Even though the writers strike that crippled talk shows has lifted, the three co-head writers for Drew Barrymore’s daytime show have declined to return, sources close to the production said.
It was not clear from the sources why the three writers are not returning.
The production sources said offers were extended to all three when they could be extended after the end of the strike, which was lifted on Sept. 27, and all three declined.
Barrymore was criticized after she announced in September that she would resume “The Drew Barrymore Show,” a daytime talk show, even though the strike by the Writers Guild of America had not yet been resolved.
Barrymore was dropped as the host of the National Book Awards in response.
She later walked back the decision, apologized to anyone who felt hurt, and said she would wait to resume production until the strike was over.
Some people are in a Union for the benefits. Some people are in a union because they believe in what unions stand for.
Sounds like she had the latter.
I’d like to take this opportunity to decline writing for Drew in solidarity
It was not clear from the sources why the three writers are not returning.
Barrymore was criticized after she announced in September that she would resume “The Drew Barrymore Show,” a daytime talk show, even though the strike by the Writers Guild of America had not yet been resolved.
I wonder if these two things could be related? /s
“Hey, we are going to do the show without writers. We dont need you guys at all.”
“Bet.”
I mean the previous stroke alot of late night shows went on without writers. But that was a different climate because Letterman pushed everyone’s hand by actually giving the union what they wanted so he had writers.
get fucked, scab.
(this probably won’t completely derail her show but it’s a huge middle finger nonetheless)
Everyone is all amped up about this and want her show to fail for “crossing picket lines”, but she didn’t go through with continuing her show during the writers strike because of the public backlash. What else do people want? What’s the point of a boycott if the boycott continues after the boycott worked? I just don’t think I agree with the whole “you have one chance to appease the internet and if you briefly step out of bounds or aren’t Keanu Reeves you’re done” attitude.
That being said they could’ve just found new, better jobs. They had the time to network.
She knew what she was doing and didn’t care. The only reason she walked back on it was it was causing her harm and that’s seems to be all she cares about.
I just don’t understand how the late night talk show hosts were able to do it last strike but the daytime talkshow host wasn’t allowed to do it this time? What’s the difference?
Last time, the shows went to air without the writers. IIRC the way it worked was that they did away with sketches and monologues so there was no writing, basically just interviews and improv. Leno did write his own monologue at one point, despite being a WGA member and deservedly caught shit for it.
Letterman and Conan paid for the writers salary out of their own pocket for the duration of the strike.
SNL and Colbert set up live shows to raise money for the striking writers.
All of this was done in solidarity with the writers, which were never replaced or supplemented throughout the entire 08-09 strike.
Barrymore and Maher were gonna hire scabs.
Ah makes sense, so it was possible but they just weren’t doing it right.
She’s a woman?
The problem with that argument is that Bill Maher received similar backlash for announcing he would return without writers, only to U Turn as well.
The long and short of it is that, 3 writers felt disposable by Drew Barrymore and didn’t want to return to a working environment where they could be thrown under the bus at any moment.
Thank you for additional context.
Right, but that’s exactly my point, the boycott worked. If you’re waiting for everyone to do the right thing all the time you’re going to be waiting a long time.
And if she was a normal working class woman it would be easy to forgive her. But she is a 125 Million Dollar super rich that only looks after herself and would gladly do it again if she could get away with it.
She is not getting another chance because that requires learning from your mistakes and given her social class there is no reason to believe she did.
I think “forgive” is a strong word that implies some sort of relationship here, I don’t need a relationship built on trust to consume content. If I refused every good and service that I didn’t think had my best interest in mind I’d have starved long ago lol.
All I’m saying is if the standard for boycott is “someone did something I didn’t like one time” this community wouldn’t exist
You keep talking about this like it’s a boycott, but it’s not.
She acted in an incredibly shitty way towards the people who work for her, and they decided they could do better. That’s not a boycott, that’s just consequences.
What do you want to do, force those writers to go back to work for a shitty boss?
Think you should read my initial comment again, I’m specifically talking about the reaction in this thread.
I think you have an interesting point!
Yes, she eventually did the right thing, when doing the wrong thing blew up in her face. She did the right thing out of pure self-preservation, but she did the right thing.
And it doesn’t matter, because she proved to the people working with her that she’s a snake. I’m not surprised that they refused to come back, and she has only herself to blame.
I never blamed them for not going back
She didn’t fail to appease the internet. She did something to make 3 of her employees not want to work for her. Maybe they just used the time away from work to re-evaluate their careers and decided to make a move with no hard feelings. Maybe it had been a terrible place to work and the announcement was the last straw. I bet they have a much more nuanced view of the situation than we do.
I’m discussing the response to this article in this thread, not her employees moving on.
Oh. Well what does it matter what we’d say? I’d wager the people in this thread aren’t her core audience.
Haha good point, just an interesting topic in general.
I didn’t do this, the writers are making their own choice.
No, no. This is good. Once people learn there’s no redemption they’ll stop responding to this shit.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Even though the writers strike that crippled talk shows has lifted, the three co-head writers for Drew Barrymore’s daytime show have declined to return, sources close to the production said.
Barrymore was criticized after she announced in September that she would resume “The Drew Barrymore Show,” a daytime talk show, even though the strike by the Writers Guild of America had not yet been resolved.
Barrymore was dropped as the host of the National Book Awards in response.
She later walked back the decision, apologized to anyone who felt hurt, and said she would wait to resume production until the strike was over.
The Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, known as SAG-AFTRA, went on strike July 14.
One of the three writers did not respond to an emailed message through her website Wednesday afternoon.
The original article contains 257 words, the summary contains 138 words. Saved 46%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
If they were gonna do this she should have just brought the show back without them before the strike ended then.
