Officially, the WGA recognizes story and revised story, draft, two revisions and a production polish as the standard MOW writing steps. (6 steps total). There is always debate as to what specifically constitutes a polish (e.g., how much work is involved) and sometimes the production polish may be used as a step and an additional polish during pre-production is purchased independently. Frequently the production company will ask the writer for minor changes before submitting the official draft to the network.

During production colored pages are churned out daily, even with scripts that change in indiscernable ways. These are minor changes which may not involve the writer, dealing with location specifics or names which may have legal clearance problems. You rarely hear the song "Happy Birthday" in a film even when a writer scripts it. It is copyrighted material and is not public domain until (I'm guessing here) 2006. You frequently hear the song "For S/he's A Jolly Good Fellow" which is in the public domain and no one really sings in real life but frequently does at birthdays in TV. Writers may fix a line of dialogue which doesn't quite play. Sometimes a writer will be called to approve a suggested specific change. The WGA protects the writer's efforts (as they should) and allows very specific changes without the writer's consent.

Sometimes a troubled script or rush job (usually a true story in competition with a rival network's version of the same story) may be written while being shot. Not always the best experience in the world, but it happens. I did a true story once that was ordered as soon as the word "Guilty" was out of the judge's mouth and we were writing throughout the entire production. The Director did the rewrite, which was great, but that film was about six years ago and I suspect he's still catching up on his sleep. A true story, a network staple, has a million legal issues to deal with. Before shooting, text that has passed creative muster must also be approved by lawyers and standards departments as well as insurance companies protecting the film from lawsuits (Errors and Omissions or "E&O"). It's a lot of work, and a lot of cost to write as you shoot. It happens, though.
Back to the questions

Do you usually work with the original writer all the way through? Is it common to bring another writer in?

I am very proud of having worked on over 60 films at the network and replacing only one writer (over differing creative sensibilities) in the entire course of that. There were two cases where the writers asked to be replaced for various reasons. Both were true stories and in one case the writer was exhausted by the massive requirements of a very high concept fact-based story based on a rather notorious scandal involving some very famous people. The other had to do with the actor attached to play a glamorous period Hollywood biography. She was concerned about dialogue that she felt wasn't working. I told her I did not want to give up on the writer but named the writer I knew would come to the rescue if necessary (having already discussed this with the dialogue polish writer). I also told the original writer, whom I enjoyed working with, that there were specifics our star was looking for. At the end the writer said he felt comfortable being rewritten on the dialogue. (Whether this writer was being honest or gracious I don't know, but I felt pure respect for him and would happily work with him again, this being a business of reputations. I don't know if he would work with me again, but he made me feel he would and I consider the experience honorable all around.) I felt this was proof of my basic belief that honesty, is indeed the best policy.

I don't like to replace writers. I believe the writer/producer relationship is a creative marriage and it behooves both parties to learn how to share the blanket, which is also in the best interests of the children (the film).
Back to the questions

As producer, how much impact do you have on the script? Do you ever rewrite them yourself?

I'm a producer, not a writer, and don't presume to do the task of someone else. As the producer, however, my creative sensibility has tremendous impact because (everyone, in unison please) MOWs are a producer's medium. I will work with the writer as much as they want to while they are writing. I will meet at great length to talk about scenes that I would like to see in the film, long after I have hired the writer based on my conceptual thoughts on the film (e.g., the statement I would like to have the film make must be the guiding premise in the film. When in doubt, revert to the concept. It would be foolish of me to hire a writer who doesn't see my concept in the material. That's why I insist on meeting with writers before recommending to the network.) I am available around the clock for a writer in need, and will check in while they are working since the story is critical and the first draft will take the writer 4-6 weeks to write.

I am very awe-struck by the onerous task of filling over a hundred blank pages with black markings that make sense and would never presume to interfere with someone's process. If I were a writer, I would want to work with a producer like me, but if I wanted to write a MOW I would have to find someone else to produce the script. We have our assigned roles, partly in order to create a forum for appropriate response and criticism.

I wouldn't mind writing but have no idea if I have the aptitude. I wrote a sit-com pilot once because I felt it was important to try to fill those pages. I trained in theatre and like to work with creative people. That's the only reason I do this for a living. If I didn't love being part of a collaborative creative process, I wouldn't do it. If I didn't do this, I would take a non-emotionally-involving or time-consuming job and trade in the spare time for a great time working in theatre (even community theatre) and a personal life; both of which I have had to give up large chunks of in order to do something I seem to be compelled to do. I believe that's the only reason to be in the arts. Success is luck and timing and a lot of preparation. Art, on the other hand, is a noble bondage. If you can free yourself from it, by all means, you should.
Back to the questions

MOWs seem to have changed over the years. You don't see many "Execution of Pvt. Slovik" or "Bang the Drum Slowly" kinds of films now; they seem to be more "reality-based" and even tabloidy. Do you agree? If so, what accounts for the change?

I agree with the fact that MOWs have changed; but you're also citing examples of a form in its early days and commenting on what has happened to it since. While I think many Network TV MOWs have become more reality based, I think they have always been tabloidy (e.g., exploitive). I haven't seen a film with"Centerfold" or "Portrait Of A ..." in the title, for instance since the highest rated NBC film of 1982 was called "Policewoman Centerfold", and I don't think teen prostitution movies have changed all that much since "Dawn, Portrait of a Runaway" or "Off the Minnesota Strip".

The forum is extremely topical and issue driven. "A Case Of Rape", the first major rape-themed TV movie seems a little parochial today; its message: rape victims are victimized continually through the process of recovery from the assault. The very real issues of that film have been superceded because of public awareness of victimization and the rights of victims to compassionate treatment. The public awareness exists in part because of MOWs which reflect specific issues and attitudes about them. I don't know if "Shogun" would work today, but the success of "Gulliver's Travels" indicates a marketplace for epic literature. (The networks are developing movies and mini-series based on "The Odyssey", "The Time Machine" and "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" for example, partly in imitation of the success of Gulliver.)

The market is changing and often finds new success in its old forms. There are over 150 original MOWs made each year for a growing number of venues (original movies are on CBS, NBC, ABC and FBC, but add to the mix: Family Channel, Disney Cable, Lifetime, USA, HBO, Showtime, TNT as well as A&E [for which I am producing an original 2-hour movie], PBS and any number of other outlets I'm forgetting. And consider that the more personal stories have found smaller niche markets. This year, Lifetime, for instance, did Jessica Savitch, middle class heroin use, a Nazi resistance film among their originals; HBO did Rasputin, "The Late Show", "Marilyn and Norma Jean" and TNT did their epic Westerns and "The Heidi Chronicles", among other films. Add "Gulliver's Travels", "The Beast", the many Larry McMurtry westerns and, of course, the true crimes to the familiar stories of stolen babies, battered women and rapes and you have a pretty varied program.

I would say network audience erosion has made the need to play safe more significant as the advertisers balk at increased costs for lower numbers. I would say NBC's movie franchise has been very successful at creating a marketplace for films about young girls in roles that were traditionally played by an older leading lady - on NBC, it seems Tori Spelling, Kelli Martin, Candace Cameron, Melissa Joan Hart are tending to play roles that CBS tends to cast with Judith Light, Lindsay Wagner, Marlo Thomas, Cheryl Ladd, Patty Duke and the late Elizabeth Montgomery and Lee Remick. There is still event TV. This year there were films with Jessica Lange, Kathleen Turner, Ted Danson, Lou Gossett, Jr., Maureen O'Hara (!) Lolita Davidovitch and any number of people I'm forgetting. I occasionally get dispirited by what seems to be a sameness in the product I'm involved in but the truth is my development and production right now consists of a best-selling spiritual book, a pulp fiction piece from the 50s, a "these are the times we live in" true crime (in the tradition of a successful film I worked on a couple years ago, "A Friend To Die For" based on a Rolling Stone Article called "Death of A Cheerleader"), a family drama, a totally fictional piece I wrote the concept for and a thriller based on unknown but contemporary crime technology. As someone who plays even money to keep myself working, the mix is more heartening than disheartening. I love each of the projects for different reasons and when I look at them individually, I really can tell them apart.
Back to the questions

What is the ballpark figure paid for the rights to an average true story?

It depends, since there is no average figure. A story a lot of people are chasing will go for more than a story you find. I've seen rights designated different ways. If someone's are the only rights necessary to tell a story, a TV Movie will probably pay them between 25,000 and 50,000 if the movie is made, with some percentage of the money traditionally paid to option the rights and the large payment saved until the film is made. Most rights deals assume the first year is a percentage which may be applied to the purchase price, while the second year is non-applicable at the same rate. Thus a 40,000 rights purchase for a story that took more than one (but less than two) years to develop into a film with a 10% payment structure would end up costing the producers 44,000, paid as follows: 4,000 (10% applicable to the 40,000 purchase price, leaving 36,000 when the film was made) plus the non applicable 4,000 for the second year and the balance of 36,000 paid when the film either went into production or wrapped production.

Deals are flexible and involve many issues. At the end of the day, the network is going to a pay a fixed rate for the picture, so the goal is to spend less money for things that don't show on screen and try to get as much on the film as possible. Sometimes additional rights may be required so you want to leave yourself some room in the rights payment category to cover additional rights, or transcript costs (for a trial) or consulting fees for experts, etc.
Back to the questions

What does a network pay, on average, for a MOW script?

The network will start an unproduced writer with the WGA minimum for two-hour broadcast network MOW fees. (The Guild has rates for every length and type of programming you can use a writer for.) There are different rates for different kinds of writing: adaptation of books, research-based scripts, etc. A writer is also given a production bonus, which is usually the essence of a complicated negotiation for a writer and, frequently, a fly in the ointment. The WGA minimum is around 42,500 for a MOW, but I haven't looked at minimums in a while so please assume this as a ballpark figure. The WGA will happily provide the exact information but be prepared to know exactly what the project is. A network will increase the writer's price by degree, based on the success rate of the writer and how frequently the writer works. Sometimes one network will not recognize what another network has paid a writer as a cost determinant. Frequently a network will reuse a writer, which can make it difficult if you are trying to get them work at another network. WGA also guarantees residual payments for the life of a film. I have no idea how residual structure works for writers.
Back to the questions

Is an annotated script required for true-story MOWs? If so, is its submission required before or after the deal is made?

Annotated scripts are required for fact-based. I will ask each network for the current annotation guidelines as soon as a film is put into development and give the guidelines to the writers as soon as they are hired. Annotation is required in part for standards: the networks each decide what the accreditation of "A true story" (almost never used unless pure transcript is being used), "Based on a true story" (a very hard designation to get), "Inspired by a True story", "Inspired or suggested by Actual Events", etc. Audiences like watching stories that have something in them that they perceive as real and the networks need to protect their ability to tell the audience what it is getting.

Legal departments are understandably worried about the network's financial and legal responsibility with respect to what they say about people who have a right to protect themselves from being defamed in front of millions of viewers. Although E&O coverage protects a producer from massive settlements, the networks are concerned about people going after the vast financial resources of the network, or even expensive nuisance suits. Annotation is indeed part of a fact-based writer's obligations. I'm doing one now for which the writer has kept the notes but has a deal protecting him/her from actually having to do the annotation. FBC required substantial annotation on SBTL, which although based on a book had to substantiate claims it made about the central character's two clinical deaths as well as about characters portrayed within the film. It might seem otherwise, but the requirements of docudrama are massive, and somehow, so are the latitudes of storytelling even when done within the context of these requirements.
Back to the questions

How much time elapses, on average, between a network's purchase of the rights to a true story and the airing of the completed MOW?

The nice thing about MOWs is that they usually take about a year to make. If it isn't made in the year, or at least clearly headed towards production, something's rotten. So why the second year option? Because I've had the material for some time before submitting it to the network, during which time I've played with it and shaped it into what I hope will be saleable form. The network may spend time considering the project. (In one case of a film I'm now doing, the network waited seven months before putting it into development.) Then the writer search begins - usually a two month process. Then the writing period. Figure four weeks of preliminary research on a fact based, involving the trip and the sorting of facts. Figure another 4-6 weeks to turn that into a story. If there are notes on the story (remember, this is the critical step, in my mind), figure another 4-6 weeks for revisions. In between these steps, also figure a week of my notes before turning it into the network. Figure 6 to 10 weeks for first draft, plus my week for notes before turning it into the network and figure 4-6 weeks for the two revisions. Separate and apart from that, try and schedule a meeting with a group of people who are doing their jobs, taking their vacations, handling their crises and add another 6 weeks of random time. If the film is ordered, it's going to take at least a month to agree on how much the film will cost/be licensed at and to cast the lead. Add eight weeks of pre-production (ideal, but frequently as few as six, during which locations are found, crews are hired, script is polished, non-leading roles cast, etc.), add another 4-5 weeks total production and eight weeks minimum post-production. Then the movie is aired and over in two hours.

At the network, by the way, I had 75 such projects in development at one time, took as many pitches each week, and supervised, in a single year, as many as 23 pictures (and that year I simultaneously exec produced "Fall From Grace: Jim and Tammy Bakker" for the network's in-house company). Most writers who have done a few pictures are doing more than one simultaneously, and as a producer I've got about 40 sets of stories at any given minute that I'm trying to sell, while developing my films that the networks have said yes to. You do the math, because I get confused.