SAG. The Screen Actor's Guild. If you live in LA (unless you live in a cave), or are in the industry else where, you're aware that SAG has been on the verge of a potential strike for some time, a few month's to be more specific. There are quite a few issues on the table, such as force majeure (uncontrollable acts of nature/life that complicate or ruin a shoot), number of required SAG background per shoot, but the MOST IMPORTANT of all, is the NEW MEDIA (internet, webisodes, streaming video, video games, etc.). Not only the one area the AMPTP (alliance of motion picture and tv producers) is unwilling to bend which shows it's importance, it also will be the direction ALL future media will be going in. Long gone are the days of DVD rentals and purchases. Between internet piracy, hulu.com (which has been bought out, so someone's making money), and Netflix instant streaming, there won't even be a point to getting a cut of DVD usage/sales. If it wasn't for Criterion Collection, I wouldn't buy DVD's at all, and I'm nostalgic (in that I still like to shoot 35mm, and read actual magazines instead of e-zines), in other words, I'm the exception. People have switched over to digital (aka new media) means for everything. Music first, now film and TV are following the same path, and if we don't get our cut now, we never will, because it will only become more valuable, and harder to fight for.
I have to say, I'm very disappointed in my fellow SAG members for allowing petty scare tactics to make them forget what's important. I've heard things like: "We can afford to strike in this economy...". There are several things wrong with that.
1.) Oldest trick in the book. We're being tempted to take something in a moment of desperation, because we're not thinking clearly. People are afraid they're going to be broke, somehow they've been convinced that the idea of striking and losing money in these "dark" times is scarier than being fucked over for the rest of your career. Taking a shitty deal now, just so we don't strike, will negate any possibility of us getting our piece or New Media.
2.) We're actors, when are we ever stable? You may not book something for months at a time. We are supposed to prepare for this eventuality, with or without a strike, soooo, what really is the difference? None as far as I can see.
3.) I am an actor, professionally. This means, I rely on it to pay my bills and feed me (and my family someday), so the idea that because of these short-sighted deals our "leaders" are taking from the AMPTP will make that future bleak if not impossible, due to the horrible distribution of wealth being generated from the new, but soon to be predominant form of media. If we can't get a living wage, this already next-to-impossible dream, will become a nightmare.
4.) The only time New Media is confusing to the AMPTP is when is involves paying us. When it comes to copyright infringement on them, they seem to have a very clear idea of what's owed to them. I have seen several interviews on MSNBC, Bloomberg, and C-SPAN with producers, and they all seem very confident that they will make a ton of money from the transition to New Media, although it seems they don't plan on sharing with the talent. hmmm...
So, to conclude... New Media is of the UTMOST importance in these upcoming negotiations. DVD's are going the way of the dodo, and so will our pay check if we don't get informed, and start trying to figure out how not to get screwed. And, we can't be short-sighted, we have to keep the big picture in focus, and think about ten years down the line, not just a fix for right now (the AMPTP counts on us sacrificing our greater good for instant gratification).
In solidarity...
Love,
-R*
Posts
