House Odds

I’ve been a bit busy lately and haven’t had time to post. I haven’t had a chance to follow the news for the last couple of days either. I’ve been in the studio where time stops.

I have been interested in the Writers Guild strike but, like I say, I haven’t been able to see much coverage in the last couple of days.

I did see this from Brian Lowry in Variety.

Amid the emotions surrounding the writers strike has been vitriol from some scribes toward any news outlet failing to echo their position — a “blame the messenger” attitude vented at coverage by Variety, among others.

Scanning message boards and blogs uncovers all manner of allegations about kowtowing to corporate interests. The assumption is that those not fully following the Writers Guild’s script must be bowing to pressure from their ownership or currying favor among advertisers, with journalists lacking the spine to bite the hands that feed us.

In this way, strike rhetoric is oddly mirroring modern politics, where partisans now filter straight-ahead reporting through an “us vs. them” prism, seeking out accounts that buttress their views while shunning those that might challenge them.

This represents a relatively recent dynamic, fueled by the Rush Limbaugh era of talkradio, cable news and the Internet, which barely existed during the last strike in 1988. It’s an especially poisonous environment when applied to this fracas, since talent and the studios must eventually reunite once the saber-rattling and marching ends, whereas political combatants (or at least their public mouthpieces) are now locked in a state of perpetual warfare, the better to spice up the give and take on “Hannity & Colmes.”

My impression of the media coverage I’ve seen is that it has been subtly unfavorable to the writers. You know, such and such show has been shut down by picketers and the plight of all of the peripheral, industry employees who are out of work because the writers are striking.

I have not seen any mainstream press really discuss the issues that the writers are striking about. When I hear anything it’s about royalties from DVD sales and nothing about internet revenue. I think the internet revenue is the key issue.

I think that Brian Lowry’s comments about the message boards and blogs is evidence that there is some effort from the writers side to try and neutralize the mainstream press.

Do you blame the writers for doing this? The mainstream press is the same company they are striking against. That is the “relatively recent dynamic”. The network is the newspaper is the movie studio. 24 is Newscorp which is 20th Century Fox which is USA Today and so on and so on.

The deck is stacked. It’s house odds. Some things are that simple. Who do you think is going to come out on top, the guys with all the movies, TV shows, newspapers and book publishing or, the guy with the blog?