Richard Goldwater, President and Co-Publisher of Archie Comics, died last Tuesday. He was the son of John Goldwater who, together with partners Louis Silberkleit and Maurice Coyne, formed the company now known as Archie in the late thirties. (The firm was originally called MLJ Publications with those letters standing for Maurice, Louis and John. Archie Andrews debuted in 1941 and soon became so popular that the whole company was renamed in his honor.)

In the grand tradition of nepotism that ruled almost every comic book company from the forties through the sixties, Richard Goldwater went to work for his father's company around 1950, focusing primarily on editorial content. He was 14 or 15 years old at the time and by 1957, he'd assumed real editorial duties. In much the same way, Michael Silberkleit (son of Louis) joined the firm but he was more interested in the business end of things. In the early eighties, Richard Goldwater and Michael Silberkleit formally purchased Archie Comics, Inc. from their fathers, the interests of the Coyne family having been acquired some time earlier. Richard soon handed the main editor job to Victor Gorelick but remained involved in creative decisions.

I'm afraid I don't know a lot more than that about Richard Goldwater. I presume the company will put out some sort of obit/press release and that they'll have better information than I do and more of it. I'll post a link whenever there's something to link to.

From the Washington Post…

U.S. military reports from the scene of the Sept. 16 shooting incident involving the security firm Blackwater USA indicate that its guards opened fire without provocation and used excessive force against Iraqi civilians, according to a senior U.S. military official.

The reports came to light as an Interior Ministry official and five eyewitnesses described a second deadly shooting minutes after the incident in Nisoor Square. The same Blackwater security guards, after driving about 150 yards away from the square, fired into a crush of cars, killing one person and injuring two, the Iraqi official said.

Yeah, but they really hate us for our freedoms.

Luke Foster wrote a nice article about our silly comic book, Groo the Wanderer. Some of you might want to give it a read.

This was one of those "goose flesh" television moments for me…the opening ceremony for the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. As usual, a relay race of athletes carries the torch to the stadium and the organizers try to pick someone special to take the final handoff and light the cauldron that signifies the commencement of the competition. This clip runs a little over eight minutes and if you don't know who the final torch handler was, do yourself a favor. Take the time to watch the whole clip — that's Dick Enberg and Bob Costas narrating, I believe — and see if the finale doesn't give you a wonderful little tingle. It does that for me every time I watch it.

Two reporters from the McClatchy newspaper group fact check George W. Bush's statements about his veto regarding the State Children's Health Insurance Program. I don't know if Bush is lying or just misinformed but neither reflects well on the guy.

Finally solved my computer network problem. After trying 7,378 other possible solutions, I found the right one. I installed a piece of software two weeks ago and its makers don't tell you that it has an unadvertised networking component that runs continuously in the background and is of no use whatsoever to me. I found a website where someone divulged the tip-top secret method of uninstalling it and when I uninstalled it, my computers suddenly began speaking directly to each other. Whew.

I have to tell you: I'm getting really sick of software that adds in all sorts of extra, surprise components. Anyone here install the current Nero Burning Rom? Or the software that comes with new Hewlett-Packard printers? I just want the thing I bought to work, people. I don't need your bonus image library software or your desktop (or Yahoo Desktop or Google Desktop) or your search engine or — especially — your memory resident networking and updater software. At the very least, you could tell us about these things before we innocently slap them onto our C Drives.

As you may have heard, there's a movie coming out this Christmas based on the musical play by Stephen Sondheim and Hugh Wheeler, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. That's great timing because when I think of Christmas, I immediately think of a serial killer slashing throats. Johnny Depp has the title role and Tim Burton directed and though I like (not love) the stage version, I find myself curiously unexcited about the film.

That may change but it isn't changed by a two and a half minute trailer which can be viewed here. You can also view it via the film's website where you can also download Sweeney Todd wallpaper and Sweeney Todd buddy icons. And aren't there enough sickos prowling our chat rooms without people identifying themselves via Sweeney Todd buddy icons?

The trailer, as you'll see, does its best to hide the fact that this is a musical. There's very little singing, no mention of Broadway and even Evelyn Wood couldn't read fast enough to see Mr. Sondheim's name. It will be interesting to see if the marketing folks maintain this approach as they get closer to the release date.

I'm also curious if Sondheim has written any new tunes for the film, particularly with an eye on the Academy Awards. As you may know, it is not uncommon when a musical is adapted to the screen for new songs to be added. The old songs are not eligible for the Best Song Oscar but a new one is. Sometimes, a composer who'd like to win one will make that a condition of the sale; that he must be engaged to write a couple of new ones so he can maybe score a statuette. Sometimes, the producers want it because they think it a new song or two will enhance their soundtrack sales and also, of course, a Best Song Oscar wouldn't hurt the film's box office. And sometimes, of course, new tunes are introduced for creative reasons.

This is why you got "Mean Green Mother from Outer Space" in the film version of Little Shop of Horrors. It's why Marion the Librarian sings "Being in Love" instead of "My White Knight" in the movie of The Music Man and why Adelaide sings "Pet Me, Poppa" instead of "A Bushel and a Peck" in the film version of Guys and Dolls. It's why the film version of A Chorus Line, along with doing almost everything else wrong, replaced "The Music and the Mirror" with "Let Me Dance For You" and it's why Dolly Parton wrote new songs for Best Little Whorehouse in Texas even though she didn't write the show when it was a stage musical.

One might note that when a stage song is replaced by a new song, the new song is inevitably inferior and it usually doesn't win an Oscar. ("Mean Green Mother" is probably the best of the ones mentioned in the above paragraph…and I don't think it's insignificant that it didn't replace a song in the original show. It was just an add-in.) If anyone can improve on a Sondheim score though, it's Sondheim. It'll be interesting to see if he tried.

Recently, for no visible reason, one of my computers decided to stop talking to another of my computers. I have three here and they're all networked. C can connect to A and B. B can connect to A and C. A can connect to C but cannot connect to B. When I attempt this, I get a message that says it is not accessible and adds, "You might not have permission to use this network resource. Contact the administrator of this server to find out if you have access permissions." Since I am the administator of it all, I have no idea what to ask myself or how to answer me.

But it's weirder than that. I have a program called Network Magic installed on my computers. It's a utility that comes with DLink routers and it monitors your network and allows you to tinker with settings, and you can even network your computers through Network Magic. A can connect to B that way but not via the standard Microsoft Windows Network. This would make everything fine except that I can't run my sync/backup utilities through the Network Magic network. They only run through the Microsoft Windows Network where A can't connect to B.

Last evening, a gent who knows more about computers than I will ever know was here for four hours, tinkering and trying to make things right. I was disappointed that he couldn't fix things but I also had that quirky bit of pride that he didn't do any better at solving the problem than I had.

I spent another hour or two this morning, playing with settings and trying odd things. I'm down to, "Well, there's no earthly reason why this should make a difference but I'll try it anyway." And now, I'm going to make a concerted effort to forget about it for a while and turn my attention to deadlines and work that must be done. That may be the hardest part.

We all have old commercials that resonate in our heads for a long, long time. This was one of my faves for many years…

Today, George W. Bush vetoed a (sorta) bipartisan bill that would have dramatically expanded children's health insurance. It's okay to spend money we don't have for the Iraq War, even if billions of those dollars disappear mysteriously or go into corporate pockets without actually aiding the war effort. But trying to improve health care for sick kids? Well, we can't have that.

I don't think anything has lowered my opinion of Bush more than a "let them eat cake" statement he made not long ago at an appearance in Cleveland…

The immediate goal is to make sure there are more people on private insurance plans. I mean, people have access to health care in America. After all, you just go to an emergency room.

…spoken like a rich guy who has never had to rely on an emergency room and never will. As if our emergency rooms weren't already flooded with sick folks…or as if going to an emergency room and not paying the bill because you can't afford it is a workable alternative to real medical care. You wonder if before Bush signed the veto forms, he paused to realize that because of his actions, a certain number of children whose deaths could be prevented would die. Probably not.

The L.A. Times has an obit up for Charles B. Griffith, the screenwriter whose list of credits included the original Little Shop of Horrors, which we were discussing here the other day. I note that in the obit, star Jonathan Haze is quoted as saying the film has two days of principal photography but "three nights of second-unit work supervised by Griffith and actor Mel Welles."

And beneath that, the Times has a obit for Randy Van Horne, whose singing group performed (it says) on the theme songs of Huckleberry Hound, The Flintstones, The Jetsons and other shows. There's a nice bit of immortality. Those tunes will be played from now 'til the end of time.

This is Jon Stewart's conversation with Chris Matthews on last night's Daily Show. Every so often, and this is an example, Stewart just talks to his guests in a candid, non-formula way that is honest and refreshing and therefore sadly unique in broadcasting today. He clearly didn't like Matthews's book and unlike most hosts, didn't feel he had to pretend otherwise. (He also clearly read it and didn't have to pretend he had, which is what too many hosts do.) I thought it was such a remarkable discussion that even though it's one of those flaky Comedy Central links, I'm going to take my life into my hands and embed it for you here.

Incidentally, I was also impressed, though less so, with Matthews's sportsmanship, sense of humor and ability to rise to the occasion. A lot of guests on book tours go on a show like this armed with their canned, rote responses which are sufficient because the hosts are asking canned, rote questions. I don't always "get" Matthews on his own show. He seems all over the map on some issues…like he thinks most of what Bush does is phony and hurtful but every so often, he seems to have this odd man-crush for the guy's macho swagger. He's often very good at changing the subject just as a guest is nearing a substantive point. It'll be interesting to see what happens if and when he has Stewart on his show.

Mike Hagan, a reader of this site, writes to ask…

I've been reading your blogs about the seemingly pending strike by the writers. I find it interesting to follow what happens as my parents were both teachers and members of the teachers union. While prohibited from striking (state law in Missouri because they were teachers), they did get the "blue flu" and try other tactics during negotiations with administration. So, the topic is interesting to me.

But, I've discussed the idea of the strike with friends and they keep asking me, "What is the point of having a writer's union in today's world?" I don't have a good answer. So, as part of your series, I think it would be great if you could address the issue of why the union is still relevant and why it is still necessary. Because, it seems as well, that there would be enough other writers out there willing to cross picket lines and replace current writers.

I think the point of having a writer's union in today's world is sharper than ever. With all the new technologies and the rapidly-changing business models out there, it's harder than ever to figure out the math. Could you dope out what would be fair compensation for the use of your work in "webisodes?" Or direct-delivery DVD rentals? Or the means of marketing that they're going to invent in five years to exploit the material you're writing this year? The folks who control the finances of this business — the Producers — have row upon row of highly-paid experts to research these strategies and the companies consult with one another and enter into cooperative ventures and partnerships. You can't negotiate with them on a one-to-one basis. They're too big and you, all on your own, are too small.

Actually, the point of a writer's union is crystal-clear to those of us who've worked in both animation (which is often not covered by the Writers Guild) and live-action (which is). I've worked for some studios like Disney under both arrangements and the difference is staggering. On the animation deals, my agent had to spend days negotiating terms that are standard in a WGA deal…even things like a clause governing screen credits. In the absence of one, they can just about put any damn name they want on the material so on a non-WGA project, we have to work all that out and it isn't easy. Because the WGA has a whole credits manual and a well-established arbitration process and a committee and precedents…and on a non-WGA project, we have to figure out a system that's fair without being able to access all that.

Even when I've had a lot of clout, the resultant deals — the ones we were able to negotiate without WGA coverage — lacked certain basic protections, like enforcement. Several times on animation projects I've written, the studio I was working for violated my contract in a way they would never have attempted on a WGA show. On a WGA-covered show, they knew, the guild would step in for me with its lawyers and handle matters. To do it on a non-WGA show meant that I'd have to go out and pay my own lawyer which, in two cases, I did. In one, I spent tens of thousands of dollars on legal fees before they paid me off — the full amount plus my attorney expenses. An exec there who left the firm later admitted to me that they often tried to get out of paying writers that way and that it usually worked. They presumed — correctly — that most writers wouldn't or couldn't spend that kind of money to go to court and would instead settle for lesser amounts. Around the office, they called it the "post-negotiation." After you'd done the work, they'd negotiate with you how much of the agreed-upon fee you were actually going to receive.

Most TV and movie writers — and by "most," I'm guessing upwards of 97% — are quite solidly behind the whole concept of the Writers Guild. Even if they haven't written animation, they've written something for a crooked publisher, a weasely editor, a slimy non-union producer. It can be shattering because the kind of work we do causes us to often lead with our hearts and therefore become quite vulnerable to exploitation. Often, we have to expend more energy on getting paid and protecting our legal rights than we expend to create the work…so we're delighted to have an entity like the WGA that's there to do all or most of that for us. If and when we strike this time, the Producers will spread the claim, as they always do, that the membership of the Guild isn't really behind its leadership. They always claim that and it's never true.

As for non-guild writers: Sure, there are plenty of them out there. But they're not interchangeable with the folks who walk off the job when there's a strike…just as if there's an actor's strike, the studio that's producing the next Tom Hanks movie is not going to replace him with an unknown who'll cross a picket line. They're going to wait for Tom because Tom is who they want, who they believe they need. They wouldn't pay Tom Hanks umpteen million per movie if he could be replaced with that unknown guy. And they wouldn't be paying mega-salaries to the folks who write The Office or the CSI shows or Desperate Housewives or any top show if they thought they could get by with the kind of writer who'd come in and do scab work. They would already have hired that guy if they felt he could do it because he'd be a lot cheaper.

There's a little more to it than this but I need to get back to an assignment. So I expect there'll be more here in the days to come on this topic.

I love "consumer protection" investigative reporting and wish this nation's local news teams did more of them. Some time ago, I called your attention to a series that the Los Angeles NBC affiliate, KNBC Channel 4, did on the Jiffy Lube chain. Armed with hidden cameras and hard questions, they revealed dozens of cases where Jiffy Lube employees had charged customers for unnecessary repair work that often was not even performed.

Well, Channel 4 is at it again. This time, their target is the Home Depot chain, specifically their home repair and construction services. If their report is to be believed, Home Depot often does the same thing to homes that Jiffy Lube does to cars. This page will take you to transcripts and video of the five segments that KNBC has done so far on this investigation. It's about what you'd expect — consumers getting ripped off — but it's still shocking.

You'd think that after the Watergate and Whitewater scandals, people would learn the following: That if you're starting a government-related enterprise that might someday get investigated, don't use "water" in its name. The Blackwater company oughta get dumped by the government just for not being smart enough to know that.