• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, January 3, 2008

So what did the Writers Guild of America get from Worldwide Pants anyway? Apparently nothing from TV advertisers, which is the only bit of good news for marketers.

From what we know, Worldwide Pants says its pays its writers' residuals directly -- and that includes the Internet.

But here's what CBS said, in a statement: "CBS controls the Internet exploitation rights for both programs, and will comply with any eventual negotiated agreement between the AMPTP and the WGA."

What was the exact formula of those Internet streams? According to Worldwide Pants, producer of "Late Show with David Letterman," the company agreed to almost exactly what the WGA originally proposed back on December 7.

That would seem to be a residual for Internet streaming of full-length episodes, based on a percentage of the existing broadcast minimum, to be paid again after every 100,000 views of an episode. The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers' most recent proposal offered a percentage-based residual for a year's worth of Web streaming that worked out to about $250 for an hour-long episode.

One thing for sure: The deal wasn't in any way based on what advertisers pay for those streams.

While CBS doesn't control Worldwide Pants, it still is responsible for the advertising. The WGA has made waves about how much money advertisers spend on digital streams -- revenue writers feel they should get a piece of. CBS controls that revenue stream -- but it doesn't control any WGA deals that Worldwide Pants makes.

It seems those streams have to be "full-episodes." So here's a couple questions: Who is going to monitor that? Better still, who can really get that information?

For a while now, advertisers have groused that, among other things, they can't get an accurate count of unique visitors to a particular stream -- one visitor may use two computers; two visitors may use one computer, for example.

But a bigger issue is that no one can get a true read on who's seen a complete episode. They know when people arrive -- but they have no clue when they leave.

WorldWide Pants can get access to that level of Internet information. But are they going to hire a separate firm for the post-research audience analysis? Will this conflict with whatever eventual deal CBS makes and monitors via David Poltrack and his research area?

TV marketers should be cheering Worldwide Pants' deal, but it doesn't affect them -- at the moment. Fresh late-night programming in January can only help to ease the difficult situation of declining gross ratings points, which are drying up faster than a prune in the desert.

Overall, network executives don't seem to be in much of a rush to get a deal done. That's not what TV advertisers want to hear - which is why reports says major media agency executives are trying to have some talks with the WGA.

Why? Do networks really believe TV marketers will take any and all reality show crap that's dished out in February, March, and April?

TV marketers don't like that picture, which is why they are putting themselves in the picture.