Nobody is going to the Golden Globes

[n548gxg]

http://www.variety.com/VR1117978475.html

SAG president Alan Rosenberg has announced that not one of the more than 70 actors nominated for a Golden Globe will attend the Jan. 13 ceremonies.

The event's been thrown into turmoil and uncertainty due to the WGA's refusal to grant a strike waiver to Globes producer Dick Clark Prods., which offered to accept the same terms as David Letterman's Worldwide Pants banner. Instead, the guild's asserted that it will picket the Globes, skedded to air on NBC, which has become a prime target of the WGA’s strike campaign in the past few weeks.

Rosenberg, who made the announcement Friday afternoon, has been a staunch supporter of the two-month strike.

[Turtleboy]

Sometimes Unions are crap.

Imagine being an actor nomianted for a Golden Globe, and in the running to win. First time in your life, and being told by your Union that you can't go.

Also, I didn't know Alan Rosenberg was the President of SAG. I've always liked him (as an actor, didn't know anything about him as a person till reading wikipedia and this story).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Rosenberg

[spikedavis]

and still it's more people than would watch it.

[Langree]

The event's been thrown into turmoil and uncertainty due to the WGA's refusal to grant a strike waiver to Globes producer Dick Clark Prods., which offered to accept the same terms as David Letterman's Worldwide Pants banner. Instead, the guild's asserted that it will picket the Globes,

So, the exact deal that they said last week was everything they were asking for and they hoped to make the same side deal with other companies doesn't cut it when it comes to DCP.

See, I back the writer's in what they are doing, but question how they are doing it at this point.

[TAsunder]

Does this affect Brits?

[TeighVaux]

So instead the out of work (not nominated) SAG actors and non-union actors will go as paid audience members and seat fillers. SAG did not have any problems with actors working struck shows in production, just this high profile event.

[nrrhgreg]

I can see public opinion turning against the WGA very quickly with what's been going on the last couple of days.

There's no excuse not to give Dick Clark Productions the same interim deal they gave World Wide Pants. None at all. DCP would put on one 4 hour award show. Great, NBC gets that ad revenue, big deal. With the WWP deal it gives CBS 10 hours a week of WGA approved ad revenue. Where's the difference?

Not to mention the exposure it's going to cost the movies and TV shows nominated, which would probably sell DVD's, costing the writers residuals.

All of this on top of the battle they seem to be dead set on waging with Leno is not good for them. I hope Leno goes fi-core, someone needs to show these people they are not all powerful like they think they are.

[spikedavis]

I can see public opinion turning against the WGA very quickly with what's been going on the last couple of days.

There's no excuse not to give Dick Clark Productions the same interim deal they gave World Wide Pants. None at all. DCP would put on one 4 hour award show. Great, NBC gets that ad revenue, big deal. With the WWP deal it gives CBS 10 hours a week of WGA approved ad revenue. Where's the difference?

Not to mention the exposure it's going to cost the movies and TV shows nominated, which would probably sell DVD's, costing the writers residuals.

All of this on top of the battle they seem to be dead set on waging with Leno is not good for them. I hope Leno goes fi-core, someone needs to show these people they are not all powerful like they think they are.


I think you are absolutely right-I remember people everywhere saying "We support the writers!" And now 2 months later the Tivos are empty and people are starting to lose patience. When the SGA strike hits, people are going to flip their lids-I'm sure most of America isn't even aware that's around the bend.

[AJRitz]

I can see public opinion turning against the WGA very quickly with what's been going on the last couple of days.

There's no excuse not to give Dick Clark Productions the same interim deal they gave World Wide Pants. None at all. DCP would put on one 4 hour award show. Great, NBC gets that ad revenue, big deal. With the WWP deal it gives CBS 10 hours a week of WGA approved ad revenue. Where's the difference?
Of course there's a reason not to offer the same deal. There are several:
1) As a rule, the one-off deals are bad for the union and are not in their interest. The deal with World Wide Pants was a good faith gesture - a public show that the WGA was the side that was being reasonable. But the AMPTP refused take the bait.

2) Letterman, who's the decision-maker at WWP, has supported the strike from the outset. Dick Clark Productions hasn't been supportive, and NBC has been seen as one of the hard line leaders, so the WGA isn't going to do either of them any favors.

3) Awards shows are a platform. The networks use them as a platform to show off their nominated/winning shows. Actors use them to show off their marketability. Writers are using it this time as an opportunity to advance their cause. Partially because many actors are also writers (and vice-versa) the unions are very supportive of one another.

4) SAG's decision to support the WGA makes a lot of sense, considering that the SAG contract is up in June, 2008, and they'll be wanting contract parity with the writers.

[busyba]

I don't get how the Writers Strike is relevant to the Golden Globes. Just have a party and give out the awards, who needs to write anything? If anything, the show will be much better without that Bruce Villanch crap that they make the presenters spew before getting to the nominees.

[IJustLikeTivo]

Sometimes Unions are crap.

Imagine being an actor nomianted for a Golden Globe, and in the running to win. First time in your life, and being told by your Union that you can't go.

Also, I didn't know Alan Rosenberg was the President of SAG. I've always liked him (as an actor, didn't know anything about him as a person till reading wikipedia and this story).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Rosenberg

Honestly, it's the freakin Golden Globes. No one cares. A bunch of furriners ( a few dozen, total, not all in the business directly) get in a room and make up a list of people they want to meet. Then send out invites, arrange for each person to get an obscene bag of goodies and call it an awards. No one's obit starts out: "Golden Globe winner and two time Oscar Winner...."

[mtnagel]

skeddedWhy does Variety write like that?

[Langree]

Why does Variety write like that?

I asked that same question at least a year ago. It's painful to read at times, but they always have.

[mtnagel]

I asked that same question at least a year ago. It's painful to read at times, but they always have.Yeah, I recall them talking about the "Peacock" and the "Alphabet" for NBC and ABC or something like that. It's just annoying to me. I read, "skedded" and had to pause to figure out what they were saying. I figured it out, but it's just dumb.

[busyba]

I had the same reaction when I read a Variety article on the show "The Class", where they mentioned that "Lucy Punch ankled the skein". WTFnF???

[mtnagel]

I had the same reaction when I read a Variety article on the show "The Class", where they mentioned that "Lucy Punch ankled the skein". WTFnF???I have no idea what that's supposed to mean :confused:

[busyba]

I have no idea what that's supposed to mean :confused:

"Lucy Punch quit the show".... apparently.

[mtnagel]

So researching it, I found Variety's Slanguage Dictionary (http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=slanguage). This is ridiculous it was also to create a clubby feel among the paper's entertainment industry readers. People in the business understood thrush; those outside the business, well, they weren't Variety's target readers anyway.So actually busyba's quote means, "Lucy Punch quit or was fired from the TV series." :rolleyes:

[marksman]

I consider turning down the deal with the GG that they made with WorldWide Pants to put the WGA in bad faith at this point, and as a member of the public I call shenanigans. I was feeling a little bit of sympathy for them, but this is bogus.

If every show agreed individually to their terms you would have to assume they would say yes. Yet they are saying no, so I can't assume anything, and I have solid proof they are playing games. Stupid move on their part.

They could have milked the GGs for publicity as it went off and was covered and been viewed as the good guy. Now the show is not going to happen. It is going to get a minimal amount of press and then the story is going to die. Honestly the more I think about it the more idiotic I think they have to be to have done this. They just threw away a ton of free publicity and goodwill for their position in exchange for some bad will. It makes no sense.

[marksman]

Of course there's a reason not to offer the same deal. There are several:
1) As a rule, the one-off deals are bad for the union and are not in their interest. The deal with World Wide Pants was a good faith gesture - a public show that the WGA was the side that was being reasonable. But the AMPTP refused take the bait.

How is a deal where they accept 100% of their terms not in their best interest. It does not weaken themselves or their position.

All this shows is the WGA is full of crap.

[Idearat]

If the CEO of Exxon discussed with the CEO of BP over drinks at a party about cutting back production to give a boost in retail prices they'd have their asses in a sling for illegal business practices.

But a union can have contracts with multiple competitor production companies, forcing them all to the same agreement. And another union, with their own separately negotiated contracts can get their members to "honor" the strike of the first union. How is that not currupt?

[DevdogAZ]

Sometimes Unions are crap.
Sometimes? SOMETIMES?!?!

[tiams]

The WGA is getting ridiculous now. They have given the SAG awards show a waiver, but refuse to give the Golden Globes one. And for what reason? The GG offered to agree to ALL their terms. What more can you want than ALL YOU TERMS?

They have no regard for all the people their actions adversely affect. The people they have caused to lose their jobs and therefore their health insurance, and in some real cases their homes.

[Idearat]

The WGA is getting ridiculous now. They have given the SAG awards show a waiver, but refuse to give the Golden Globes one. And for what reason? The GG offered to agree to ALL their terms. What more can you want than ALL YOU TERMS?


That's an easy one. SAG is another union.

[tiams]

That's an easy one. SAG is another union.

OK That answers why they gave SAG a waiver, doesn't answer why they won't give the GGs one even though they will agree to the same terms as WWP.

[MickeS]

OK That answers why they gave SAG a waiver, doesn't answer why they won't give the GGs one even though they will agree to the same terms as WWP.

They probably feel that the WWP was a gesture of good will towards CBS, but any more waivers will undermine the greater fight. Which I agree with.

[Edmund]

You think any of the actor will pull a Powers Boothe, (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000959/bio) this tme?

[MickeS]

You think any of the actor will pull a Powers Boothe, (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000959/bio) this tme?

If Jay Leno was nominated, maybe he would've? ;)

[mrdbdigital]

If the CEO of Exxon discussed with the CEO of BP over drinks at a party about cutting back production to give a boost in retail prices they'd have their asses in a sling for illegal business practices.

But a union can have contracts with multiple competitor production companies, forcing them all to the same agreement. And another union, with their own separately negotiated contracts can get their members to "honor" the strike of the first union. How is that not currupt?

Because the unions are specifically exempt from this under the existing laws.

[Idearat]

Because the unions are specifically exempt from this under the existing laws.

Legal? Yes
Corrupt? Yes

[AJRitz]

How is a deal where they accept 100% of their terms not in their best interest. It does not weaken themselves or their position.

All this shows is the WGA is full of crap.

It's not in their best interest because it's not in the WGA's best interest to negotiate individual agreements with every production company. It is their right, under the NLRA, to negotiate a single, global, agreement. The better outcome, for the WGA, is for Dick Clark Productions to begin pushing the rest of the AMPTP to stop playing games and just get this thing settled.

[marksman]

They probably feel that the WWP was a gesture of good will towards CBS, but any more waivers will undermine the greater fight. Which I agree with.

Please explain how and why you agree with this. Apparently AJ does too, and I don't get it.

As someone mentioned agreeing to ALL THEIR CONDITIONS does not undermine anything. It just shows the union for the gameplaying jerk-offs they must have been all along.

[marksman]

It's not in their best interest because it's not in the WGA's best interest to negotiate individual agreements with every production company

If negotiating with every company individually gives them EVERYTHING they want, as opposed to negotiating globally gives them NOTHING but a strike, I don't see how that can be the case.

Sorry, but denying ANY production company from reaching agreement who agrees to ALL of your demands is simply disingenuous. If they wanted to his global stance they should not have negotiated with ANYONE. Once they made the agreement with WWP they opened the door. Not allowing others to reach the same agreement is just horrible faith.


This is the WORST course of action the WGA could have taken. Open the door to one company and then close it to everyone else. Huge mistake.

If their primary motivation was a single unified front then they should have pursued that. If their primary motivation was to get the best possible dealer for all of their members that they could, then they should have pursued that. Instead they half arse pursue both. If I were in the Producers group I would be laughing right now.

[MickeS]

Please explain how and why you agree with this. Apparently AJ does too, and I don't get it.

Because the ones who have agreed so far have very little to lose by agreeing (the contentious points of the contracts involve revenue that these companies see very little of), but the companies that buy their products (CBS buying Late Show from WWP, for example) will reap huge benefits from it, even though they themselves do not have an agreement with the union for the writers employed by them. The union wants to have an agreement in place with the networks overall, not just meaningless cherrypicked agreements that don't matter much for the revenue sources that the strike is mainly about.

At least that's what I meant by thinking it undermined their effort as a whole.

[DevdogAZ]

If negotiating with every company individually gives them EVERYTHING they want, as opposed to negotiating globally gives them NOTHING but a strike, I don't see how that can be the case.

Sorry, but denying ANY production company from reaching agreement who agrees to ALL of your demands is simply disingenuous. If they wanted to his global stance they should not have negotiated with ANYONE. Once they made the agreement with WWP they opened the door. Not allowing others to reach the same agreement is just horrible faith.


This is the WORST course of action the WGA could have taken. Open the door to one company and then close it to everyone else. Huge mistake.

If their primary motivation was a single unified front then they should have pursued that. If their primary motivation was to get the best possible dealer for all of their members that they could, then they should have pursued that. Instead they half arse pursue both. If I were in the Producers group I would be laughing right now.
While I think I agree with your position on the WGA in general, I think you're missing the point here. IMO, the only reason the WGA agreed to terms with WWP was because Dave was going to go back to work anyway, just like Jay, Conan, Carson, Jimmy, etc. They could have held out and been made the fools of, or they could sign the agreement and look like the good guys. Doing the deal with WWP was basically a no-brainer for them.

However, to continue forging one-off agreements like that will hurt their overall position. It doesn't matter that DCP is willing to agree to their terms, because their terms are irrelevant to an awards show. Nobody is making residual money off their writing efforts at the Golden Globes. But if the WGA allows this show to proceed with business as usual, it will be a shot in the arm for the networks, a shot in the arm for Hollywood, and it will appear to most viewers that things are proceeding as usual. But if they stand their ground and continue to disrupt business as usual, it will have a better overall effect for them.

[smak]

What reason is there to forge a deal with the Golden Globes?

Late Show & LLS are 4-5 night a week shows, every night, every week. The GG's are a once a year show for 3 hours, that employs minimal writing.

A goodwill gesture? Where's the goodwill gesture from the other side?

You don't strike, and then continue to make deals with management to earn management money while you're striking.

You may all hate unions and strikers, but, a strike isn't all puppydog tails and rainbows. It's done to hurt management, and force them make a deal with you.

Continuing to make side deals that allow the networks to earn a lot of money, doesn't make sense, when that deal barely helps any working writers.

-smak-

[Fassade]

If negotiating with every company individually gives them EVERYTHING they want, as opposed to negotiating globally gives them NOTHING but a strike, I don't see how that can be the case.

Sorry, but denying ANY production company from reaching agreement who agrees to ALL of your demands is simply disingenuous. If they wanted to his global stance they should not have negotiated with ANYONE. Once they made the agreement with WWP they opened the door. Not allowing others to reach the same agreement is just horrible faith.

Separate negotiations yield separate terms. Organizations like the AMPTP (and the WGA for that matter) exist only because its members, negotiating together, can secure better terms than most individual members can on their own. Logically, then, very few individual members possess the ability to negotiate even similar terms to the whole group. Once operating separately from the AMPTP, each production company negotiates solely on what it can offer by itself; the terms offered to the group no longer apply, except maybe as a starting point. Simply put, DCP and the Golden Globes bring quite a bit less to the table in terms of jobs and benefits than does WWP and the Late Show. As such, it would only be good business sense for the WGA to demand more of DCP than WWP. (Unless the WGA promised the AMPTP deal to any and all comers, or refused outright to negotiate with a DCP that went beyond those terms, in which case, I agree, it would stink.)

[Langree]

"This is a comprehensive agreement that addresses the issues important to writers, particularly new media," the Guild said. "Worldwide Pants has accepted the very same proposals that the Guild was prepared to present to the media conglomerates when they walked out of negotiations on December 7. Today's agreement dramatically illustrates that the Writers Guild wants to put people back to work, and that when a company comes to the table prepared to negotiate seriously a fair and reasonable deal can be reached quickly."

Apparently, not really.

In a letter to members, WGA leaders recognized that the deal with Letterman meant that some latenight scribes would be returning to work next week, while others would remain on the picket lines. But it said the Letterman deal was a necessary part of the guild's broader bid to increase pressure on the majors by negotiating with individual companies.


So why is the deal with DC the same? Dealing with Letterman they are helping the big bad management at CBS. No different then cutting the exact same deal with DC.

If the deal was good enough for one, it should have been good enough for the other.

[AJRitz]

Apparently, not really.




So why is the deal with DC the same? Dealing with Letterman they are helping the big bad management at CBS. No different then cutting the exact same deal with DC.

If the deal was good enough for one, it should have been good enough for the other.

See my post in the other strike thread about the UA deal.
Divide and conquer relies on reaching a deal with one, or at most two, probably smaller players. The point is that the competitors to those players start getting antsy to get new content going themselves. The WWP deal gives CBS and advantage over NBC and has to have the NBC late night folks nervous. If better fresh content on CBS starts have a serious impact on NBC late night ratings, you can bet there will be pressure from NBC to resolve.

Similarly, with the UA deal, pretty soon UA starts to gain a significant advantage with regard to the applicable release window. If UA starts making announcements about projects that will be coming out for a release window for which the other studios have nothing, because they have no writers, the other studios are going start feeling serious economic pressure. That economic pressure is likely to also lead to pressure by the studio reps to the AMPTP, urging AMPTP to get the strike resolved.

[smak]

Apparently, not really.




So why is the deal with DC the same? Dealing with Letterman they are helping the big bad management at CBS. No different then cutting the exact same deal with DC.

If the deal was good enough for one, it should have been good enough for the other.

The Letterman deal puts writers back to work on shows that air 10 hours a week.

The Dick Clark deal would put writers back to work on shows that air 3 hours a year.

That's a big difference.

-smak-

[tiams]

So is anyone going to watch the show if it is televised? I would love it if E! televised the red carpet arrivals and we could see "rogue" stars showing up. I would cheer anyone who pulled a Powers Boothe.

[JLucPicard]

Chances look good that there won't be a telecast:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22537641/?GT1=10755

[IJustLikeTivo]

Chances look good that there won't be a telecast:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22537641/?GT1=10755

And in related news, if a Golden Globes fall in the forest, does it make any noise?

[aindik]

Was Dick Clark Productions offering a deal for all of its shows or just the Globes? Does the WWP deal apply to all of WWP's current and future shows, or just the two it has on the air now?

[DevdogAZ]

I saw a promo yesterday for the People's Choice Awards. Seems like it was on CBS and coming up soon. How are they getting around this issue?

[DUDE_NJX]

This time it's a clearly stated fact, not a speculation. So go cry to your mommy.

[That Don Guy]

Chances look good that there won't be a telecast:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22537641/?GT1=10755
"Were a postponement agreed upon, the Globes would likely have to occur before Oscar nominations are announced on January 22, which buy only a week or two, a very small amount of time for an interim agreement or larger strike resolution to take place."

Er, why do the Golden Globes have to be given out before the Oscar nominations are announced? It's not as if the Globes would have any effect on the nominations, seeing as how AMPAS's deadline to receive Oscar nomination ballots is already the day before the Globes.

-- Don

[TAsunder]

Holy anti-semitism, Batman!

[jlb]

This time it's a clearly stated fact, not a speculation. So go cry to your mommy.

:down:

[rich]

All of this on top of the battle they seem to be dead set on waging with Leno is not good for them. I hope Leno goes fi-core, someone needs to show these people they are not all powerful like they think they are.Can someone please translate fi-core? :confused:

[plateau10]

Can someone please translate fi-core? :confused:

I didn't know before just now, but I think this makes sense:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_core

[MickeS]

someone needs to show these people they are not all powerful like they think they are.

They seem to be pretty powerful though. :)

[appleye1]

I saw a promo yesterday for the People's Choice Awards. Seems like it was on CBS and coming up soon. How are they getting around this issue?Because it's not NBC? I really think they're more interested in punishing NBC than anything else.

I'd like to know how they're getting around it too. Maybe Worldwide Pants produces the PCA?

[marksman]

Because it's not NBC? I really think they're more interested in punishing NBC than anything else.

I'd like to know how they're getting around it too. Maybe Worldwide Pants produces the PCA?

No. The WGA has given out exemptions to several other productions/award shows.

It is some of the worst faith negotiating I have ever seen. I don't care if they hate NBC. What they are doing is stupid.

[jsmeeker]

so, who is going to watch the Golden Globes "press conference"


In a related note, who watched the Peoples Choice "event" last night.

:D

[TiVo Steve]

The "Death of Hollywood"... if this keeps up for another six months, so many people in the industry will be out of work it may be the Tinsel Town's version of the stock market crash of '39.

Imagine, no more television (or movies) what would we do... read a book, go camping, spend more time with the family... turn off our TiVos...

Like Steve Martin says "Naaaaaa" :cool:

[flyers088]

so, who is going to watch the Golden Globes "press conference"


In a related note, who watched the Peoples Choice "event" last night.

:D

Forgot it was on last night. Any thing of note happen during the show?

[Magister]

The People's Choice thing was funny. It was just Queen Letifah and clips. Sometimes actors/singers would have sent in a video clip of them accepting the award.

And when I said funny... it was more funny disturbing, not ha ha.

[DevdogAZ]

The "Death of Hollywood"... if this keeps up for another six months, so many people in the industry will be out of work it may be the Tinsel Town's version of the stock market crash of '39.
Wow, that's a crash I hadn't heard about. Unless you're talking about Poland.

;)

[tiams]

Holy anti-semitism, Batman!

Since religion has been dragged into this...
Now that the WGA has a deal with Tom Cruise/UA, will the scientology agenda have a greased path? Can you imagine what would happen if all future movies were Tom Cruise productions?

[Langree]

Since religion has been dragged into this...
Now that the WGA has a deal with Tom Cruise/UA, will the scientology agenda have a greased path? Can you imagine what would happen if all future movies were Tom Cruise productions?

I'd save a lot of money going to movies or buying new DVD's.

[Fassade]

Wow, that's a crash I hadn't heard about. Unless you're talking about Poland.

;)
Nah...Hollywood has already told us how it was not a crash, only Winter for Poland (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGp0hCxSg98) (and France) :)

[jsmeeker]

The People's Choice thing was funny. It was just Queen Letifah and clips. Sometimes actors/singers would have sent in a video clip of them accepting the award.

And when I said funny... it was more funny disturbing, not ha ha.

yeah.. I only watched a few minutes, but it was like a news magazine type show. All taped ahead of time. No audience. Think "extra" or whatever revealing the winners. Of course, for a show like the Peoples Choice, the winners already know in advance. It's not like the Oscars or something where the no one knows until the show (except for the accounts :) )


The Golden Globes announcements promises to be even more lame. Will the Oscars suffer the same fate?

[AJRitz]

Interesting note from Slate.com's Hollywood reporter, regarding the AMPTP and the perception (as I noted earlier) that there is some division there, but the hardliners are "in charge" (at least for now):

"As for the AMPTP, the hawks seem to be in control. It occurs to us that the most hawkish of the hawks is said to be Peter Chernin—Rupert Murdoch's humble servant. Fox has American Idol premiering soon, and that has been the ultimate television show (in terms of ratings) for some seasons now. Does it occur to the other networks, which have no such weapon in their arsenal, that by following Murdoch's hard line, they are enabling him to get the most out of his competitive advantage while they are left to scramble with reality shows and reruns of cable programming? How well it all works out for him."

The full article (http://www.slate.com/id/2181358).

[Langree]

Survivor and Big Brother kicking off in Feb for CBS too. Both will probably do well for CBS.

It wouldn't at all surprise me if Murdoch is positioning things so Fox does well during the strike, CBS too. I see nothing the others are doing that will be the ratings grabbers that Fox and CBS have coming up, and sweeps season is almost upon us.

[nachonaco]

Now it's just getting annoying. They're too greedy.

[anom]

Now it's just getting annoying. They're too greedy.
Who is?

[nachonaco]

The WGA.

:rolleyes: (at them not you)

It's just, like, it's never going to end until they win.

[DevdogAZ]

The WGA.

:rolleyes: (at them not you)

It's just, like, it's never going to end until they win.
Well, that is kind of the point.

[jsmeeker]

Now it's just getting annoying. They're too greedy.

annoying? yes. (the strike as a whole. not just the WGA)


greedy? Not really.. Not when you look at what they get for similair things and what others in the business get for the same thing.

[Royster]

The Golden Globes announcements promises to be even more lame. Will the Oscars suffer the same fate?

Perhaps, but, I guarantee they'll end on time. Once the producers see how little it cost, this could be the future of award shows.