There’s Nothing Left to Squeeze, Say TV Network Bosses

While Hollywood is the main battlefield in the writers strike, writers and producers acknowledge that three New Yorkers--the chief executives of the three major television networks--wield enormous power in the dispute.

To date, ABC, CBS and NBC have backed the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers despite the likely devastation of their fall prime-time schedules. The networks buy programs from the producers, but they also belong to the alliance, principally in their capacity as producers of TV movies and other shows.

Writers Guild of America leaders have predicted that the networks, preferring not to suffer long-term damage just for the sake of studio profits, will urge producers to loosen their bargaining stance.

The studios have lobbied hard to keep the networks in line, arguing that only by a tough bargaining stance with the guild can they produce affordable programs in the future.

The Times asked Capital Cities/ABC Chairman Thomas S. Murphy, CBS President Laurence A. Tisch and NBC President Robert C. Wright about their views on the impasse.

Murphy and Wright responded. Tisch did not.

Are the networks being damaged by the strike?

Both said their companies are being seriously hurt.

“The damage is both short-term and long-term,” said NBC’s Wright, who added that his company may feel extra-sharp impact because its top ranking in the ratings gives it the most to lose.

In his words: “We had fundamentally the strongest promotional opportunity (for fall shows), with viewers watching the Olympics and World Series. We stood to gain immeasurably by introducing our new fall schedule (on time). It was an unprecedented opportunity for us. This will have long-term impact.”

Despite the promise of some temporary programs, ABC’s Murphy said that even the daytime soap operas--which have operated with non-union writers--are hurting. “The ratings aren’t exactly (great), you know,” he said.

Some analysts have predicted that the TV networks might reap a short-term profit because they’ll still get some advertising dollars this fall, but won’t be spending for expensive programs.

“Anyone who believes that is kind of kidding himself,” Murphy said. He expects profits to be hurt--and predicts that the ABC and CBS networks will show losses for 1988.

Are the cable services going to gain at the expense of the networks because of the strike?

“The absence of new fall programs is extremely negative to us at a time when cable is gaining,” Wright said.

“Even our own ESPN is competing with us,” said Murphy, referring to a cable sports network owned by Capital Cities/ABC.

So why have the networks backed the alliance--by refusing, for instance, to buy new programs from companies that sign interim agreements with the guild?

Because “there’s no more water in the mop,” said Murphy, who views the producers’ stance as part and parcel of the cost-cutting campaign he launched when Capital Cities took over ABC in 1986.

Plagued by losses and declining audience share, he claims to have squeezed about as much cost as he could from network overhead in New York. Now, he said, it is up to Hollywood to attack program costs, a big share of which are passed on to the networks.

Wright similarly believes that Hollywood programs cost too much, and that a line might as well be drawn with the writers as anywhere else.

“It isn’t just the increases in program costs that disturb me. It’s the fundamentally high cost of programming. This is very, very expensive,” he said.

Won’t the networks lose their last chance to salvage some sort of fall season if the strike isn’t settled within a week or so?

“It’s too late for that question,” Wright said. “There is nothing to be gained by us doing anything else. The programs (we want) are in the hands of the alliance. There are no comparable programs. There is no place else to go. . . . For a number of shows that were important to us for the fall, it’s already too late. We already missed them.”

Why did things get this bad?

“I can only guess,” Murphy said. “It’s always difficult when any industry has to cut back. Unions are going to resist that. They’re going to feel, ‘Why are we being singled out?’ ”

Wright--apparently assigning blame to networks, unions and producers alike--said: “We’re killing the very business that pays the bills at the most critical part of its life cycle. From what little I can see . . . we’re dealing with a lot of emotion here and not a lot of economics.”