Act Acting » Acting School » NBC Totally Screws Over the Strike

NBC Totally Screws Over the Strike

Question:

Here’s some news. I know this is long but it’s worth reading. Please call and E-mail Later Today Two e-mails recently received. LATER TODAY has been flooded with calls. As of 2:30 today, they have made NO decision on whether they should say some sort of retraction or apology. This is the phone number for LATER TODAY – 212-664-4343. Let’s keep those Come on everybody, speak up!" This morning on "Later Today" (NBC), there was a disturbing segment- called "How to break into TV commercials" or something. They interviewed 2 "commercial casting directors" (I’ve never heard of either of them and I’ve been doing this for over 3 years now) who were saying that "you don’t need to be a professional actor – it’s easy to break into commmercials!" Then when the host asked if the people needed to be in the union, one There were tips on headshots, and then they followed one of the "casting directors" around on her typical day – rollerblading around central park taking polaroids of people, looking to cast them. There was NO MENTION of the strike ( although I didn’t watch the entire thing – I couldn’t bear it). This clearly seemed to me to be a segment produced in order to help the advertisers find more scabs – the whole segment was geared towards making it easy for "real people" to find work. Response from IL Lisa Lewis To Whom It May Concern: This morning’s edition of "Later Today" was appalling. At at time when 135,000 union actors are on strike (78 days and counting), it was uniquely insulting to see a full hour’s worth of network television programming devoted to "how ANYONE can become a star in TV commercials". There was not ONE mention of the strike in the entire forty minutes I was tuned in — at the very least you owed it to your viewers to caution them that taking commercial work in the current climate is SCABBING. But I guess it’s not "fun" (or pleasing to your advertisers) to tell both sides of the story, or to highlight how terribly these "real people" would be exploited if they worked without a contract. It’s not "infotainment" to tell people that if they get cast in a spot today, their image and likeness can be used IN PERPETUITY IN ALL MEDIA and that they’ll receive a flat fee and no insurance or retirement benefits. Not "must-see TV" at all, is it? In spite of the "lite" tone of your show, it still represents at least a quasi-news format. Is advertising now DICTATING your editorial? Is the news division is planning a half-hour tribute to the ANA in place of NBC Nightly News? Will Brokaw be interviewing "Mikey", now that Quaker has been forced into running his old spots again? Will we see a segment on how a realtor from suburban Chicago is making his long-shelved acting dreams come true? Or how the lady who reads scripture at her small-town church has suddenly become the sultry, sexy voice of XYZ computers? I wonder: if auto workers were on strike, would a program such as yours devote an hour to "how ANYONE can learn to swing frames for $22 an hour"? Or if teachers were on the picket lines, would you air a program on "how ANYONE can teach calculus for fun and profit"? I doubt it. Because GM individually and local school boards don’t have the power necessary to dictate network programming. But I think we know who does . . . the ANA and (by extension) the AAAA. I don’t for ten seconds believe the timing was accidental — your own website seems to indicate that today’s program was to originally supposed to be about "tying the knot" — perhaps the collective network advertisers thought "tying a noose" was a more worthwhile use of the segments they support. At precisely the moment advertisers are struggling to find SCABS to act in their commercials, here comes a full HOUR of network programming devoted to flushing innocent "real people" out of the bushes, with nary a mention of the perils involved or the real issues at stake. How irresponsible, unbalanced and short-sighted of you! Turning your program over to them was editorial log-rolling at it’s finest. And I must add that I pity your two UNION hosts — I hope they’ve taken a nice, hot shower and are enjoying the 30 pieces of silver they received for helping to stab us in the back. (When the "extras" casting director mentioned SAG, Asha Blake nearly jumped out of her skin, so anxious was she to move away from the subject of unions. This moment more than any other confirmed for me that there was a definite EDICT that mentioning the strike was out of bounds.) And I’ll be curious to see how the network chooses to present similar stories in the future — when the Film, Theatrical and Network News contracts expire . . . "ANYONE can bring you the news, just come on down and audition!" or "ANYONE can be the next "Friend", submit your tape to . . ." Shame on all of you for deliberately hurting union talent in this way. Shame on every last one of you. And I guess you also fail to realize that though we are actors, we are also consumers and viewers. Myself, well, I’d imagine I fit right squarely into your demographic: I’m a 36 year old married woman, live in Chicago, own a home and have occasion to watch daytime television (particularly now that I’m out of work). I would be happy to appear on your program and represent one of the 135,000 "real people" whose careers are threatened by the "real people" your program encouraged to step up and cross our picket lines. Since I am so certain that NBC will want to make this right and schedule a time to present the unions’ side of the story, I will wait anxiously by my e-mailbox for a member of your staff to contact me. One last thought — I wonder if the impending cancellation of "Later Today" made the program "expendable" in this scenario. Maybe NBC used the weakest weapon in their arsenal to fend off the advertisers’ demands. Hmmm. If so, thanks for at least trying to "bury" the story. But no matter the intent, you still screwed us over. It was a lovely way to start the day. Lisa Lewis SAG/AFTRA/AEA Chicago, IL

Response:

Lisa, Excellent letter, excellent post. Good work on both counts. I was shocked that this interview went off without that statement being challenged. Thank you for challenging it. Carl ‘Wesistance is futiwe! Pwepawe to be assimiwated! Huh-uh-uh’- Elmer of Borg Got questions?  Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

Response:

Thanks to both Pat and Carl — keep on keepin’ on, folks! Lisa

Response:

Lisa, I’m one of those "non union folk" who support the SAG/AFTRA strike. I am also one of those "anyone" who got into commercial work in because of my "look". I have worked my ass off since to keep working, at times temping to pay for workshops and "tools" ( headshots, resumes…) For "later today" to assume that ANY person can get into this without full knowledge of all aspects is insane, to say the least…there is a LOT of downtime at first. No, you are NOT going to be the spokesman for Wendy’s on your first try. But the local commercials you do are the start. More people have seen me on an infomercial than my standup act…( we’re working on THAT, too! ) I may eventually make this my primary career, but for now, I’m having a good time. Good letter Lisa. May the advertisers get the hint…fast. Pat Alder

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Greetings, NG! Since this is my first post here, I should let you all know what my basic "deal" is (before I read ten posts asking "who the hell are YOU to say . . ."). 1).  I am a long time member of SAG/AFTRA/AEA. 2).  I am 100% committed to seeing an end to this horrid strike, and I’m putting in a whole lotta hours to see that it happens. 3).  I have precious little interest in debating my value as a human being or actor.  I’ve worked too long and hard to take pot-shots from people I don’t know on subjects they may or may not know anything about.  That said, I am more than willing to engage in intelligent discussions of the facts and opinions surrounding the strike action and our PROFESSIONAL endeavors in general. 4).  I make a comfortable (but by no means astronomical) living as an actor — not because I’m exceptionally beautiful or lucky or because I kiss anybody’s ass.  I make a good living because I’m skilled, I’m trained and I work harder than you can possibly imagine.  Lest you assume I am a spoiled, "lazy" actor, prior to finding some measure of stability in this business, I did any and all kinds of menial and/or minimum wage work including (but not limited to): waitressing, delivering newspapers, washing dishes, emptying bedpans, teaching improv to kids, typing, filing, answering phones and so on.  I am not a stranger to hard work, and I continue to volunteer in my community and bust my ass for others on occasion. 5).  I am the woman who wrote the letter to "Later Today" that Drama Queen posted. Now that you know who I am, I really only wanted to address the response posted about "teaching calculus for fun and profit".  Among my "civilian" friends and relatives, I happen to know at least ten (yes, count ‘em ten) who would have a greater aptitude for communicating calculus than they would communicating commercial copy.  I know that’s probably hard to believe, but it’s true.  (Maybe I just happen to have really smart friends.) In fact, I happen to know at least two actors who could do it as well (One of them is an expert in the field of Artificial Intelligence, and the other teaches Logic to advanced junior high kids every summer.) Now,  I don’t mean to imply that understanding advanced mathematics is simple or easy, but I ‘ll betcha if they stood in the park and staged an experiment testing aptitude for acting vs. math, they’d likely find an equal number of each, and maybe even more leaning toward the math side.   You see, mathematics is a tangible thing, it’s purely objective; acting talent is not.  (And remember, I didn’t say "teach calculus SUCESSFULLY or WELL", I just said "teach calculus for fun and profit".)   I know the hardships casting directors are laboring under right now — have you any idea just HOW MANY "real people" (including those who think they’re actually talented and those who just came along for the thrill) a CD will have to sift through to find even ONE remotely employable "actor" these days?  Hell, it’s tough enough to cast to perfection when we’re all at their disposal.  The intent of Tuesday’s program was to flush out ANYBODY willing to give it a shot, and the fact that they didn’t even MENTION the strike makes their motivation for doing so, at the very least, suspect. Enough. I guess I don’t mind that my words were posted here, but all I ask is that people try very to actually READ what is written before responding. Lisa Lewis Chicago

Response:

 <<if teachers were on the picket lines, would you air a program on "how ANYONE can teach calculus for fun and profit"? I see why you’re angry at the network, but on the other hand not anyone CAN teach calculus. If appearing in commercials requires an advanced skill set, then they can’t recruit replacements in the park anymore than they could recruit calculus teachers in the park.

Perhaps you misunderstood. That was not *my* letter, or *my* anger spoken of in the letter, although it does give voice to some resentment i feel over the issue. This message was a repost of anothers message. Just passing it along for the edification and perhaps righteous indignation of those who support this strike and the motives behind it. Drama Queen

Response:

Greetings, NG! Since this is my first post here, I should let you all know what my basic "deal" is (before I read ten posts asking "who the hell are YOU to say . . ."). 1).  I am a long time member of SAG/AFTRA/AEA. 2).  I am 100% committed to seeing an end to this horrid strike, and I’m putting in a whole lotta hours to see that it happens. 3).  I have precious little interest in debating my value as a human being or actor.  I’ve worked too long and hard to take pot-shots from people I don’t know on subjects they may or may not know anything about.  That said, I am more than willing to engage in intelligent discussions of the facts and opinions surrounding the strike action and our PROFESSIONAL endeavors in general. 4).  I make a comfortable (but by no means astronomical) living as an actor — not because I’m exceptionally beautiful or lucky or because I kiss anybody’s ass.  I make a good living because I’m skilled, I’m trained and I work harder than you can possibly imagine.  Lest you assume I am a spoiled, "lazy" actor, prior to finding some measure of stability in this business, I did any and all kinds of menial and/or minimum wage work including (but not limited to): waitressing, delivering newspapers, washing dishes, emptying bedpans, teaching improv to kids, typing, filing, answering phones and so on.  I am not a stranger to hard work, and I continue to volunteer in my community and bust my ass for others on occasion. 5).  I am the woman who wrote the letter to "Later Today" that Drama Queen posted. Now that you know who I am, I really only wanted to address the response posted about "teaching calculus for fun and profit".  Among my "civilian" friends and relatives, I happen to know at least ten (yes, count ‘em ten) who would have a greater aptitude for communicating calculus than they would communicating commercial copy.  I know that’s probably hard to believe, but it’s true.  (Maybe I just happen to have really smart friends.) In fact, I happen to know at least two actors who could do it as well (One of them is an expert in the field of Artificial Intelligence, and the other teaches Logic to advanced junior high kids every summer.) Now,  I don’t mean to imply that understanding advanced mathematics is simple or easy, but I ‘ll betcha if they stood in the park and staged an experiment testing aptitude for acting vs. math, they’d likely find an equal number of each, and maybe even more leaning toward the math side.   You see, mathematics is a tangible thing, it’s purely objective; acting talent is not.  (And remember, I didn’t say "teach calculus SUCESSFULLY or WELL", I just said "teach calculus for fun and profit".)   I know the hardships casting directors are laboring under right now — have you any idea just HOW MANY "real people"  (including those who think they’re actually talented and those who just came along for the thrill) a CD will have to sift through to find even ONE remotely employable "actor" these days?  Hell, it’s tough enough to cast to perfection when we’re all at their disposal.  The intent of Tuesday’s program was to flush out ANYBODY willing to give it a shot, and the fact that they didn’t even MENTION the strike makes their motivation for doing so, at the very least, suspect. Enough. I guess I don’t mind that my words were posted here, but all I ask is that people try very to actually READ what is written before responding. Lisa Lewis Chicago

Response:

 <<if teachers were on the picket lines, would you air a program on "how ANYONE can teach calculus for fun and profit"? I see why you’re angry at the network, but on the other hand not anyone CAN teach calculus. If appearing in commercials requires an advanced skill set, then they can’t recruit replacements in the park anymore than they could recruit calculus teachers in the park. Before you buy.

Response:

Perhaps they will do a segment on "Anyone can create a late nite talk show.." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – One last thought — I wonder if the impending cancellation of "Later Today" made the program "expendable" in this scenario. Maybe NBC used the weakest weapon in their arsenal to fend off the advertisers’ demands. Hmmm. If so, thanks for at least trying to "bury" the story. But no matter the intent, you still screwed us over. It was a lovely way to start the day.

Response:

Related Posts

Leave a Reply