Chances are you didn't notice, or even care, but the longest strike in the history of "the industry" (that's the entertainment industry to you non-LA folks) ended on October 23rd. The strike pitted SAG (Screen Actors Guild) and AFTRA (American Federation of Radio and Television Artists) against two large advertisers' groups, and centered around how actors should be compensated for cable and Internet ads.

Unfortunately, there never was a shortage of commercials, because they were just shot outside the U.S., during the strike. A few real people were affected, of course, but since the number of SAG and AFTRA members who actually make a living at their craft could all gather in a small room, with plenty of space left over for the make-up crew, the job action garnered little buzz.

On the very same day, though, another interesting entertainment employment issue erupted.

Twenty-eight screenwriters filed a class-action lawsuit against the major TV networks, movie studios, and talent agencies, alleging that a systematic pattern of age discrimination has denied them employment on dramas and situation comedies.

Most of the 28 in the class are writers with substantial credits, who are not only over 30, they are mostly over 40!

A report commissioned by the Writers Guild of America found that nearly 75% of members age 30 or younger were employed in 1997, versus 46% in their 40's and 32% of those in their 50's.

While discrimination on the basis of age per se is clearly wrong, the circumstances inherent in this case merit a closer look. And, don't forget to count up the ironies.

Starting in the late 1960's, the baby boomers came into the biz, and crowded out many of the old pros. If age discrimination existed as a legal theory then, not too many people heard of it. Flash forward 30 years, and what goes around comes around.

There probably are some producers who think that only the young can write for the all-important youth market. Never mind that the most successful film of all time, Titanic (1997), was written by a guy then in his 40's. Never mind that the keys to its success were hardly revolutionary: a compelling historical event, the promise of great special effects, the love is a tragedy theme, and a hero prettier than the heroine--to assure that teen-age girls would pay to see the movie 20 times.

Never mind either that there is nothing new under the sun! If you provide the right mixture of sex, violence, and loud music, the project practically writes itself. Am I missing something here?

Arthur Eisenson, one of the 28, told the media that, "This solution [the lawsuit] is the last thing I and my peers ever thought about-- it's the law against age discrimination."

Sure thing, Arthur.

In an industry so politically correct and Leftist that coming out of the closet these days refers to a Hollywood conservative revealing himself as such, and "God" is most usually a dyslexic reading about a canine, you didn't think about portraying yourselves as victims, and seeking redress in the courts.

Never in a million years.

The lawsuit that won't ever be filed is the one on behalf of creative types who have been blacklisted because they don't subscribe to the industry's politics, morality, and ethics. I promise you, that class is far larger than 28, and far more persecuted than the 1950's Hollywood Ten.