Official WGA Writers Strike thread.

[KneeCo]

Family guy is in hiatus, so at least some animated shows are covered (also I think Matt and Trey's not being WGA members is probably their decision, given that they have also made a live action show, the short lived 'That's My Bush').

Speaking of 'Family Guy', Fox announced today that they are having near-completion episodes completed without Seth Macfarland who has been a vocal striker and has said previously a number of times that if they did that, he'd be pissed.

[ QUOTE ]
The overlords at Fox have announced plans to air an original Family Guy episode this Sunday and move forward on three more without the participation of mastermind Seth MacFarlane, who not only serves as show runner but supplies many of the key voices.

The move has angered MacFarlane, who stopped work on the series last week to join the picket lines with other WGA members. Film and TV writers whose union went on strike Nov. 5 to force Hollywood studios to negotiate a bigger cut of the profits from DVD sales and other future digital media platforms.

"It would just be a colossal dick move if they did that," Family Guy's creator told Variety, noting that the next three episodes of the animated comedy are "relatively close to completion, but they have not had a final pass."

[/ QUOTE ]

full E! article

[TheNoodleMan]

Any uncompleted family guy episodes can just throw in random chunks of filler that have nothing to do with anything.

[XXXNoahXXX]

Deadline Hollywood is reporting that David Letterman is going to pay his entire staff out of his own pocket at least through the end of the year.

Pretty cool on his part.

[JSchnett]

Anybody know how many episodes of House there will be?

[pirateboy]

I'm a bit confused on 1 issue. A LOST writer says they don't make anything off of webcasts/itunes downloads. My friend who I debate this with says the WGA does make money off those.

The truth is __________?

[DeuceKicker]

I work for a product placement company, though not in the PP department, so I’ll try to tackle these.

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously there is some product placement on The Office - Second Life, Staples, etc. But also it has to fit into the story. How does that work? Does The Office approach Staples and Office Max, and say "Hey we have a bunch of lines about a big competitor, it can be you, or the other guy", then they bid on it?
Or what about in Family Guy, when they're going to Olive Garden and Lois says "Me likey breadsticks! Me likey breadsticks!". Is that paid for? If Family Guy wants to do the joke do they have to ask permission from Olive Garden? If so, do they go ahead and ask for some money at the same time?

[/ QUOTE ] Generally, the productions services, prop, and wardrobe departments of a show will contact the product placement company that handles that client. The PP company will give approval on the client’s behalf to use or mention the product, and supply product if needed.

[ QUOTE ]
Seems like a lot of negotiation would have to happen if you come up with the joke on Tues and film on Thurs. or something. Then again with Family Guy you could just stick the joke into any episode. But let's say it's a similar situation with Friends and Pottery Barn. But it will only fit in that episode. Do they do some quick negotiation?

[/ QUOTE ]Yes, there can be some last-minute scrambling to get approval from the client, then get the product, signage, etc… to production. A mention in an animated series should be much easier, because you only need to send over a few pages of script to be approved.

As far as bidding for exposure—no, that usually doesn’t happen for straight product placement. There is a sub-set of PP, which is called Branded Integration (maybe other PP firms call it something different, but everyone is doing it now, as this is where the industry is moving). An example of BI is when I. Robot needed a futuristic car for Will Smith. IIRC, Audi and Lexus were both interested in having some of their more out-there concept cars featured in the movie and the bidding was pretty heavy.

AFAIK, movies and TV shows cannot use or mention a product without the parent company’s permission (probably because of the copyright issues that CDS mentioned up-thread). So if The Office wants to mention Staples, and the line is, “Our paper is better than that crappy stuff Staples sells.” Staples could refuse to allow them to mention their company in that way. Obviously if the usage is neutral or positive, most companies are glad for the free exposure. If the placement is negative, they’ll refuse and the production’s art department has to make fake packaging etc… for a fictitious product.

[ QUOTE ]
And finally, does any of the product placement money go to the writers? If not do the studio heads come down and say "you have to fit Target into this episode". Can the writers say no? Or do the studio heads say "Extra $1k for everyone any time you fit any of these companies into any episode."?

[/ QUOTE ]No, they don’t get paid, and I vaguely recall hearing some word around the office that script writers were starting to grumble. Technically, purposely sliding Target into the script could be considered ad-writing, not creative writing (I’m sure I’m bungling the terms, but in the industry there is a difference).

For generic PP, no money is changing hands. The productions benefit by only having to deal with a few PP companies to get props, signage, and approval.

[suzzer99]

Thanks, I had a feeling there had to be some organized system. So generally are you saying that when a show calls up to ask permission to use a company's name, no money changes hands?

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
Family guy is in hiatus, so at least some animated shows are covered (also I think Matt and Trey's not being WGA members is probably their decision, given that they have also made a live action show, the short lived 'That's My Bush').


[/ QUOTE ]

Considering Matt and Trey's general disgust with the whole Hollywood system, I would imagine they would only be part of the WGA if it was necessary for them to keep their jobs. I get the impression that with writers who are also producers it's more of an option than a requirement though. But that's just my impression and it could be wrong.

[diamonddawg]

[ QUOTE ]
Written by Dale Alexander, a key grip on NBC's "The Office":
[ QUOTE ]

102 people fired from The Office
Our show was shut down and we were all laid off this week. I've been watching the news since the WGA strike was announced and I have yet to see any coverage dedicated to the effect that this strike will have on the below the line employees.


I respect the WGA's position. They probably do deserve a larger percentage of profit participation, but a lengthy strike will affect more than just the writers and studios. On my show we had 14 writers. There were also 2 cameramen, 2 camera assistants, 4 hair stylists, 4 makeup artists, 7 wardrobe people, 4 grips, 4 electricians, 2 craft service, 4 props people, 6 construction, 1 medic, 3 art department, 5 set dressers, 3 sound men, 3 stand-ins, 2 set PAs, 4 assistant directors, 1 DGA trainee, 1 unit manager, 6 production office personnel, 3 casting people, 4 writers assistants, 1 script supervisor, 2 editors, 2 editors assistants, 3 post production personnel, 1 facilities manager, 8 drivers, 2 location managers, 3 accountants, 4 caterers and a producer who's not a writer. All 102 of us are now out of work.


I have been in the motion picture business for 33 years and have survived three major strikes. None of which have been by any of the below the line unions. During the 1988 WGA strike many of my friends lost their homes, cars and even spouses. Many actors are publicly backing the writers, some have even said that they would find a way to help pay bills for the striking writers. When the networks run out of new shows and they air repeats the writers will be paid residuals. The lowest paid writer in television makes roughly twice the salary than the below the line crewmember makes. Everyone should be paid their fair share, but does it have to be at the expense of the other 90% of the crewmembers. Nobody ever recoups from a strike, lost wages are just that, lost.


"We all know that the strike will be resolved. Eventually both sides will return to the bargaining table and make a deal. The only uncertainty is how many of our houses, livelihoods, college educations and retirement funds will pay for it."

--Maria Elena Fernandez

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I just want to bump this particular quote because, all in all, the strike is asinine as, frankly, residuals are not an issue grave enough to cause a work stoppage. Pension issues, health care and rest period - those are worth striking over.

[CharlieDontSurf]

Residuals are more important.