Simply put, this is a bad time to be testing the loyalty of prime time TV viewers. That may be why everyone's talking about the strike with a kind of resigned dread. Like World War I, it's a conflict no one wants but everyone seems powerless to stop.
Writers are fed up because they think the studios have been flaying them alive in every negotiation since '88, even finding a way to stiff scribes over DVD revenues. But writers are also nervous about dropping the big one. Who knows what might happen? "My greatest concern is that by striking, we're playing our last and final card . . . against a more heavily armed opponent," Craig Mazin, a screenwriter who co-writes "The Artful Writer" blog, e-mailed me.
For The Record
Los Angeles Times Tuesday, October 16, 2007 Home Edition Main News Part A Page 2 National Desk 2 inches; 65 words Type of Material: Correction
'Dancing With the Stars': The Channel Island column in Monday's Calendar said that reality shows such as "Dancing With the Stars" would be "strike-proof" if the Writers Guild of America called a strike. In fact, "Dancing With the Stars," unlike many reality series, does operate under a guild contract, although ABC has not indicated whether the show would continue in the event of a strike.
Some shows could be seriously damaged. Last year, ABC gave "Lost" a three-month hiatus in the middle of the season -- and the layoff was promptly blamed for the show's subsequent ratings woes. What would a strike do to the serialized thriller's fan base?
Obviously, anything that threatens scripted series isn't good for TV writers. The networks and studios know this, and that's why their reps are eagerly feeding reporters stats about how many network time slots have been lost to reality shows over the last few seasons. Message: Stop moaning about your compensation, you laptop-toting, latte-sipping ingrates, or you'll all end up writing intros for Ryan Seacrest.
If that sounds like overkill, well, the networks are running scared. Executives would likely have to renegotiate ad rates and offer extensive make-goods if their prime time lineups are hit by a strike, Spengler says.
Can't they avert this? Well, sure. It's possible that this will turn into a repeat of 2001, when the entire town braced for a writers' strike that never came. But even that near miss had serious consequences: The stockpiling meant to protect studios and networks from a strike left them instead with a glut of product, leaving many workers unemployed well into 2002.
"To me, a strike means a loss," said Mazin, summing up the ambivalence of many. "On the other hand, some things are worth striking over, even if it means shooting yourself in the foot."
--
scott.collins@latimes.com
