote is required by the constitution for the deal to be formally accepted but that the Board of Directors can lift the strike without before that happens.

The terms for compensation for Internet re-usage in the DGA deal were not very appealing for Writers and Actors. I haven't seen what the deal terms are that have been proposed to the WGA, but if they didn't make good progress on this, the deal might be met with a mixed reception by members.

That said, the Negotiating Committee and the Board of Directors have the pulse of the membership my guess is that the membership will go along with the recommendations of the Negotiating Committee and the Board of Directors. I don't know how unanimous the NC/BoD are with respect to the deal (i.e. whether there is agreement that the deal is fair enough or whether the strike should go on longer).

Re:This is news for nerds...

[rainmayun]

... because many nerds watch tv.

Re:

[homey of my owney]

Damn, in time for the Oscars... Why couldn't they hold out for another couple of weeks?

Re:

[bkr1_2k]

Because they want something to come back to when they reach a deal. If they held out past the oscars many "analysts" of the industry speculated they wouldn't be able to recover their viewers. As it is I suspect most of the decent new shows are going to be dead anyway.

Re:This is news for nerds...

[Misch]

I really don't know why the different shows didn't just hire scabs and keep going

Because the actors are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, and the stagehands by the ISTEA. If the studios tried hiring scabs to replace the writers, the actors and stagehands would have walked out as well.

Re:This is news for nerds...

[Mister Whirly]

Actually, stagehands are represented by the IATSE [iatse-intl.org] - or the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employes.

Re:This is news for nerds...

[Original Replica]

Speaking as someone who is in the entertainment industry and has been on strike in the recent past I just want to say; Going on strike is not an easy decision. There is a great deal of consideration that goes into what the industry itself can bare. There is also a great deal of consideration about the long term effects of not going on strike would be. You say that there are have been people that would have been fine with the old contract. True. There are probably people who would be willing to do your job for much less money as well. But what would the long term effects be? In the case of the writers, it would be the end of writing as a viable career option. They were fighting to have the same royalties on internet distribution as they currently have on DVD distribution. Everyone knows that in ten years the vast majority of the distribution will be via the internet, so in essence they were fight to have royalties at all. Royalties are what allow for writing to be career. [johnaugust.com] It was clear from the outset of this strike that the writers would have to do some short term damage to the industry as a whole, in order to preserve the long term existence of their jobs. The reason this was obvious was because the management on the other side of the bargaining table was putting forward a proposal that would have short term gains and long term damage. In the short term they would have profited 3% more on internet sales, but in the long term they would have destroyed the position of professional screen writer, leaving only those who would pursue writing as a hobby. Sure they could always get some starry eyed recently graduated newcomers to fill the job, but as those people tried to do things like buy a house or raise a family, they would be forced out the job by the financial realities of the "old contract". There would be no one around with 20 years of professional experience, there would be no one to really refine the craft, there would only be glorified interns. That isn't good for the industry.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Do they really need writers for "And the winner is..."?

I need only three words to explain this

[YA_Python_dev]

Joss Whedon, Dollhouse [wikipedia.org].

Re:I need only three words to explain this

[howdoesth]

Joss Whedon, Dollhouse [wikipedia.org].

I was really expecting Dollhouse to get killed during the strike before it ever even had a chance to get off the ground, but it looks like Fox is fully committed to letting me see it, fall in love, and then break my heart after 14 episodes. Thanks, guys.

Re:

[Peeteriz]

And I bet it's not like these people (well, the good and creative ones anyway) just sat on their asses for that time. Most likely they have quite a few things thought out and written down that they'll be able to adopt and sell now with the new rules - the producers are starved for content right now, they've run out of shelved things, taken breaks, and now need a lot of scripts to catch up again.

Re:

[NeoSkandranon]

Seems like lots of the better/more-known writers packed up and went on tour performing stand-up type gigs with the material they come up with, rather than handing it over to a show.

Re:So...

[OG]

That's thinking a bit short term. If their terms are met like they were hoping, it means that they're not cut out of emerging media outlets. That's going to be an important point in the next couple of decades as people shift their content viewing to legitimate online venues and away from traditional television.

Re:So...

[jacobw]

So the writters get like a couple percent increase in their salaries while they lost about 1/3 of their anual income. These are writters not mathamatitions,

And based on your comment, "mathamatitions" are not "writters," either.

Actually, a lot of the people on the WGA negotiating committee are "show runners"--IE, writer/producers with a huge amount of responsibility. One of the negotiators, for example, is Carlton Cuse [imdb.com], one of the two guys who runs LOST; as you can imagine, you don't end up running a multi-million-dollar enterprise unless you have a lot of financial savvy.

So why would a bunch of smart people recommend a strike under these circumstances? Two main reasons.

First, writing careers can be very short-lived, and they are usually sporadic, with many periods of unemployment. (In fact, in any given year, nearly half of WGA members are unemployed.) The major issue in this strike was "residuals"--the royalties that writers get every time a TV show they wrote is broadcast, or a movie they wrote is sold. So, it's not entirely foolish to give up your 50% chance of employment this year to get a good deal on royalties that might be feeding your family for the next two decades.

Second, believe it or not, this was not strictly a selfish action. WGA members are very conscious of the fact that a lot of the stuff that makes it possible for us to earn our livings was won by previous generations of writers. Obviously a desire to have a good living is the main incentive in any business negotiation, but in the back of all our minds, we don't want to be the generation that let the studios roll back several decades of labor gains.

DISCLAIMER: I am an individual WGA member. These are just my opinions. I don't speak for the union.

Wow

[mpapet]

You and the moderators have no clue. Here's a couple of Fun Hollywood Facts.

1. There is so much money flowing through the distribution cartel, that unions are the only way to wrestle it out of the Producers/Studios. I'm old enough to remember a blockbuster low-budget movie called "My big fat greek wedding" has, to date, not turned a profit. Now, I could see a bad movie not turning a profit, but that movie was and still is INSANELY popular. Hell, my wife still gets residuals from a commercial that appeared in a big-budget movie made 20 years ago. That's how shady Hollywood accounting is.

2. Writers are about the least respected guild in Hollywood. Seriously, food craft gets more respect. (probably because they aren't a union)

5. Producers routinely turn great stories/scripts into trash. Once they own the rights to the script, let the destruction begin!!! This is why good books rarely make good movies. Once the writer gives up control it's all downhill. Notable exceptions usually have the writer having final say on the script.

You, and the idiots who modded you up have no clue.

the relevant quote from Michael Caine

[Anonymous Coward]

in 'Deathtrap': "I'll tell you how good [the script] is. Even a gifted director couldn't hurt it."

Re:

[hansamurai]

With reality TV, you don't even need actors let alone scripts to make a show.

Re:

[sammyo]

Well actually you do. Do you really think a 'producer' comes up with the 'challenges'? The host is all 'adlibs'?

One subtle sticking point was that the 'non-writers that 'sketched' out the challenges are covered by another union (IATSE?) and the studio heads were able to use that to play off workers against each other.

Writers' incomes

[jacobw]

Yeah. As it is, those folks only make $75000 to $100000 a year. That's not much to live on.

Actually, writers' incomes are all over the place. According to the WGA's annual report [wga.org], 45% of its members had no income at all in 2006. (Or, at least, no writing-related income; they may have been waiting on tables or doing something else to pay the bills.) Of those who DID work, 25% earned less than $38,740, while 5% earned more than $685,000! With such a wide disparity, you can juggle the statistics to suggest pretty much anything you want. The studios said something like "Working writers earn an average of $200,000 a year" while some writers said things like "the median income of a writer is below $5,000." I suspect both those statistics are, technically, true--notice that one is about an average while the other is about a median.

Personally, I think the most useful way of looking at a writer's salary is this: 55% of WGA members are employed in a given year, and among those who are employed in a year, the median income is about $107,000. So, with a 55% chance of earning $107,000, your expected annual income is $58,850. This is an excellent income if you are young and single. If you have kids and a mortgage, and you live in LA or NYC (two of the most expensive cities in America), then it's still a good wage, but it's not mansion-and-a-yacht level. This confirms my own experience--the WGA is basically a middle-class union, negotiating with multibillion dollar global companies.

(I know--I'm making a number of assumptions in my analysis, but I'm not a statistician and I have to simplify things a little. I'd welcome corrections from any of the numerous Slashdot readers who must be better at statistics than I am!)

Re:

[KKlaus]

A median is an average. The studios were probably doing a mean (which is what most people think of when they think of an average). And to be honest, there's probably even more distortion than you think. I'm sure the WGA is including a whole pile of unpaid interns on the bottom, and the studios aren't counting those. A lot of ugly distortion all around.

Re:Writers' incomes

[jacobw]

You're right about the mean/median/average thing. Thanks for catching that.

However, you're (most likely) wrong about the WGA including "unpaid interns" in its stats. The WGA statistics only cover WGA members; and before you can become a member, you have to have a certain amount of paid TV or film writing work.

As a labor union, the WGA has to have independently-audited reports of the membership dues it receives and what it does with those dues; it then publicly releases the report as well as submitting it to the Department of Labor. If the WGA is including anybody other than WGA members in its statistics, it is violating federal labor law, and the independent auditors who certify it are colluding in fraud.

Of course, fraud does happen, auditors do look the other way, and there have been corrupt labor unions in the past, but tbarring evidence to the contrary, I think it's safe to assume that the basic data in the WGA annual report is not fraudulent.

(Of course, once the WGA releases the data, the numbers can get pulled out of context and subjected to all sorts of technically-true-but-misleading manipulation, which leads us back to where we started.)

Re:

[crashfrog]

So, with a 55% chance of earning $107,000, your expected annual income is $58,850. This is an excellent income if you are young and single.

Except that it's also a 45% chance of having no income at all (at least not from writing), and that's not so great. It's pretty hard to pay the rent with a 55% chance of having money.

Re:

[jellomizer]

Well I am going to assume that they are going to get a higher percentage on DVD and Internet Sales > 4% - 8% which is was the key thing they wanted.

Re:Was that still going on?

[elrous0]

Personally, I thought Conan, Colbert and Stewart were a lot funnier WITHOUT the writers. It forced them to get creative for the first time in years. Now that the writers are coming back, looks like it's back to the 10-millionth reiteration of "Masturbating Bear" and other tired old skits.

Could they have just STAYED on strike?

Re:Was that still going on?

[AmaDaden]

They were damn good, but for how long? I don't think they would be able to keep coming up with original material for much longer. They would burn out eventually. If you noticed while their skits were good they needed to be dragged out. More interviews and more 'lets look at this'. They were able to make skits just not nearly as many.

Re:

[gnick]

Conan, Colbert and Stewart were a lot funnier WITHOUT the writers

They were hilarious, but uneven. A lot of what they did was novel and fun. But, a lot was pretty weak. As fun as the "feud" was at times, other times it was obviously a lot more drawn out than it needed to be (Captain Obvious, I know...)

I can't say that I really missed it while it was gone, but I do welcome back The Word.

Re:

[bhunachchicken]

"some of us have wives that like to watch garbage TV"

[ever so slightly off topic]

That's right, and that's why I encourage as many people to go to the cinema, buy CDs and basically pay for the stuff they enjoy rather than getting it from p2p networks.

My one, absolute fear with the writer's strike was that the TV networks would simply fill the void with us much "reality tv" and other minimal scripted talent shows as possible.

However, my other fear is that movie and TV studios will feel inclined to

Re:

[Deagol]

You could ditch (broadcast) TV entirely. Rent movies and quality TV shows on DVD. It takes a few weeks/months to "decompress" from the frenetic need to have some sort of constant visual stimulus to occupy your spare time, but afterwards, you'll both be much better off. Read, play cards, listen to music, or, you know, *talk* with each other. :)

Re:

[Otter]

Same here. If a network used the money to pay the Giants and Patriots to play a tiebreaker, it would be more likely to get my attention than new episodes of Law & Order competing with the three Law & Order reruns and eleven CSI reruns on at the same time.

Re:Was that still going on?

[danguyf]

Well, aren't you just Mr. Too Cool For School?

I'm so glad to know that you didn't even deign to notice that a large portion of those who work hard to entertain you lost their jobs and houses in a fight over the future of online content rights.

Re:Was that still going on?

[elrous0]

In all fairness, I'm not sure the "According to Jim" writers deserve your vigorous defense.

Re:

[moderatorrater]

And the programmers for Windows ME probably don't deserve to have their jobs defended from being outsourced, but some things harm the good as well as the bad.

Re:

[smooth wombat]

a large portion of those who work hard to entertain you

If someone doesn't watch tv, then how are/were they affected by this strike? They weren't. I do watch some tv but didn't really notice any change except for reruns of 'How I Met Your Mother' and 'The Big Bang Theory'. Other than that, no problems here either.

Aside from that, this is probably one of the few times I will agree with a union demand. In this case, yes, the writers should get compensated for their work when that work is sent onli

Re:

[LWATCDR]

Maybe they are doing a poor job entertaining me.
I can not think of one show on the networks that I really want to watch. I have about 8 episodes of Heros sitting on my DVR that I have yet to watch because they are just not that interesting to me. They are about the best show on TV right now.
While I do think good writers are vastly under paid I have to say what they are turning out now is of such a low interest to me that I just didn't notice.

I tend to watch a lot more of the History Channel and the like tha

Re:

[morari]

Working hard to keep me entertained? Which ones were those again? Last time I checked, the large majority of material released today is absolute garbage.

Re:Was that still going on?

[EVil Lawyer]

Who lost their houses? The vast majority of writers saved up 6 months' salary in anticipation of exactly this strike. Not to say it wasn't a financial hardship, but my friend who currently writes for Scrubs tells me that almost everyone was planning for this.

Re:

[netsavior]

Who lost their houses?
the thousands and thousands of working class people who run lighting, sound, catering, construction, etc etc for these shows.

The writers and the studios are probably among those LEAST effected by this strike.

Re:

[bobobobo]

Nor did I. I never watch TV [theonion.com] in fact.

Re:Was that still going on?

[elrous0]

Thanks for letting us know [theonion.com].

Re:

[Stanistani]

You knew this when he turned his head to the right and whispered, "Line?"

Re:So what?

[Captain Splendid]

Does anyone really even give a damn anymore?

Uhh, yeah. I'd like my last season of BSG, thankyouverymuch.

Plus a couple of other shows, but that one's top of the list.

Re:Too late

[avronius]

Did we finally find someone who choose the "Posthumously" option?