this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
232 points (97.2% liked)
Television
4628 readers
3 users here now
Redirected - Please see [email protected]
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As the article notes, writers for her show are governed under a separate contract which was not being struck. It was actually a cool move on her part to respond to the backlash with further solidarity and push back the show, since no one on her team was actually called to strike.
Also I find it weird that it's "struck" and not "striked" like how being hanged is very different from being hung.
Her show might not have been struck off, but her 3 co-writers were all members of the union and actively picketing outside her show's studio. There's no way she didn't expect it to ruffle their feathers - in fact, she tried to keep it secret and didn't tell them, instead they found out through audience ticket giveaways online.
She literally posted about it on social media, which is how you know about it lol
She posted about it after the writers found out, but it was posting about it that brought it to the wider public's knowledge.
No, you're misunderstanding that portion of the article.
The Actors agreement allows talk shows to continue with SAG/AFTRA members, but the writers strike covered the writers on the show. They tried to restart production without writers (which is possible, Late Night did it in the last writers strike).
So even though the Actors strike is still happening, shows like this can use union actors (like Drew Barrymore) now. And they can use union writers now, too, because the writers strike is over.