Since I mentioned the writer’s strike in the last post, I might as well put down my thought on the issue. Although it’s easy for me to simply be anti-large corporation, I am also not usually pro-striker (especially when the strikers are making large sums of money anyway, as in the case of the baseball strike a few years back), and I think I have a good clear take on the issue. (By my standards at least – I’m usually hobbled by indecisiveness and that awful ability to see both sides of an issue).

Although there are several issues being raised by the writers as reasons for the strike, one of the big ones is new media. Simply put, writers are usually compensated when things they have written are shown on “old media” (like television or radio), and want that same compensation to apply to internet TV, video phone downloads, content on demand, etc. To me this is almost a no-brainer. The media companies have always been incredibly resistant to adopt new technologies, and usually have to be dragged into the next wave of technology kicking and screaming. They opposed VCRs, MP3 players, television over the internet, tried to scare off TiVo, and only embraced HDTV when congress pretty much forced them to. They still don’t think of “new” media as being a viable method for content distribution, and instead consider it to be for promotional purposes, which is the excuse they use for not compensating the writers when content is viewed over “new” distribution networks. The truth is, whether the media companies like it or not, the world is changing, and these “new” technologies won’t really be new for very much longer. There is no reason why watching TV over the internet might not become standard practice in a few years. Trying to claim that internet episodes are still only promotional is either a poor excuse that should be seen as a clear deception, or a true expression of the media industry’s inability to grasp a changing reality. Either way, the writers are entirely correct – new media should count the same way old media does.

The second big issue is the percentage of money they get from DVD sales. The WGA negotiated a system in 1988 whereby they got approximately 0.3% of the cost of a VHS tape when it was sold. Since then, manufacturing costs for home videos has dropped dramatically. DVDs cost next-to-nothing to manufacture and take almost no time to produce. The cost of home videos has also dropped (in 1998, a home video cost between $40-$100). The writers have found themselves getting less money for the same level of sales. On the other side, DVD sales are now a major source of income for the studios, and are a major factor in considering the financial viability of content, rather than just an afterthought. (As can be seen by Family Guy’s return to the air). Again, this is simply an issue of new technologies needing new economic calculations. If writers do indeed deserve to be compensated whenever their content is paid for, then the home video market, which is now a huge factor in earnings, should count too. The only problem is, as the New York Time pointed out, the movie studios have already given away much of the money to their star actors and directors, but that is there own bad business decision, and the writers should not suffer for it.

If you want more one-sided propaganda, see the WGA’s video on the subject.

If you disagree with me, please let me know why – I’m curious to hear a logical and well thought out anti-writer argument that doesn’t simply boil down to “I’m jealous of the writers because they get paid more than I do”.

moth

Originally uploaded by bachrach44

So I’m not entirely certain if this is a moth or a butterfly (it has some features of each), but I do know this – It started as a caterpillar which found its way into the entrance hall of the apartment building, and ensconced itself in a pupa a few feet from the front door. (The pupa is immediately below and to the right of it in the picture). After emerging from the pupa, butterflies and moths need to unfold their wings and wait for them to dry before they can fly away. This one appears to have died before it could take the opportunity to do so. (Which made it an ideal candidate for photography). After hatching, most butterflies and moths excrete excess dye, which is what caused the stain which you can see below it in the picture.