The New York Times and the Hollywood work stopage

The media coverage of the struggle between the Hollywood producers and TV honchos (AMPTP) and the screen and TV writers (WGA) continues to raise serious questions about journalistic ethics. Most of the coverage, of course, deals with the lack of the usual elaborate TV coverage of the award shows. Take, for example, David Carr's ("The Carpetbagger") article in yesterday's New York Times. For example with regard to the likelihood of an Oscar show, he quotes one of his producer sources, Walter F. Parkes, as follows:

If there is a quick settlement with the directors' guild and if it is looked upon by the writer's guild as a framework for negotiations, and it brings them back to the table, there might be an Oscar telecast.

This is the last point made in the article. Carr never questions its accuracy despite the fact that the producers and network executives walked away from the table not the writers. But to acknowledge that would challenge the basic point of view of his article, which is that of the producers and network executives.

At an earlier point in the article Carr writes:

No one...last night... [after the Globes' non-show] wanted to be spotted jackknifing in glee with a Champagne glass in hand at a time when the town is tearing itself in half because of a writers' strike that has idled most television production, threatened future movie shoots, put thousands of people out of work....

So if you are interested in who is responsible for "the town...tearing itself in half" and "put thousands of people out of work" its obviously the writers, who are on strike.

This despite the fact as Michael Winship, president of the Writers guild, East, reminded us on Democracy Now that it was the

the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, against whom we’re still on strike...who have refused to come back to the bargaining table.

Unfortunately this view from the perspective of one side of this dispute is not unique to Carr and the Times. It has been characteristic of almost all the corporate-owned media. I'll bet that if asked when Carr was researching the article the president of the Writers Guild, west would have been happy to talk to him. But I guess Carr and his editors just weren't interested.

The other thought I had about all this is how we've reached the point where if TV doesn't cover these awards with all the stars and the red-carpet brouhaha they don't really happen. That may be the unkindest cut of all.