"Screw the Internet!" is what my dad yelled at me the first time I told him to watch a video streaming on YouTube. It took me three weeks to persuade him that it was worth his time to figure out how to watch the infamous "numa numa dance" video that was seen by hundreds of thousands people and remains one of the prime examples of why Internet video is, without a doubt, the future of visual media. Now here's the problem: While we know that Internet videos are the key to success in the entertainment industry, no one knows how to take that knowledge and and profit from it. When the Writer's Guild of America decided to strike just over two weeks ago, it was because they knew this fact. The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers refuses to give the writers the money they want for the same reason. My question is: Where is all of this money coming from?Yes, key points of the strike are over residuals to be paid for the sale of DVDs, (like VHS, writers receive four cents on average per disc sold) and the sale of television episodes and films being sold via Internet-only outlets like the Apple Store. But the body of the fighting, which is spilling over into those more concrete arguments and making all of this moot, is everyone's desire for a slice of the online pie. Both sides are asking the question: At what point does using the Internet to play proprietary material mean that the consumer is actually using said product? In other words, when we watch TV on the Internet, are we actually watching TV?

The answer is, at least in my mind, a hard-nosed yes. As I've said time and time again television is a valuable commodity because it is the vein through which we are all given the opportunity to have a common experience. For better or worse, television, and now the Internet, have the ability to shape our thinking by expanding our wealth of knowledge to include new stories, regardless of how outlandish, or seemingly trivial. This leads to why I have taken up the battle cry of my father. While watching videos on the Internet connects people via a common experience, it further isolates people because it makes the viewing process much more solitary. Watching TV alone is fine, but I find that the shows I enjoy the most are the ones that I watch with others. When used to stream videos, the computer has the potential to be much more of an idiot box than the TV has ever been.

However, it seems like Internet videos are already beginning to learn from their forefathers. Most mainstream sites that feature streaming video include some kind of advertisement. Just as with television, the producers are making some money, and while the producers need the extra revenue to cover the increasing cost of making TV and film, the writers need that money to eat. If a writer's show gets cancelled or if he gets canned, he doesn't just start writing freelance; finding a job often means waiting until the next break in production when teams need to be reconstructed. Writers live off residuals, which is money paid to them for the shows they wrote that get replayed for months at a time. The doctrine of fairness says give the writers what they want; they deserve to be as rich as any actor or producer, but they almost never are.

Now, as the scripts begin to run out (only two more episodes of Heroes!), we are privy to the beginning of the end. Next semester is teeming with crappy, worthless reality television. Yes, there are some new shows that are starting in January, but very few of them will be able to last without writers to polish scripts or even finish their miniseasons. So I would ask of you, cable-watching compatriots, is to support the writer, the man behind the scenes. Yes, an actor can give a great performance, but a great writer can make a bad actor look good or let great actors push themselves further than they've ever gone. This industry cannot survive without the writers, so why not treat them like it?