http://deadline.com/2014/11/cbs-films-lionsgate-distribution-sales-partnership-1201283340/

The article I read is about Lionsgate and CBS films will become partners entering the new year. The partnership is more on the business side of thing and  expected to show great promise as the two companies already produce great revenues world-wide. The two companies had already partnered up in the past can released successful films and TV series.
I chose this article because two big name entertainment companies are going to be working together and it interested me to see what collaborating they would be doing. This article is important because when two big name companies decide to work together, there is always a reasons for this. I remember hearing that Lionsgate films did not produce as much profits as previous years, so this collaboration could be an attempt by Lionsgate to get some back by working with a successful company. As a student and filmmaker this shows me that even successful companies have to ask for help. As a consumer this shows me that two big name companies are going to be working together and kind of raises my expectations for the quality of the films. This article raises a few questions in my head, such why the sudden partnership? Could Lionsgates failure in the film department cause this partnership? Why would CBS agree if Lionsgate is having a slow year in the film department?

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-aereo-layoffs-20141106-story.html

The article I read is about Aereo Inc., which is a company that broadcasts TV signals, being accused by the Supreme Court  for breaking copyright law. The company, since, has announced that it will be laying off employees. The controversy started in when the Supreme Court found out that the company was streaming "local TV stations’ signals over the Internet via remote antennas, charging customers $8 to $12 a month for the antenna and a cloud-based digital recorder." According to the supreme Court this violated the Copyright Act. The company said that they laid off 43 workers.

This is important because is shows how  there are many laws and guidelines the entertainment industry/ companies must oblige to. This article caught my attention because it said that Aereo Inc. was laying off its employees and I thought, to myself, I wonder why? In my opinion I think the employees should not have been laid off. The fault was done by the company by illegally broadcasting local TV signals; the workers were just doing their jobs. This shows me that there is a dark side to the entertainment industry. You could be working for a company that is illegally doing something and you might not know about. However in this case it is unknown if the workers laid off knew about the illegal activity. As a consumer/ filmmaker it makes me wary of the  entertainment industry, I mean if you company was conducting illegal activity, who knows if other may be doing so too.     

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-warner-bros-to-cut-annual-costs-20141015-story.html

The article I read is about Warner Brothers reporting bad profit over the summer; to compensate for this they plan on cutting their budget by $200 million yearly. The article says that Warner Brothers will being laying off people as early as November. Although the amount of people that will be laid off is unknown, it is expected to be a large amount."We are firmly committed to IMPROVING our margins," Tsujihara said. "Through that process we have committed to cutting costs significantly."
I thought this article was important because it shows how one of the top companies in the entertainment industry must cut back due to the low revenues of the summer. This affects me as a consumer because as the budget is being cut, the quality of their productions will reflect it, which makes me question if I should even pay to watch it. This affects me as a filmmaker because the film industry suffered a huge blow this summer not producing as much revenue as the previous year and due to this companies must cut their budgets. What if I wanted to take up a career in the film industry? The budget cut is only making it harder so people to get into the industry. The Warner Brothers budget cut makes me wonder; if the entire film industry suffered a big blow of the summer and WB is cutting its budget, who's next? Will WB still be able to produce the same level of productions after the budget cut/ lay offs? 

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/alibaba-leads-chinas-multibillion-dollar-736705

This week I read article about how Alibaba, one of the richest companies in the world, is said to be looking into buying a movie studio. Alibaba is marketed to be worth over $200 billion and has a "vault" of $25 billion. Alibaba has already purchased movie studios in china and also has purchased other companies to increase their corporation
.  This article is important because Alibaba holds a strong influence in social media in China, the fact that they are considering investing in U.S. based movie studios means that the film industry could expand even more. As a consumer this impacts me because if a rich company plans on investing in a movie studio than we can hope to see better movies as budgets would be higher and movies will not be restricted by money in a sense. As a filmmaker this influences me because the possible investment in a movie studio could lead to new developments within the industry itself. However this article raises a few questions, like if a Chinese based company buys a U.S. based company would will that effect the economy? Also how would this effect the movie studio? would it help it?    

http://deadline.com/2014/09/drones-hollywood-faa-approves-841265/

This week, I read an article about how drones can now be used as camera platforms in America. Before, the film and T.V. industries were restricted to man operated helicopter on American soil; if they wanted to use drones, they would have to go to another country. However, only 6 aerial photo companies are allowed to use drones on productions at the moment. It is said that this will support job creation, revenues, and movie and T.V. production in the U.S.  
This is important because it gives the film and T.V. industries new means of filming. There are no longer as many restrictions in America on using drones as camera platforms. This opens up endless possibilities to what types of shots and scenes can be produced.  This impacts me in a number of ways such as a consumer; I can expect to see possible more films, filmed in the U.S.. As a filmmaker It gives more possibles of shots that will better depict what is happening. 
The legalization of drones on American soil as camera platforms is good and all but raises a few questions.  Will this even affect film and T.V. industries? I believe it will; companies won't need to leave the country if they use drones as camera platforms. What differences do drone camera platforms and man operated helicopter camera platforms have? Man operated helicopter camera platforms are more dangerous and costs more money. How will it affect U.S. economy? it is said that it should encourage film industries to stay and film in america, creating more possible job opportunities and thus helping the economy. 

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/onlocation/la-et-ct-creative-caucus-event-20140910-story.html

This week I decided to read an article about how people from the film and television industry held an event in Washington D.C. to show "lawmakers a behind-the-scenes look at the 'creativity, talent and innovation that drive the American film and television industry.'" The event was held on Wednesday September 10, 2014 and included actors, makeup artists, costume designers and story board artists giving a sense of what the industry is about. The said purpose of the event was to remind Congress members of how influential the film industry is to the economy and society.  
I choose this article because I found it interesting how the film industry must "remind" congress members of  about "the economic value of U.S. entertainment industry", as if there as a need to. The entertainment industry provides the people with jobs and according to the article, "The motion picture and television industry supports nearly 2 million workers and annually contributes $41 billion to over 300,000 businesses, according to the MPAA." I believe that Congress members and the entertainment industry are both well aware of the contribution the industry has on the U.S. economy and just used this event as a way to gain attention for both parties.
I feel that this article influences me by exposing me to the relationship of Congress and the entertainment industry; the relationship being purely business. It exposes me to how influential the entertainment business truly is. I did not know that the entertainment industry played that much of a role in the U.S. economy and makes me wonder if Congress uses the entrainment industry to spread its ideas of laws and such. Oh course, I know that they do, but to what extent? 

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-fi-summer-box-office-20140902-story.html

This week, I read a Los Angeles Times article about the film industry's summer box office gross decreasing as compared to last years.  They said that this summer the industry grossed $4.05 billion as opposed to last year's $4.75 billion and that the industry had the worst May to Labor Day season since 1997. This is rather peculiar as the price of tickets (in the U.S) decreased by 15%; this decrease in price was presumed to attract more people. Reports also showed that no movie grossed $300 million (domestically) for the first time since 2001. The blame of this gross decrease is put on the movie studios for not providing films that get people to want to watch them.
  
This article shows significance because the movie industry grossed a total of $4.05 billion as opposed to last years $4.75 billion. This shows that movie studios did not meet the expectations of many film watchers. This could also be a sign that the movie industry could slowly be dieing out. Right not it is only a 5%
decrease but if this gradually continues who knows what could possible happen to the movie industry. I feel that the decrease of movie gross over the summer this year does not impact me directly as a student, but as a filmmaker and consumer it raises ideas such as the possibility of the film industry slowly dieing. The article also implies that movie studios are not meeting the demands of what film watchers want to see within movies. As both a filmmaker it causes problems for me because I watch movies to help inspire my own movies and if the general people watching the movies don't like them then what are the odds people will like my ill inspired film. As a consumer I feel that the movie industry gross decrease is a sign that movie studios can not produce something new and exciting. They are sticking to what they know as as the article says,"The studios might have played it a little too safe after reaching last year's heights. The industry focused on franchise films that have delivered hits in the past and avoided taking chances on expensive fresh offerings." and I agree completely. Movie studios should be producing movies are both new in story plot and get's people's attention.
This article raises questions/ideas such as "Is the movie industry dieing?" and "Are movie studios running of of ideas for movies?"  These question/ ideas are raised because as the article said the movie industry grossed less money this summer than last year. Although its could be due to the 15% ticket price drop it could also be the movie industry's lack of ability to produce something worthy of watching.