• by Adam Buckman , Featured Columnist, August 3, 2023

A letter to the editor in The Wall Street Journal this week provided a look at the actors’ strike from the point of view of an ordinary person.

He was just a guy from Nebraska who watches TV in the same manner we all do in the current era of multiplatform options and content numbering in the thousands of hours.

His message: SAG-AFTRA can stay on strike from now until doomsday and there will never be a shortage of TV shows for him (and millions of others) to watch, whether new or otherwise. 

“[One] factor not in the union’s favor is the high inventory of shows,” wrote the man, an Omaha resident, in the letter published Tuesday on the WSJ editorial page.

“My wife and I still have two years’ worth of ‘Succession’ [pictured above] to catch up on, as well as a number of great shows out there our friends have urged us to watch.

“It could be a couple of years before we would notice a lack of entertainment opportunities. I feel sorry for SAG-AFTRA members. They could be in for a long strike,” he wrote.

For whatever reason, the letter writer neglected to mention the Writers Guild, which is also on strike. But his point is clear: Few consumers of TV today are feeling deprived of TV shows stemming from the strikes. And in his view, they never will feel that way either.

At no point did the writer identify himself as affiliated in any way with the TV business. His letter was merely a reader reacting to a column about the strike situation by Peggy Noonan that was published July 22.

As a non-TV industry civilian, he didn’t take into account the strikes’ disruption of new-content production and the impact on ad-supported television, which is dependent, at least in part, on new shows and new episodes of returning ones.

Network TV in particular is taking a hit from the strike now that the summer production season has been effectively cancelled (unless the strikes end soon).

Like streaming shows, scripted network shows have fans too, many of whom want to see new, original episodes of their favorite returning shows starting in September. They might also be looking forward to sampling new ones.

The letter writer also neglected to mention the effect on the studios. When production grinds to a halt, they lose money too.

But the man from Omaha was making his point regardless of studio or platform brand. In addition, he might only have been referring to streaming, and not the world of network television at all.

While he might subscribe to some or all the major streamers and knows their names (Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Apple TV+, Disney+, Max etc.), in the final analysis, that whole world is just TV to him. What does he care if the networks can’t put on a fall season?

An op-ed piece published in the Journal on July 27 went even further. It assessed the impact of the strikes on ordinary Americans in a lead sentence of just two words: “Nobody cares.”

“That’s my message to the Hollywood writers and actors who are on strike,” wrote Matthew Hennessey, identified at the bottom of the piece as the Journal’s deputy editorial features editor and a former actor.

“You assume Americans are on your side because we love the shows you create and the characters you play,” he wrote.

“The faceless, fat-cat studio heads seem like natural villains. But if you think that means we’re rooting for you, you’re mistaken. Nobody cares.”

His point is that the strikers’ efforts to cultivate sympathy and support from the population at large will not work. 

“Here’s the main thing,” he said. “Your cause isn’t as righteous as you think it is. … Actors aren’t saints. Writers don’t wear halos. You’re looking to ‘secure the bag’ just like the producers on the other side of the negotiating table. 

“Let’s not pretend this is the Dust Bowl and that [SAG-AFTRA President] Fran Drescher is Ma Joad.”