Article cover image: TV, BUT NOT FOR FREE

TV, BUT NOT FOR FREE

As the Edinburgh Television Festival gets underway, author, television writer and independent producer, Jeff Norton calls for an end to the widespread practice of asking writers for the small screen to work without payment.

Recently I was fortunate enough to attend the TV Writers’ Festival hosted by the invaluable BBC Writersroom. This annual event brings together credited writers and executives across the BBC and other broadcasters. It’s a fantastic initiative that aims to strengthen ties between writers and broadcasters.

During a panel with key drama commissioners from the BBC, ITV, and Sky, the thorny topic of writers getting paid for their work came up. When one of the writers asked the panel about the common practice of indie producers expecting writers to “work” for free, the panel looked at him as if he had three heads. Then he asked members of the audience to raise their hands if they’d been asked to write substantial work (i.e. not just a one or two pager) for free by producers. Every hand in the room went up. It was as if an unspoken truth had finally been voiced. The commissioning executives looked shocked. And the audience felt validated.

…the main commissioning broadcasters appear to only want to work with “commissionable writers”, of which there are believed to be about 20-25.

But why would anyone expect a professional to ply their trade for free?

There exists a conventional wisdom among many indie production companies (certainly 100% of the ones I have spoken to or worked with) that the main commissioning broadcasters appear to only want to work with “commissionable writers”, of which there are believed to be about 20-25. The knock-on effect is that when indie producers interface with writers who aren’t on that list, they seek to reduce the perceived risk of working with a “non-commissionable” writer by getting as much work executed (that is words on the page) as possible to be able to show the commissioner that the “risk” of using the writer is greatly reduced.

When a writer pitches an idea, the producer will typically ask for a short treatment or write-up. I think most writers, myself included, have no problem with the notion of scoping or shaping an idea into something tangible, because it’s the creative execution of the idea that makes it real. That said, what the vast majority of “non-commissionable” writers (who are mostly working writers, often in daytime, radio, theatre, and so on) experience is that indies cry poverty and ask for longer treatments, revisions, mini-bibles (“to be able to tell the broadcaster how it’s returnable”) and sometimes whole scripts…for free. The indie producer typically says that they’ll ask the broadcaster for development money, but the chicken-and-egg scenario is that they neither want to approach the broadcaster with insufficient material nor want to pay to generate the necessary material to lower the perceived risk.

If the broadcaster passes, the indie won’t be out of pocket. But the writer has spent many hours “on spec” on a project which is now shopped and condemned to die a slow death in their desk drawer.

Often these arrangements are made under a “right to shop” agreement where no money changes hands but the indie producer has the right to show the broadcaster the pitch or treatment in the hope of securing development financing. If the broadcaster passes, the indie won’t be out of pocket. But the writer has spent many hours “on spec” on a project which is now shopped and condemned to die a slow death in their desk drawer.

Now, I’m not unsympathetic to the true indies that try to boot-strap their development by asking writers to lean in and maybe share the load. In that scenario, however, my opinion is that writers who take a risk alongside the producer should be entitled to a share of the Executive Producer fee upon production. Most indies, however, won’t let a writer touch “their” Executive Producer fees. It’s no surprise that some writers are setting up their own production companies to control more of the creative and the economics.

One of the reasons I raised money for Awesome, my own IP and production company, is to be able to solve this. I develop my own material (often based on my own books) but now I’m increasingly in a position to champion other writers’ works (books and original TV ideas) too, and to be able to pay for options and treatments.

Not paying writers to write only leads to a limited offering of voices.

Since these three executives at the TV Writers’ Festival were shocked by the common practice that surrounds nearly every single project that makes its way to their desks, it’s worth asking: how can broadcasters help change the situation? A good start would be to:

1) Telegraph clearly (and publicly) to indies that they are open to pitches from writers who are not on “the list”;

2) ask producers when they present a pitch/idea/treatment if the writer has been paid for this work or if it’s being shopped on spec;

3) take pitches directly from writers and then seek to pair them with production companies (this solves the adverse incentive issue of indies not wanting to put their hands in their pockets unless they are 100% certain of securing development financing). I recognise this third step potentially means a huge amount of work and material to slog through, so it may not be practical, and in the UK it’s typically the indie producers who serve as the signal for quality (in the US, it’s the agents). The BBC Writersroom already does a great job of acting as a trusted third party that “filters” the great from the not-quite-ready; perhaps the BBC Writersroom could play a larger role in shepherding projects from script to screen.

I don’t claim to speak for all writers, but I do operate in a unique position in the marketplace as both a writer and a producer. Not paying writers to write only leads to a limited offering of voices. If we’re content with just consuming drama from those on “the list” then this isn’t an issue, but if we want a diverse set of voices writing our telly (especially those from new, female, and under-represented minorities) then there is a role for broadcasters in helping create a healthy, creative ecosystem where professional writers are paid as professionals.

Jeff Norton is an author, a writer-producer, and the founder of Awesome, a UK-based IP and production company. He is on twitter as @thejeffnorton and on the web at AwesomeMediaEnt.com.

© Jeff Norton

This feature is an edited version of a blog from www.jeffnorton.com


FREE IS NOT AN OPTION

The Writers’ Guild of Great Britain (WGGB) campaign to tackle the growing amount of work writers are expected to do for free

WGGB have been running their campaign Free is not an Option since 2015 to address the issue of writers in TV being asked to work for free. The campaign was launched after a survey run by the WGGB found that 87% of respondents in the TV and film industries reported a significant increase in the amount of work they had been asked to do for free.

As well as using this evidence to lobby politicians on the conditions of writers within in the TV industry, WGGB has worked with its most experienced members to compile guidelines on what a writer should and shouldn’t do for free. These guidelines also include a 10-point negotiation primer on how to say no and talk about money without losing work.

Read about the campaign.

Read the guidelines.