Two thoughts: -\"Blacklist\". It may be (understandably) difficult to do so, but let\'s strip away the emotional baggage this word carries, and look at it from a purely technical point of view. The WGAw (and, I imagine, its counterpart in the east) has set up a committee to investigate strikebreaking and scab activities. A Guild member who engages in such activity faces penalization in one or more forms, up to and including expulsion from the Guild, thereby rendering him or her unemployable in any meaningful way as a writer in the movie and TV industry. And if I\'m not mistaken, a non-Guild member (like myself) who does any writing for a studio during this strike will face the almost-certain possibility that he or she will not be allowed future membership in the Guild. If that\'s not a \"blacklist\", what is it? These people are being deprived of actual or possible careers the same way the blacklisted writers of the \'50\'s were. Now lest you think that this constitutes criticism or disapproval of the Guild\'s actions, I offer you my second thought: -While the *effect* of the Guild\'s actions would be the same as that of the infamous \'50\'s blacklist, the *reason* for the Guild\'s blacklisting can be defended on moral grounds. The Guild can take no other course of action in this strike. Discipline has to be enforced, and the picket lines honored, or else the Guild gets broken, and the AMPTP gets to run roughshod over present and future writers. Kiss residuals goodbye, and expect to be paid once for content that the studios get paid for over and over again. So while Mr. Counter\'s use of the term \"blacklist\" is technically correct, it is nonetheless reprehensible, since his intent is to play on our emotions in order to draw a parallel with that \"other\" blacklist where none exists. I have no problem calling it a blacklist, nor do I have any problem supporting this particular one. As Mr. Davis states in his comment, the Guild is not acting against its \"staunch\" members, only those who would undermine its objectives.

Two thoughts:

-"Blacklist". It may be (understandably) difficult to do so, but let's strip
away the emotional baggage this word carries, and look at it from a
purely technical point of view.

The WGAw (and, I imagine, its counterpart in the east) has set up a
committee to investigate strikebreaking and scab activities. A Guild
member who engages in such activity faces penalization in one or
more forms, up to and including expulsion from the Guild, thereby
rendering him or her unemployable in any meaningful way as a writer
in the movie and TV industry. And if I'm not mistaken, a non-Guild
member (like myself) who does any writing for a studio during this
strike will face the almost-certain possibility that he or she will not be
allowed future membership in the Guild.

If that's not a "blacklist", what is it? These people are being deprived of
actual or possible careers the same way the blacklisted writers of the
'50's were.

Now lest you think that this constitutes criticism or disapproval of the
Guild's actions, I offer you my second thought:

-While the *effect* of the Guild's actions would be the same as that of
the infamous '50's blacklist, the *reason* for the Guild's blacklisting
can be defended on moral grounds. The Guild can take no other
course of action in this strike. Discipline has to be enforced, and the
picket lines honored, or else the Guild gets broken, and the AMPTP
gets to run roughshod over present and future writers. Kiss residuals
goodbye, and expect to be paid once for content that the studios get
paid for over and over again.

So while Mr. Counter's use of the term "blacklist" is technically correct,
it is nonetheless reprehensible, since his intent is to play on our
emotions in order to draw a parallel with that "other" blacklist where
none exists. I have no problem calling it a blacklist, nor do I have any
problem supporting this particular one. As Mr. Davis states in his
comment, the Guild is not acting against its "staunch" members, only
those who would undermine its objectives.

Mr. Counter doesn\'\'t know what he\'\'s saying. It\'\'s time he stepped down from his post. We of the WGA (both WGAw and WGAE) are not doing anything against our staunch members. We are brothers and sisters in solidarity and will sit this one out until Mr. Counter decides that our position is the correct one.

Mr. Counter doesn''t know what he''s saying. It''s time he stepped down from his post. We of the WGA (both WGAw and WGAE) are not doing anything against our staunch members. We are brothers and sisters in solidarity and will sit this one out until Mr. Counter decides that our position is the correct one.