Advertising “Strike Tax” is the Solution to Writers/Producers Impasse

By: MediaVillage (View Profile)

In the first week of the Writers Guild of America strike, I offered a solution that has been gaining momentum over the past two weeks. “It’s time to think out of the box in more ways than one,” I wrote in November. So here’s the solution. Let the advertisers step up and agree to pay a tax on all network television ad expenditures for the next three years, beginning in September 2008, to fund a pool for distribution to writers, actors, directors, and related unions. This pool of funds will provide compensation for the writers’, directors’ and actors’ contributions to the digital rights expansion producers need and want, without requiring long –term economic valuation of the new media marketplace. A one percent tax on broadcast and cable network spending represents an estimated $400 million annually, $1.2 billion over three years. Two percent equals $2.4 billion. The networks and studios can’t complain about this solution. The unions can’t complain. While advertisers and agencies might protest at first, this Strike Tax will actually be self liquidating. As Sarah Fay, CEO of Carat U.S. and Isobar pointed out, “the strike is a huge issue for advertisers.”

If the WGA strike stretches into the summer and is joined by Screen Actors Guild and Directors Guild members, then the recent gains experienced by the networks as a result of returning late night hosts will be lost. This has the potential to destroy network television as advertisers know and love it. By ending the strike, advertisers will avoid suffering losses to their business resulting from under delivery on their required advertising exposure. They will assure the sustained viability of network television as a powerful medium for their messages, and they will support the industry as it transforms to a digital marketplace. In last year’s Upfront, advertisers agreed to pay substantially increased costs because network television is worth it. An additional one or two percent in costs might ultimately be extracted from the networks in negotiations, but networks will make it up by avoiding the substantial ratings declines the strike is causing and will continue to cause.

2 readers liked this story.
share
bookmarks
Comments
posted: 02.01.2008
Honoria Glossop, Ph.D.
I do not quite understand why it is necessary to involve government (taxation) in this situation. Why tax advertisers - if indeed they will ultimately suffer the most from this strike then they can get directly involved in funding the Writer's Guild. If they don't care, then why the be forced to surrender money to the government, to be passed on (minus hefty government overhead) for something that "will be good for them", as defined by somebody else. There is too much thinking out there that best and only solutions to our problems is taxing somebody else. And I let you on a secret - the tax that advertisers would pay would be ultimately passed on the consumers. Maybe you don't care, and watching fascinating (for you) shows is worth it. I don't watch TV at all so I am perfectly indifferent to what is shown on the box and I would resent paying extra money for basic products (produced and sold by those nasty advertisers) so you can engage in your leisure activity.
posted: 01.08.2008
Amanda Coggin
Great resolution idea. If the greed continues for the AMPTP and the WGA holds their ground for their rights, it only makes sense that the other big winners, the advertisers, step in to save the day. Thanks for your insight.
Tell us a Story.

You know you've got something to share. Maybe it's something funny, touching, inspirational or informative. Whatever it is, your circle of friends here at DivineCaroline would love to hear from you.

Btn_articletour
most liked
Loader_buff
Other topics you might appreciate
Relationships Career & Money Neighborhood & World Parenting