|
I absolutely love Friday Night Lights. I have watched every episode twice, and I just finished watching the first season again on DVD (the one and only Christmas gift I bought myself). Every time I watch it, I think of home, and how great it is to see Austin spotlighted on national television. The news this morning, then, was a bit troubling to me. From the Statesman: "Strayhorn slams city for not paying 'Friday Night Lights.'" Candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn is blasting the City of Austin for not paying any of the money it offered the NBC show in a 2007 incentive deal. The city had agreed to give NBC $40,000 a year for past and future seasons if it kept filming "Friday Night Lights" in Austin and met contract terms. The show, now in its third season, has yet to see a dime. City officials say NBC hasn't shown that it complied with key terms of the contract. But Strayhorn said the show, which chronicles folks in a football-centric Texas town, deserves to be paid because it achieved the purpose of the deal: pumping millions of dollars into the local economy and promoting Austin as a film-friendly city.
I should point out that the article states that both Brewster McCracken and Lee Leffingwell have every intention on handling the situation. The question, then, is simple: Is this a real thing, or is Strayhorn just rambling? I think: Strayhorn is just rambling. First of all, achieving the "purpose of the deal" is not sufficient reason to pay anyone. If I'm hired to do contract work and I don't do it, then I haven't fulfilled my contract. That's pretty simple, and it says a lot about Strayhorn's non-existent business sense that she wants to hand out funds just because. Secondly, the article goes into pretty solid detail (good reporting by Statesman reporter Sarah Coppola) about the circumstances. There are provisions in the contract that NBC has, apparently, not fulfilled. That includes provisions such as what percentage of the cast and crew are hired from Austin, and whether or not the show names Austin in its credits. But beyond that, the City of Austin has money set aside for the show already -- once there is confirmation that it's been paid. So clearly the City Council hasn't been ignoring the problem or they wouldn't have any money set aside. Finally, there appears to be a little history of contract disputes with NBC and the state. A quick Google search brought me this article from August 2007 in TV Guide: "Friday Nights Location Crisis Averted" It came thisclose to a move out of the Lone Star State for Year 2 of NBC's critical darling Friday Night Lights. "Texas didn't follow through on the rebates promised when we based the production in Austin," says Aimee Teegarden, who plays the coach's daughter Julie. "NBC said, 'We're going to move.' It was talks about money. Arizona and New Mexico were both anxious to have us and offered incentives, so I was expecting our show to leave Austin."
"Aimee's right," says executive producer Jason Katims. "We were scouting new location bases and were courted by the other states' film commissions, but the network and the appropriate people in Texas settled things. I can't provide specifics, but it worked out so we could remain in Austin."
So to recap: - You don't hand out contract money for "good intentions" if the provisions of the contract haven't been fulfilled
- The city has money set aside for the show; clearly they're not ignoring the problem
- There's some history to this; more than likely, a reality of dealing with a mega-company like NBC
Strayhorn would do better to set aside the fake outrage and focus on how she plans on doing anything of actual substance. Like writing her concession speech.
|
