The New York Times has an interesting perspective on the whole Hollywood writers’ strike.
“So after a long and bitter strike, the writers won, right?
On points, yes, probably. On principle, certainly. From a practical perspective, maybe not so much.”
It goes on to say:
“It is equally true, however, that the strike was bad for writers in the short term. The delays caused by the strike prompted the studios to ask themselves a fundamental question about the need to finance all manner of pilots for a traditional upfront extravaganza followed by a traditional introduction in the fall. That system, fairly unchanged through the years, has historically been lucrative for writers.
Some 70 development deals in which writers were essentially paid lucrative stipends to come up with shows that might not ever be broadcast are now gone, and they will not be coming back any time soon. “
The big question remains: just how much revenue will be generated by “new media” in the upcoming years? While everyone seems to agree that that’s where TV shows (and movies, and music, and…) are headed, nobody yet knows exactly how the business model is going to work.
Interesting times ahead. But I’m glad my livelihood doesn’t depend on it.