The TL:DR… I’m about to talk about Star Wars and the SAG-AFTRA strike. 😉

On July 13, 1923, the 50-foot high, flash-bulb popping “HOLLYWOODLAND” sign was dedicated in the Hollywood Hills of Los Angles County. Originally, a bit of a vanity project by a couple of street car tycoons and real estate barons to build an exclusive hillside community with not just upper-class homes and stately mansions, but tennis courts, markets, salons and stables for resident’s horses. The massive sign was erected to be the most visible billboard to attract newcomers to one of America’s fastest growing cities, which quickly became a hallmark for one of America’s fastest growing industries.

Hollywood.

Where “Happily ever after” is a destination.

100 years later, on July 13, 2023, the Screen Actors Guild & American Federation of Television & Radio Artist joined the Writers Guild of America and ceased production and promotion of all projects covered with the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers. What this means is that almost every movie and most television shows, shows with performers who are members of the SAG-AFTRA union, are no longer being produced. Big budget blockbusters like Gladiator 2, Deadpool 3, and the sequel to the newest Mission Impossible movie have all ceased production. Television shows like Chicago Fire, Law & Order: SVU, NCIS, and The Simpsons, which would typically be in production for their fall seasons right now, as well as popular streaming shows like Andor and Stranger Things, have all shutdown. So clearly, if you’re a fan of television and movies, you might be slightly disappointed for a little while. Yeah, studios still have completed projects scheduled to be released, but there will be a noticiable delay on whatever your viewing pleasure might be.

So right now, you might be asking yourself…. what does any of this have to do with Star Wars?

I’m glad you asked!

Back in 2016, Lucasfilm Limited and Walt Disney Studios released “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” in theaters. If you’re not a fan, very briefly, Rogue One is a Star Wars movie, which acts as a spiritual pequel to the 1977 blockbuster Star Wars. As a prequel, this 2016 film used many of the same storylines, set designs and characters that were used in the original 1977 Star Wars. While storylines are timeless and sets can be recreated, characters that are played by actors and actresses in 1977 have age or otherwise not available to reprise their roles nearly 40 years later. And where some characters were recast with younger(and well, living) actors, the producer of Rogue One decided to use the budding technology of creating the digital likeness of certain characters. Peter Cushing, who played the villain in the original Star Wars, passed away in 1994. However, when you look at Rogue One, he was very prominently seen in the movie played by an actor whose face was not his own. Just the same with Carrie Fisher, who played Princess Leia in the 1977 movie. At the very end of the 2016 Rogue One, she shows up, not as the 60-year-old woman she was, but as the 20-year-old young woman she was in 1977. The thing is, while abbreviated and digitally articulated, Princess Leia, or at least Carrie Fisher’s face, was in Rogue One, but there’s one detail that was not in Rogue One. And that was Carrie Fisher herself. She was not credited in the film, which also means Carrie Fisher received a total of $0.00 from a film that grossed over one billion dollars in the box office. And this is part of the problem.

The other part of the problem deals with Princess Leia’s on-screen twin brother(here’s your 40-year-old Spoiler Alert), Luke Skywalker. Luke Skywalker was played by Mark Hamill. In 1977, Mark Hamill was 26 years old when audiences first saw him as Luke Skywalker. However, audiences last saw him as Luke Skywalker in 2020 and 2022, when he reprised the role in the streaming series “The Mandalorian” and “The Book of Boba Fett”. Those two shows took place a few years after the character was seen in the original films, which meant, like the actor, the character was to also be in his twenties. So, they also digitally recreated his likeness for these shows as well. However, the producer of these shows actually had Mark Hamill perform the scenes in the show, which means he is a credited performer and was paid for his work.

So what does this have to do with a bunch of overpaid actors going on strike?

I’m getting there! I promise!

A long time ago, in a studio far, far away from me, actually around the same time the Hollywood sign was originally erected, the executives of Hollywood studios held an enormous amount of power in the industry. Not very much different than now, but then, performers worked for the studio executives. They were for all intent and purposes, employers of those studios and as an employer they pretty much treated their employees, or actors, the way most employers would treat employees if left to their own devices, and that was pretty detestable. So, a group of actors including Boris Karloff(the guy who played Frankenstein) and Frank Morgan(the Wizard from the Wizard of Oz) along with several other actors and actresses created the Screen Actors Guild, a labor union to protect their rights as workers with studio executives and producers. And they all lived happily ever after…

For about 25 years.

Because at that time, a new invention started to gain traction in American households: Television. Now, Americans didn’t have to go out to theaters and pay to watch actors on screen. They could watch them on television in the comfort of their homes. Studios could sell their products to television networks to allow them to broadcast their films for content. And every time they did it, the studio would get paid a residual stipend with every showing. Do you know who got paid $0.00 for their work on those projects? Writers and actors.

So in 1960 they went on strike. And while it took several weeks for the actors(several months for the writers), eventually, the studio executives came to the conclusion that they were kind of being a bunch of tightwads and relented. They decided to give actors and writers a part of the residuals for work that is broadcast on television. And they lived happily ever after….

For like 20 years.

Because in the early 1980s, another new technology was entering homes across America: VCRs. Yeah, quite antiquated now, the industry was just getting off the ground in 1980. Much like television, studios could package their filmed projects and mass produce them on video tape and sell those video tapes to consumers who could watch their movies in the comfort of their own homes on their televisions. And of course, they received a residual payment for every single video they could sell to consumers. And do you know who got paid $0.00 for the work they did in those projects? Writers and actors.

So, in 1980 they went on strike again(the actors, writer’s struck in 1985 for the same reason). And in case you’re not keeping track, this has become a very visible and alarming pattern. Every time there’s a change in technology or a way entertainment is filmed or broadcast for consumers, film studios and mass media conglomerates of today are there to reap extremely massive rewards for what we give them. We want the content, and they are more than willing to find every way possible to give us this content. First it was by film. Then it was television. After that, it became home media. Now, the latest way to feed us our electronic opium is with the streaming of content and services. This has changed the game dramatically. For decades, since the first WGA and SAG strike of 1960, the formula for writers and actors to receive compensation on television was by episode. An episode is made, and they get paid. And, as structured, a television series would create and air a series for an order of 22 to 24 episodes a season. Of course, if a show runs weekly, that’s roughly six to eight months of compensation. Most people, like you and me, have to work 12 months to live normal lives. So what makes up for the other six months that they are not working are the negotiated residual paychecks that they receive when their work is broadcast on television. For example, I am a huge Law & Order: SVU fan and have probably watched every episode of the series. It stars Mariska Hargitay, who is paid per episode that is made. However, what has allowed me to watch every episode isn’t by watching it on NBC when it airs. But I’ve been able to catch up and watch on the USA network, ION and also MyTVZ. And every time Law & Order: SVU airs on those networks, Mariska Hargitay gets paid a residual income for work she did during filming of the show. Those additional airings supplements her income. And while Mariska Hargitay is very good and very prominent on the show, the reality is that the vast majority of actors on these series are not. The writers definitely aren’t either. So their compensation isn’t as high as many assume. They have to work for a living, which birth the term “working actor”. These are performers that find jobs and are looking for regular employment throughout the year. That is why network shows like Law & Order, Chicago Fire, NCIS, or The Simpsons, shows with long runs, are a reliable source of income for an actor. However, with the industry’s turn to an increase production on streaming content, this has changed. In fact, it has changed so dramatically that the actual workers in the industry have not remotely been able to keep pace.

The difference between network shows and streaming shows is the length. Whereas most broadcast shows are typically over 20 episodes, most streaming shows are less than half that amount. Broadcast shows were made to be vehicles for advertisment. Streaming services have no need to cater to advertisers to that extent, so they do not need to have seasons to span 6 to 8 months. They can be structured for shorter seasons, which could require 2 to 3 months of work. On top of that, the the studio can sell a show to a stream service and instead of the show being sold to and rerun on multiple network for continued income for the work that was actually done, writers and actors only receive a single residual from the streaming service. So not only are they working less, they are also receiving less income. So when Mark Hamill performed in The Mandalorian, he was paid for his work. But when I watch Luke Skywalker rip through a spaceship full of troopers 20 to 30 times a year, Mark Hamill isn’t paid 20 to 30 different times. He gets paid once.

On July 13, the same day the SAG-AFTRA strike was announced, the CEO of the Walt Disney Company, Bob Iger, did an interview with CNBC on the future of Disney as well as it’s relationship with consumers and labor disruptions. He said it was “disturbing” to him to see the writers and actors to go on strike and said that they are not being realistic in their expectations. This is keeping in mind that he is the CEO of the company that owns the film studio that hired Mark Hamill for his singular residual. I pay $10.99 a month for a Disney Plus subscripton, which allows me to watch Mark Hamill’s character destroy a hallway full of robots as often as I want. Bob Iger ostensibly receives residual income from my monthly subscription as I watch Mark Hamill’s character destroy a hallway full of robots every month. Mark Hamill received none of that. He does not receive income for his work that I consume and enjoy, nor would he receive income for the work he did that is digitally copied and used. If I write a book and that book is sold, I will receive income every time that book is sold. And I don’t need to personally write every copy I sell to receive that income. So why is it not realistic for someone to expect to be compensated for their work in the same way?

In Star Wars and Rogue One, the characters were fighting against the planet destroying monstrosity called the Death Star. There’s a line(written by a WGA writer and performed by a SAG actor) that asked what chance they have, and the character responded by asking what choice do they have. Bob Iger and other studio executives made the decision to change their business model to focus on streaming projects. This has made it harder for writers and actors to work and to live normal lives. Is there a chance that this strike affects the industry as a whole? Yes. But one side is living very comfortably, and the other side has members living check to check. Unfortunately, they really have no other choice… they deserve the chance to live happily ever after like the rest of us.

Exactly 200 years ago, in 1823, Alexander Twilight graduated from Middlebury College in Vermont. Alexander’s father, Icabod was of mixe raced, as well as his mother Mary. Those facts would be of very little consequence for the next three years until Edward Jones, the son of a emancipated slave from South Carolina graduated from Amherst College in 1826. Amherst College decided to make note that Jones was the first African-American to graduate from an American college. However, when Middlebury College found out about this, they looked at Alexander Twilight, saw that despite him being, at best, a quarter black, he was still sufficiently African-American to be deemed the first actual African-American to have graduated college in United States history.

That was 200 years ago. For 150 years after Alexander Twilight’s mariculation, there were thousands of other African-American graduates of higher education to include the likes of Edward Mitchell, David Peck, Sam Ford McGill, Macon Allen, Ida B. Wells, Carter G. Woodson, Edward Bouchet, Booker T. Washington, W.E.B. DuBois, Patrick Healey, George Carver, James Weldon Johnson, and Thoroughgood Marshall. Among these are the first African-Americans to graduate medical school, or to pass the bar, Ivy League Graduates and even University Presidents. Also among these names is Kellis Earl Parker.

Born in Kinston, North Carolina, Kellis Parker was a lawyer, activist, and scholar. The son of a small business man, Kellis, like many Black kids growing up in the 50’s and 60’s, developed an early interest in music, with him and his brothers starting their own jazz band. It was this very passion that brought him to the path of activism when, as a teenager, he challenged a city ordinance that kept musical groups segregated in the town’s festivals. After high school, Kellis continued his activist streak, becoming one of the first five enrollees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 1960. At North Carolina, he was involved in the student chapter of the NAACP, boycotted business in Durham that refused to intergrate, became a delegate to the United Nations International Students Conference and was elected to represent UNC at the National Student Congress in 1963.

Kellis Parker would complete his undergraduate studies at North Carolina in 1964 and continue his studies at Howard University Law School. At that time in America, there were just over 200,000 black students enrolled in the U.S. colleges and unversities. In ten years, that number had increased to over a million. From 1960 to 1975, the rate of Black enrollment in higher education increased at a rate of more than three and a half times that of total enrollment growth.

So what happened?

Did we all of sudden just get smart in 1960s? Did black people collectively have a eureka moment after the “I Have A Dream” speech? For 200 years we had a piecemeal yet relatively paltry number higher education graduates, but in the last 50 years it has been more than the prior 150 combined because, according to the United States Supreme Court, we just up and decided “maybe we should start going to college.”

The only way this is possible is because it was MADE possible.

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10925. The order instructed federal contractors to take affirmative action to ensure applicants are treated fairly without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin. This is the beginning of Affirmative Action in America. Alone, judicial and legislative acts were not sufficient to reach the promise of equality we granted in the Declaration of Independence. Yes, Brown vs. the Board of Education desegregated schools, but it was only when these schools took action and made a plan to recruit promote their willingness to accept candidates of color did it make a difference.

It was the only way. The reality is Black men and women, like ALL men and women, have always been fully capable of everything our white counterparts are, but for our entire history, those capabilities have been staunchly denied. But we persisted, and Affirmative Action programs were there to make sure of it. We simply would not have intergrated and achieved if the opportunity was not there. And the opportunity was ONLY given when Affirmative Action plans were developed and implemented. And, as designed, they worked! The poverty rate for Black families was nearly 35% in 1967. In 2000, it dropped to under 20%. The median income for black families went from $11,000 in 1955 to nearly $24,000 in 1975, which was a higher increase than the rate of all families. Outside of numeric and economic improvements, Affirmative Action’s main goal was to intergrate and diversify a racially homogeneous America and it was doing exactly that. Putting Black and Brown faces where we have historically been denied and the consequence of that has force those who never knew or accepted our agency and ability to see we are fully capable of the exact same achievements as they are. That is the only way to show equality, through action.

But we have seen this story before. The same forces that fought against equality and diversity have been fighting that fight and winning it for years. And those fights have born fruit. Several schools have previously banned Affirmative Action programs over the last 30 years and the results are clear. Studies have shown the number of Black and Brown students enrolled at flagship state universities did not match the share of high school graduates in those same demographics and it did nothing but widen the gap over time. Ironically, a Harvard study found that states that have either banned or overturned Affirmative Action laws have shown a significant decrease in Asian female, Black female, and Latino male representation compared to states that had no such prohibitions. In short, Affirmative Action worked, as designed and without it, it the ill-effects of systemic racism and bias WILL increase. This is not even debatable.

Kellis Parker might have been one of the first Black men to attend the University of North Carolina. The irony that it is his very univerity that is at the center of the United States Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the very action that allowed for him and millions more to achieve what we has historically been denied is not lost. This is a bad decision by a historically bad Court. This is just the latest decision in a bank of decisions that have crippled a nation that does not match their judicial ideology. We are NOT the minority here. They are. But we have been here before. Only difference is that now we have clearly shown what we are capable of when given the opportunity. Affirmative Action is and was that opportunity. Let’s just hope it doesn’t take another 200 years to get back.