There comes a point when the employee can’t concern themselves with the perception of studio execs or if the timing is off.  For many, many people in this industry (far more than the 1% who get paid handsomely), they’ve hit a breaking point.  They are struggling just to earn a living wage in a city where rents have skyrocketed and buying a home is all but impossible.  Many outside LA may not see it, but gas prices here haven’t gone down much past $5/gallon.  In a city where travel for shoots and work is a must, that drains already precious income.  I’m not really sure when the best time to strike would actually be, but when there is a segment of actors who are getting paid the same today as they were 30 years ago?  When cost of living hasn’t been factored into wages?  Where residuals have become almost a joke for the rank and file?  Should they really wait another three years (2026) during which systems and payments will become even more entrenched and their window to have some sort of control over how AI is used will be rapidly closing if not shut entirely?  

It’s going to be a tough fight.  Strikes almost always are.  They don’t come pain free for anyone (kinda the point).  But that can’t be an excuse not to do it.  

Rolling Stone wrote:  One of the major points of contention for both groups has been the rapid development and implementation of AI and fears of how it could potentially replace writers and actors. And their concern was justified, as chief negotiator Duncan Crabtree-Ireland laid bare the AMPTP's so-called "groundbreaking AI proposal," which holds the potential to wipe out an entire pathway to breaking into the industry, as well as a reliable source of income for many. The reported proposal hinged on the ability for background actors to be "scanned, get paid for one day's pay" and for that company to "own that scan of their image, their likeness, and to be able to use it for the rest of eternity in any project they want with no consent and no compensation." "It literally was all of our worst fears confirmed when we heard that," actress Jamie Miller tells Rolling Stone. "It's kneecapping people from the start."

Link

With that being an “offer” from the AMPTP (The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers who negotiate on behalf of the studios), how can AI not be considered an existential threat to both striking unions?  And if it is, why would they “grace” studios another three year contract?

Sean Astin stated "we have some experts on A.I. who spent months designing proposals ... and the [studios] wound't engage [and] talk about what's at stake."

-C!

‘MS. MARVEL’ will be aired in its entirety on ABC next month, making it the first Marvel Studios series to be broadcast on network television.

‘YELLOWSTONE’ will air on CBS this Fall.

This is due to a lack of new content available because of the studios unwillingness to pay & treat actors & writers fairly.

-C!

When the executives make more in a day than the actors/writers make in a year - something has to change.

-C!

Any reason you can't replace the CEOs with an AI? Think of how much money the various Boards of Directors would save! 

Is it possible, or even probable, that studios will simply refuse to negotiate, willing to bet that audiences will be content with repeats?

——-

That would be a horrible bet. And I’m not sure that “we can just rely on streaming older material” is the best argument against the current streaming residual structure being fair. 

But it’s probable that the studios will try to wait it out until the writers and actors are too broke to not work.