Streaming media has disrupted the entire entertainment industry, upending the DVD purchasing, movie rental, and movie viewing models of the past few decades.
This shift has also changed the way actors are paid. As well as some of the achievements that actors have achieved through previous labor struggles—— Especially through the residualA fraction of the share of revenue from film or television—has disappeared.
Although the Writers Guild of America end strike On September 27, 2023, actors represented by SAG-AFTRA continued their strike.Residuals are one of their main features The crux of the matter: They want to receive 2% of the revenue generated by their shows appearing on the streaming platform.
The studio countered that the figure was unrealistic – This is the equivalent of actors taking no financial risk when TV series and movies fail, and reaping rewards when they succeed.
But in reality, players are simply trying to adapt existing payment models to changing technology and consumer habits.
The epidemic allows us to see the future
The extent to which streaming has changed the entertainment landscape has come into focus during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Since many movie theaters are closed With government restrictions and the reluctance of most people to sit in movie theaters, some movie studios have decided to use what they call streaming services to release movies Premium video on demand.
In order to create a blockbuster “Black Widow”, Disney decided to release The film is released simultaneously in theaters and on Disney+, its exclusive streaming service, for $30.
The film stars Scarlett Johansson, sue disney for breach of contract. Johnson claims she lost $50 million on the simultaneous release because her contract didn’t have the same streaming revenue-sharing agreement as the theatrical release.
Stream Black Widow on TV for $30 Equivalent to About three theater tickets.Meanwhile, premium video on demand cuts out much of the costs associated with showing movies in theaters: studios Generally retain 80% of income This is different from the standard of 50% allocation for theaters.
actor decided to strike Because they see the pitfalls of their livelihoods tied to the structure of contracts they are currently trying to negotiate.
fight for dignity
Today’s tensions echo Hollywood’s 20th-century labor struggles.
The Hollywood studio system of the 1930s and 1940s It’s an era Vertical integration in the film industry. The Big Five major studios—MGM, Warner Bros., Paramount, 20th Century Fox, and RKO— employed Director, screenwriter, actor and cinematographer. Filming, editing, distribution and screening are all done in-house.
This creates an efficient system that can produce movies like an assembly line, like Ford Motor Plant. Actors – just like everyone else employed by a studio – receive a salary based on the length of their contract. If a movie is a hit, they don’t make any extra money.
This period of time is rife with exploitation,low wage, sexual violence Actors also have little bargaining power.
Actors fought hard against the system; they wanted to be able to negotiate compensation related to their work on specific films. In 1948, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the studio system Violation of antitrust laws, end these unfair contracts. Actors’ newfound free agency allows them to sign solo movie deals with studios. This resulted in huge paydays for some stars, but their studio income was still largely cut.
Some actors began receiving residual income as part of their personal contracts in the 1950s. The system is modeled on music royalties earned from the sale of copyrighted music. However, when the composer and recording artist share the copyright, the actor has no copyright claim.
In the 1960s, SAG-AFTRA On strike Insist on the remainder being part of the base contract so that revenue is shared with all participants. Finally, they received it.
Get a share of streaming revenue
It is important to remember that today’s actors have received 2% of the remaining balance earned Traditional TV from the secondary market. The secondary market refers to the market beyond the original domestic release of a movie or TV series. Examples include foreign box office receipts, DVD sales, syndicated television shows and theatrical releases appearing on television.
Therefore, programs originally produced for broadcast television are not an issue.When “Friends,” originally an NBC sitcom, made $1 billion in revenue on the streaming platform, the five protagonists Every time you earn 2%, or $20 million each. But a show like “Stranger Things,” which is produced and owned by Netflix, never enters the secondary market as long as it only airs on Netflix, so the stars only earn their raw salaries.
The problem, then, lies in the fact that existing residual models do not account for streaming under the expiring SAG-AFTRA contract.
In the age of streaming, all new shows produced by streaming platforms are both reruns and originals. The actor hopes to replace this revenue line with 2% of the streaming revenue generated by the show or movie.
One problem is that streaming revenue remains an opaque process. Stream-related revenue data Unlike ticket sales or advertising revenue, which is less clear-cut, streaming platforms tend to keep this information in-house. But streaming services have their own metrics to determine a show or movie’s value to the company, such as the number of streams streamed, the first show a subscriber pays to watch and how long a customer stays subscribed.
That 2% of streaming demand is no different than 2% of streaming demand writer receives Negotiations ended the strike on September 27, 2023. As part of this agreement, Writers Guild of America Based on the remainder of the ratings negotiation on the streaming platform, producers agreed to share data with the WGA, such as total streaming time, to help determine payouts.
Although the 2% revenue generated by shows and movies equates to a larger residual demand than the WGA, Residuals are always higher for actors comparison writer.
plug loopholes
Original shows and movies produced for streaming services like Netflix, Max or Disney+ reflect a vertically integrated system in which the platform owns the studios and the rights to those productions. In this sense it recalls the old studio system of the 1930s and 1940s.
Therefore, there is no benefit for studios and platforms to provide actors with income per stream, since technically there is no secondary market. Studios and platforms have greater profit margins, while actors lose income. This is the hole that compelling actors want to plug.
When reporters describe Fran Drescher, president of SAG-AFTRA, said they are taking a “hard line” on 2 percent of revenue, but they don’t see what actors already have. The actor just wants it to work for shows and movies originating from the streaming platform.
They fought this battle to end the studio system. The goal of fighting for 2% is to prove that the work actors do for streaming television is as valuable as ever.
David Arditi is an associate professor of sociology, University of Texas at Arlington.
This article is reproduced from dialogue Licensed under Creative Commons.read Source article.
Svlook
