Why We Did It
A number of regulars have written to ask us why we’d “help” the Fizzlers by giving them an advance mention of their planned publicity stunt outside the SAG National Board Plenary this morning. In typically profane language, even the Fizzlerette in question crowed about how we were supposedly helping her.
Well, this is how we see what we do here. It may help explain why we’d put up a note mentioning an event by a group with which we have little in common.
We think that accurate information is the best weapon we have to strengthen our union. We think that members are smart enough to recognize good and bad ideas when they hear or see them. That means we’d rather have a few more participants at any event, even if it’s an event sponsored by a faction like the Fizzlers, because for every one extra Fizzler supporter we’d expect ten more who see how out of touch the group is.
Either way, it’s the ideas that should stand or fall on their own. So we’ll keep writing about them, and hope you’ll keep reading, and make up your own mind.
“It may help explain why we’d put up a not mentioning an event by a group with which we have little in common.”
Huh? Do I need more coffee?
That one sentence notwithstanding, I think you are right. Knowledge is power, and not giving members the tools to make an informed decision only hurts your cause.
Bravo.
And thank you.
He can’t type. It should have said “note” rather than “not” – which makes it clear. I’ve fixed it. Thanks.
I was one of those who questioned the posting of fizzler fizzies…but I see your point.
BTW…my friend in LA said like 25 fizzles were seen…any updates?
Is the city surrounded? YIKES!
Editor Said:
“It may help explain why we’d put up a note mentioning an event by a group with which we have little in common.”
How do you know the event was put on by a “group”? Does this group have a leader or a name? How many people are in this group? Is it a nascent movement? What are their (presuming it is a group) goals?
Most likely, this was a grassroots, ad hoc call to action. The actors, in Hollywood at least, are very alarmed and what has happened this pilot season. They what to see some action by the SAG board.
typo corrections:
Most likely, this was a grassroots, ad hoc call to action. The actors, in Hollywood at least, are very alarmed *at* what has happened this pilot season. They *want* to see some action by the SAG board.
AaaaaAAAaaaaahhh….
I might have figured that out with more coffee…
Thanks!
Oh sure – Michele & Matt (& dem dats feeding dem from de depths of Villa MeFirst) are true grassrootsers, if you know what I mean. I mean, check out her roots.
Your “ad hoc call to action” seemed to scare up less than two dozen alarmees today, mike. Eek!
Oh, and do dey now wanna “see some action?” How about a 38-hour filibuster – enough “action” for you there? How about a 1-year galumph through AllenTown?
No,, it was Anne Marie Johnson. She called it.
Oh Melissa, Melissa, Melissa…but it still is THE FIZZLERS.
Actors KNOW why we don’t have any pilots this year under SAG. Actors KNEW that when most of them went AFTRA last year.
MF damaged the union. The LA times spells it all out pretty clearly.
So, no, the membership is not expecting a man of stature like Ken Howard or a classy woman like Amy Aquino to stoop so low as to state the obvious. They also know better than to get into a disparagement of another union. Unlike Anne Marie Johnson who enjoys pushing the envelope and risking million dollar fines, they think more of our dues money than to risk that happening.
Spilt milk. The pilots AS PREDICTED, are gone this year because of SAG’s hard headed, ignorant, untalented leadership of the past.
Time to focus on the negotiations and merger so we can all have some security.
Melissa, the koolaid is alllll gooooone.
Mike, I’d also add to your list of typo’s “grass roots” should read “grass stains”
it fizzled and died.
“THEY want to see some action by the SAG board” you say? All 25 of them? really?
I think we can get them ALL into a VW Beetle. Then they can drive out to the beach at sunset and have a bon fire.
How’s that?
again, I ask you (the plural you) what action you expect the SAG board to take? Contracts are written, its a done deal. It really does not take a genius to see that the producers found AFTRA to be the better contract all around for their needs. Now, SAG officers can ask ‘why’ and try and fix what ever the tipping point was.
“I’m not ready to say it’s collusion, hard to prove, evidence needed, etc., but it is something Ken Howard and Amy Aquino and David White should be expressing displeasure about. They need to be showing the membership they saw this coming, lobbied hard to prevent it, then have something tangible to point to as an explanation.”
Its a good thing you’re not talking about collusion. How would that work? SAG leaders meet with the big 5 and say “okay, how about you take all the programs to AFTRA” And how do you know what ‘displeasure Howard, Aquino and company are expressing? Do they check in with you regularly? Oh, they should put something in writting, castigating AFTRA for those contracts?? Violate the non disparagement agreement for a fine? How about they should go after the 5 big producers in print. Call them out for signing with AFTRA instead of SAG but pointing out how much better a SAG contract WOULD BE FOR THEM. You, like most of the Fizzlers, the complainers, the militants desperately want to blame someone, anyone for the fact that the nature of tv is changing rapidly and completely and “God Damn it, it must be someone’s fault my career is in the mud”
“Producer-friendly merger”?! Oy vey. 70-30 (at LEAST) in favor of SAG, and regular elections by the membership that will produce a leadership that reflects it.
One of these days I expect SAG-AFTRA merger attempts to be blamed for Global Warming and the heartbreak of psoriasis.
Good for you, Ed, on that statement. It’s an admission of a lack of confidence to try to suppress or ignore the statements and plans of the other side of a disagreement.
Mike, exactly what action do you see the board being able to take that would not be prohibited by the No Raiding clause now that those shows are officially AFTRA?
Btw, do you have any insight for us from your friends on the other side exactly that this “dramatic action. . . to promulgate” SAGs board supposedly has?
I’d say that about maybe 25 ad hoc grassroots conspiracy theorists showed up today. Yeah, that’s a lot of alarm.
To your first question:
Both union claim digital jurisdiction. No union according to AFTRA, has been “certified” as the exclusive bargaining agent in the area of digitally produced scripted TV. The word used over and over, is that jurisdiction on this type of production, is “shared”. So how could it be raiding? The Carpenter’s Union or the UFW, to some on the hard core AFTRA “side”, could organize scripted TV.
To your second question:
I have no “friends on the other side” and I don’t know anybody that was at that demonstration or what they were protesting. I DO know that every actor I’ve talked to recently, is totally freaked out that SAG has no pilots and will have no new TV shows this season, for the first time ever. The only place where there is no alarm is here at SAGwatch. What is most disturbing, is the fact that SAG’s leadership has said nothing….