i hadn’t even thought of “lost” until j.t. (blessed be his name) made this comment. i really want to be on the writer’s side in this issue but this cross is too much to bear.

evil television and film corporations i will blame you if i miss “lost.” beware satanic corporate types.

my run for the day
distance – 3 miles
time – 28:45
pace – 9:35/mile

8 Replies to “NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

  1. “evil television and film corporations” are the ones which PAID to present tv shows to you………….not the writers.

    How can you hold them at fault when the writers are the ones refusing to work?

  2. actually the “evil ad buying corporations” are the ones who paid to “present” (aka “brought to you by”) the tv shows (not as true on films but truthfully i’m not as upset by that mainly because i’m not sure how it affects independent films) and people hold them responsible all the time for programs that they don’t produce but do support through buying ads.

    the main reason i can hold them at fault is because i want to.

    the rational reason that i can hold them at fault is because it’s obvious they have been caught trying to do an “end around” on residuals by denying the residuals to writers for internet distribution while acknowledging residuals for dvds and reruns. we all know that online digital delivery is the way things are going to go and thereby dvd & rerun residuals will dramatically drop. i don’t think the writers are “saints” by any stretch of the imagination but i don’t begrudge them getting a little piece of the pie on a media there equals a very high profit for the corporation.

  3. How can you hold them at fault when the writers are the ones refusing to work?

    Because when you create intellectual property for a living you are entitled to receive compensation when someone else uses your work and profits from it. They are claiming they’re not making any money off digital distribution (which is a lie) so that they don’t have to pay the writers what they should be.

    I don’t know how their contracts are written but I seriously doubt it’s work for hire.

  4. Weather you are working for hire, or creating intellectual property, you are entited to exactly what you agree to, no more, no less. Writers should either work for what is neigociated or not, but they shouldn’t form picket lines and keep others from doing the work for the pay they are unwilling to accept.

    Nothing wrong with a strike, a lot wrong with orginized unions.

  5. dad, i tend to agree with you on working for what you agree to (with the exception of unjustice labor practices – which this is not) but my understanding of the strike is that this relates to future work not past work (if the companies agree to past work that’s their own fault). the whole point of this was that they were trying to renegotiate their labor contract and the talks broke down. thus a strike. i have very mixed feelings concerning labor unions but that doesn’t bother me because i have very mixed feelings concerning most major corporations. i believe the writers’ demands are reasonable and as long as they don’t do anything illegal (hard to imagine a group of writer union thugs – though it might make a good tv show) striking and picketing is their right, just like the media corporations could hire “scabs” if they wanted to. of course, the corporations would apparently just show reruns.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.