Jay Leno is in trouble with the WGA. When he returned to late night television on Wednesday, he told his audience that he wrote the jokes for his monologue and that he wasn't relying on "scabs" to do his writing. It was a proud proclamation on his part, but it turns out that he was still violating the rules of the WGA strike. As a member of the WGA, he's not allowed to write. The WGA has met with Leno and let him know he broke the rules, and now the guild is trying to determine whether Leno needs to be punished.Other late night hosts like Conan O'Brien and Jimmy Kimmel returned without writers and obviously without any sort of scripts. Conan spent a good part of last week spinning his wedding ring on his desk. David Letterman and Craig Ferguson also returned last week, but they have writers because Worldwide Pants, which produces both shows, came to an agreement with the WGA.














Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-06-2008 @ 4:16PM
Derek said...
I wish I understood what on earth kind of deal Letterman could have made. I mean, what can he offer the WGA that makes them say to him OK, your show(s) can come back with writers. Your writers can break the strike without a problem. What possible terms could be in that deal that makes the WGA accept it.
Reply
1-06-2008 @ 5:11PM
D-Bo said...
It's the fact that he owns the show through WWP and that this deal was done independent of the network. Leno and the rest don't own their shows and therefore can't negotiate their own deals.
1-07-2008 @ 4:33PM
Charles said...
"what can he offer the WGA "
He offered the WGA what they were asking for. They went to the AMPTP and asked for X Y and Z to come back to work. They said no, Letterman agreed to X Y and Z and so he was able to make an agreement. Letterman offered the WGA exactly what they wanted and settled with them. It's not that heard to grasp.
1-06-2008 @ 5:20PM
Nicolas Graf said...
I guess he agreed to their demands. As D-Bo said, he (or rather his company) can make deals with the WGA without the network, so he can agree to things like residuals for web-distribution that the studios don't want to agree to.
1-06-2008 @ 8:27PM
Brent McKee said...
What Letterman - and his company - gave the WGA was an interim contract agreement based on the terms that the WGA had presented to AMPTP, in other words everything that the WGA wanted as far as Worldwide Pants can provide it. For their part the Guild agreed that when a final agreement is reached World Wide Pants would revert to the final agreement. Letterman's writers are not breaking the strike in any way shape or form. It's the same contract that Tom Cruise and Paula Wagner and the new United Artists agreed to a few days ago.
The more interesting development is that Jeff Zucker and NBC are urging the WGA to sign an interim agreement with Dick Clark Productions so that they can produce the Golden Globes and actually have people that we care about attend. The obvious question is, if the contract is good enough for DCP why doesn't NBC sign it too?
1-06-2008 @ 4:21PM
LC said...
"In a statement, NBC condemned the guild plans to investigate Leno. "The WGA agreement clearly permits Jay to create and perform his own monologue. The enforcement of strike rules against Jay in these circumstances would violate the federal labor laws."
I would like to actually see this agreement. It doesn't seem so cut and dry that he actually did anything wrong providing that he wrote all his own jokes.
Reply
1-06-2008 @ 6:55PM
Vito said...
I believe the reason for why it doesn't fall under the typical perform-your-own-material protection is because he is credited on his show as a writer and receives residuals and benefits for that (paltry as they might be in comparison). I might be wrong about that.
1-06-2008 @ 4:38PM
Ryan said...
I support the writers, but I'm sure they are just pissed off than even with a writer-less Leno, it's still better than whatever Letterman and his writers could come up with.
Reply
1-06-2008 @ 5:50PM
Derek said...
Thanks, yes it seems obvious now. I wonder why WWP didn't consider agreeing to the WGA demands earlier. If DL is the boss of WWP and considered the writers demands as fair, he could have made that deal 2 months ago.
Reply
1-06-2008 @ 8:29PM
Brent McKee said...
The answer is that Dave offered to take the deal as soon as the WGA started offering interim agreements, something that wasn't available in the first month or six weeks of the strike.
1-06-2008 @ 6:58PM
Karen said...
Isn't it going to be impossible to monitor web distribution if every company agrees to different terms? And how much content on the web is sanctioned by the production companies that put it there in the first place? Isn't most of it bootleg to start with?
Reply
1-06-2008 @ 7:13PM
Vito said...
Official web distribution. If you don't think that's feasible, take a look at what The Daily Show did. It's entirely possible that in future, illegal uploading might be unnecessary for all but the most obscure content.
1-06-2008 @ 7:39PM
Jordan said...
Any one else think that Leno was better last week than he had been in awhile? I think the show is honestly better without the writers.
Reply
1-06-2008 @ 10:46PM
tvfan3241 said...
lol, possibly punished for writing his own jokes... what is the wga, a union or a bloody cult!
Reply
1-07-2008 @ 4:19AM
Will said...
I wondered when I read that Leno said that (he wrote his own jokes) how he could do that when he is a member of the guild. And if he could do that, why be off the air for 2 months? But punish him, that's pretty laughable, what are they going to do to him, he's a multi-millionaire, I'd bet it's like a fine that a pro athleat gets, it's tiny compared to what he gets paid. I'd be interested to know what the "punishment' is.
Reply
1-07-2008 @ 4:30AM
eugene said...
Take away his cars and make him drive a hyundai excel circa 1985.
1-07-2008 @ 6:39AM
Jimmy said...
Yes, Leno needs to be punished. The WGA should make him watch his own show.
Reply
1-07-2008 @ 8:16AM
grumpyoldman said...
Leno is actually much funnier since he came back. He seems re-invigorated. Dave's still in the same rut.
Reply