View Full Version : Hot Off The Press! The Latest Television News and Info
TV Notebook
Live on 'Oprah,' a Memoirist Is Kicked Out of the Book Club
By Edward Wyatt The New York Times January 27, 2006
In an extraordinary reversal of her defense of the author whose memoir she catapulted to the top of the best-seller lists, Oprah Winfrey rebuked James Frey, the author of "A Million Little Pieces," on her television show yesterday for lying about his past and portraying the book as a truthful account of his life.
"I feel duped," Ms. Winfrey told Mr. Frey. "But more importantly, I feel that you betrayed millions of readers."
She added: "I sat on this stage back in September and I asked you, you know, lots of questions, and what you conveyed to me and, I think, to millions of other people was that that was all true."
In the three months after Ms. Winfrey chose "A Million Little Pieces" as part of her television book club, more than two million copies were sold, making it the fastest-selling book in the club's 10-year history. Alternately appearing to fight back tears and displaying vivid anger at the author and his publisher, Nan A. Talese, who heads an imprint of Random House's Doubleday division, Ms. Winfrey stared straight at Mr. Frey and asked, "Why would you lie?"
"I made a mistake," Mr. Frey (pronounced fry) replied, adding that he had developed a tough-guy image of himself as a "coping mechanism" to help address his alcohol and drug addiction. "And when I was writing the book," he said, "instead of being as introspective as I should have been, I clung to that image."
It was a stunning bit of drama that had people throughout the publishing industry glued to their television sets yesterday afternoon.
The confrontation on Ms. Winfrey's show was the culmination of events that began with a report on Jan. 8 by The Smoking Gun, an investigative Web site, that found multiple discrepancies between Mr. Frey's life and his account in the book. Among the site's findings were that Mr. Frey had spent only a few hours in jail, not nearly three months as he had written.
On Jan. 11, Mr. Frey appeared on CNN's "Larry King Live" and, while acknowledging that he had fabricated some parts of his account, defended its overall message. "I still stand by my book. I still stand by the fact that it's my story. It's a truthful retelling of the story," he said. In a last-minute call to Mr. King's show, Ms. Winfrey defended the book as the "essential truth" of his life and said the controversy was "much ado about nothing."
But yesterday Ms. Winfrey apologized to her audience for that call. "I regret that phone call," she said. "I made a mistake and I left the impression that the truth does not matter. And I am deeply sorry about that, because that is not what I believe." She added, "To everyone who has challenged me on this issue of truth, you are absolutely right."
She then confronted Mr. Frey about his fabrications, leading him to admit that in addition to exaggerating the amount of time he had spent in jail, he had lied about how his girlfriend had died; about the details of a foray outside a rehabilitation center; and about his claim that he had received a root canal without anesthesia because the center prohibited the use of Novocaine.
"I think most of what they wrote was pretty accurate, absolutely," Mr. Frey said yesterday of the Smoking Gun report.
Ms. Winfrey also acknowledged that she had received an early warning that parts of "A Million Little Pieces" were fictionalized from a former counselor at the center where the book takes place. Eight days after she picked the book in September, a former counselor at Hazelden, the Minnesota treatment center now identified as the one where Mr. Frey stayed, contacted her producers and told them that many parts of the book were untrue.
Ms. Winfrey said that she had had her producers ask the publisher about the allegations, but that they were reassured the book was accurate. She had harsh words during the broadcast for the publisher, Ms. Talese, who said that neither she nor anyone at Doubleday had investigated the accuracy of Mr. Frey's book. She said the company first learned that parts of the book had been made up when The Smoking Gun published its report, nearly two years after the memoir was first published.
"An author brings his book in and says that it is true, it is accurate, it is his own," Ms. Talese said. "I thought, as a publisher, this is James's memory of the hell he went through and I believed it."
But Ms. Winfrey pointed out that her producers had asked about reports of the book's truth in September, after the Hazelden counselor raised doubts, and that they were reassured by Random House.
"We asked if you, your company, stood behind James's book as a work of nonfiction at the time, and they said absolutely," Ms. Winfrey said. "And they were also asked if their legal department had checked out the book, and they said yes. So in a press release sent out for the book in 2004 by your company, the book was described as brutally honest and an altering look at — at addiction. So how can you say that if you haven't checked it to be sure?"
Ms. Talese replied that while the Random House legal department checks nonfiction books to make sure that no one is defamed or libeled, it does not check the truth of the assertions made in a book.
Ms. Winfrey replied, "Well, that needs to change."
In a statement issued yesterday afternoon, Random House's Doubleday and Anchor Books divisions, which published the book in hardcover and paperback respectively, said they were delaying the printing and shipping of any more copies of "A Million Little Pieces" to include statements from both the publisher and the author noting that "a number of facts have been altered and incidents embellished."
Mr. Frey's second book, "My Friend Leonard," published by Penguin's Riverhead Books, has also been a best seller. It includes a disclaimer that some names and details have been altered, but makes no mention that some events — like the opening anecdote, which takes place during a jail term that it is now clear Mr. Frey never served — are complete fiction.
In a statement, Penguin said it was considering what action to take regarding its book. About a contract it recently signed for two more books from Mr. Frey, the company said: "The ground has shifted. It's under discussion."
Mr. Frey has previously said he offered "A Million Little Pieces" to publishers first as a work of fiction, then as a memoir. But he has also said that in changing the book's designation from fiction to nonfiction, he did not change anything in it.
One former publisher said he believed that the publishing industry would have to change its practices at the behest of its biggest patron, Ms. Winfrey. Laurence J. Kirshbaum, who recently retired as the chief executive of the Time Warner Book Group and who now runs his own literary agency, said in an interview yesterday that "there is no question what she said will have a far-reaching impact on our business."
"Agents, publishers and authors are all going to have to be much more cautious in the way they approach the nonfiction market," Mr. Kirshbaum said. "Traditionally, publishers have not done fact-checking and vetting. But I think you are going to see memoirs read not only from a libel point of view but for factual accuracy. And where there are questions of possible exaggeration or distortion, the author is going to need to produce documentation."
Mr. Frey had previously claimed that he had documents supporting his story. In an interview in December with The New York Times, Mr. Frey said that he had provided more than 400 pages of medical records and other documentation for his book both to his publisher and to Ms. Winfrey's producers. Among the records, he said, was proof of his claim that he received a root canal without anesthesia.
Asked yesterday by Ms. Winfrey about the dental episode, he replied, "I wrote it from memory," a statement that elicited gasps from Ms. Winfrey's audience. He added, "I honestly have no idea" whether or not he received Novocaine or any other painkiller.
The more Mr. Frey revealed, the more heated his confrontation with Ms. Winfrey became. "Since that time, I've struggled with the idea of it — " he began to say in reference to his root canal, only to be cut off by Ms. Winfrey.
"No," she said, "the lie of it. That's a lie. It's not an idea, James, that's a lie."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/books/27oprah.html?ei=5094&en=bf37f10b148fef57&hp=&ex=1138424400&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print
About Television
There Isn't Enough Good Entertainment to Go Around
Michael Hiltzik: The Los Angeles Times
Buried not far beneath the surface of Tuesday's media merger announcements was an acknowledgment of two facts of life well understood by oil drillers, pro sports managers, and landfill operators: There are finite riches in the world to be mined, and limited room to dump your garbage.
The UPN and WB, which will be folded into a single television network, foundered on the reality that, just as a sports league's aggressive expansion often dilutes the talent on its rosters, there simply isn't enough compelling entertainment material to go around. (Alternatively, there hasn't been enough savvy managerial talent to go around.) The same can be said for the animation business, which saw two of its most significant players, Disney and Pixar, walk down the aisle.
The proliferation of new cable channels, entertainment devices and production studios during the last decade was rationalized partially by the notion that the availability of audience-grabbing content would expand in lock-step with the opportunities to see and hear it.
UPN and the WB both debuted in 1995 with the expectation that, after a ramping-up period, they would have enough solid programming to compete with the existing four broadcast networks on prime time all week long. The same year saw Pixar's initial public stock offering and the release of its first feature, the monster hit "Toy Story" — an event that led its management to believe it could hold its own as an independent studio indefinitely.
A similar theory animated the 1994 founding of DreamWorks SKG: that there was sufficient creative talent uncommitted and available in Hollywood, and enough demand, to generate new revenue from movies, television, video games, music, and Internet content. The day the venture was launched, one of its founders, Steven Spielberg, told The Times that he didn't expect to cannibalize customers from the other studios so much as expand the pie. "The market can expand if the movies are there and people want to see them," he said. "The notion of 'competition' doesn't apply."
Yet, despite the allure of Spielberg and the two other founders, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, DreamWorks never found a formula for lasting success on its own. Last month it agreed to be acquired by Paramount Pictures Corp. (itself a founder of UPN), in a deal that reflects Paramount's recognition that the fastest way to turbocharge its lackluster roster of projects is to buy an existing pipeline. In much the same way, Disney's acquisition of Pixar will enable it to revivify its stumbling animation unit by importing a boatload of new blood all at once.
As for UPN and the WB, neither of the upstart networks has been able to program a consistently profitable prime-time slate. UPN has lost $1 billion since 1995; now owned by CBS Inc., it has never had a profitable year. The WB, a venture of Time Warner, has had two profitable years in its history, but is expected to lose about $35 million this year.
That's not to say that either network has been without what passes for a hit in this age of diluted TV audiences. The series "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" was launched in 1997 on the WB — from which it was raided in 2001 by UPN. The former also had a hit in the teen demographic in "Dawson's Creek" for several years, starting in 1998. At this moment, its top-rated show is "Gilmore Girls," ranked 77th by Nielsen; UPN's highest-ranked program other than pro wrestling was "Everybody Hates Chris," a critical favorite produced by Chris Rock, mired last week at No. 109. (One of the network's more popular shows, "America's Next Top Model," is currently on hiatus and therefore not ranked.) Of the 20 lowest-rated shows in prime time last week, 15 were on WB or UPN.
The expanding availability of entertainment in myriad new formats has made it even harder for also-rans to stay in the race, but the phenomenon works differently on different companies. New formats such as iPods, webcasts and video game consoles make inroads against traditional media such as broadcast TV; but they haven't yet presented many opportunities for the sale of new material by content providers like Pixar and DreamWorks.
Rather than expanding the market for novel, niche or unheralded material, the new tend to load up on material that has already proven its popularity on the old. Currently, the top 10 TV downloads from Apple's iTunes Music Store for the new video iPod include three episodes of ABC's "Lost" (which was ranked No. 9 on the Nielsen ratings last week), two of ABC's "Desperate Housewives" (Nielsen No. 5), and three of NBC's "The Office" (No. 44, but with desirably youthful and improving demographics).
Interestingly, the networks say that the on-air ratings of these shows improve as downloads increase, more evidence that as new viewing modes proliferate, the rich merely get richer. (It's worth noting that one of the few moguls well-positioned to profit no matter how media content gets viewed is Steve Jobs, the chairman of Apple and Pixar and soon to be the largest shareholder of Disney, the parent of ABC.)
As for the Internet, as a breeding ground of new entertainment talent, so far it's largely barren. Companies from Ifilm to Amazon.com have tried to make a commercial mark with Web-only film clips, but it wouldn't be surprising to learn that the most popular downloaded moving pictures on the Web (outside of pornography) are snippets from "The Daily Show" or "Saturday Night Live."
The ever-receding horizon has made media investors very skittish. The resounding critical and commercial success of every feature film Pixar has ever made tends to obscure the reality that it has released only six full-length films in 10 years, and faces more competition in the computer-animated feature market every year from full-service studios.
A craft that flies on one engine, no matter how swift, can give its passengers a bumpy ride; when Pixar announced last June that DVD sales of "The Incredibles" had fallen short of expectations, its shares fell more than 15% in two days. Nor can an independent studio such as DreamWorks sustain many flops like "The Island," a would-be blockbuster that cost an estimated $126 million to produce and returned a paltry $36 million at the U.S. box office last year.
All this helps account for the alacrity with which media companies founded in an era of lavish expectations have lately gone looking for shelter. To paraphrase Norma Desmond in "Sunset Boulevard," their dreams were big; it's the reality that stayed small
http://www.latimes.com/business/custom/cotown/la-fi-golden26jan26,1,6256089.column?coll=la-headlines-business-enter
About Television
Broadcaster says serious news at risk
By Jan Sjostrom , Palm Beach Daily News Arts Editor
The anchorman whose boss once characterized him as ice compared with his successor's fire was anything but chilly in the impassioned speech he delivered Tuesday at The Society of the Four Arts.
"Truth no longer matters in the context of politics and, sadly, in the context of cable news," said Aaron Brown, whose four-year period as anchor of CNN's NewsNight ended in November, when network executives gave his job to Anderson Cooper in a bid to push the show's ratings closer to front-runner Fox News.
Brown said he tried to give viewers a balanced diet of light and serious news with NewsNight. "But I always knew when I got to the Brussels sprouts, I was on thin ice," he said.
When NewsNight spent four hours covering the arrest of actor Robert Blake for the murder of his wife, Brown received thousands of e-mails criticizing the amount of time the show spent on the story. Nevertheless, that show, which aired in April 2002, received the highest ratings of any program since NewsNight's coverage of the November 2001 crash of American Airlines flight 587.
"Television is the most perfect democracy," Brown said. "You sit there with your remote control and vote." The remotes click to another channel when serious news airs, but when the media covers the scandals surrounding Laci Peterson, the Runaway Bride or Michael Jackson, "there are no clicks then," the journalist said.
With the departure from the screen of the "titans" — Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings and Dan Rather — who "resisted the temptations of their bosses to go for the ratings grab, it will be years before an anchorman or anchorwoman will have the clout to fight these battles," he said.
Brown has spent most of his 30-year career in television news. He's covered everything from the Columbine High School murders to the aftermath of the space shuttle Columbia disaster. But viewers may remember best his on-the-spot coverage of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.
He's shocked "by how unkind our world has become," he said. E-mail and talk radio appear to have given people the license to say anything, regardless of how cruel or false it may be, he said.
He cited the example of an e-mail faulting what the sender considered to be NewsNight's inadequate coverage of an anti-war protest in Washington, D.C. The note ended with, "I hope the violence visited on the people of Iraq will someday be visited on your children."
Those on the opposite side of the political spectrum are no more tolerant, Brown said. "Any criticism of the administration is regarded as hatred of the president and hatred of the country itself," he said.
Important issues, such as the prosecution of the war in Iraq at home and abroad, are being clouded over by "mud-wrestling" that skirts substance, he said. Consider what he called "the swift-boating of John Murtha," the Democratic congressman whose war record was smeared when he called for an exit strategy in Iraq. "Cable didn't search for the truth, but engaged in mock debates pitting those making the charges against Murtha's defenders," he said.
Many Americans on the left and the right aren't interested in the truth, but simply want news that confirms their viewpoints, he said. "You'd think that it's no more complex than good vs. evil," he said.
Journalists have fallen short in presenting important news in ways that allow viewers to see how it matters in their lives. But viewers must take up the battle as well, he said. "It's not enough to say you want serious news. You have to watch it. It isn't enough to say you want serious debate. You have to engage in it."
http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/content/news/brown0126.html
Sports On TV
Study: Ad time in Super Bowl is on the rise
MediaLifeMagazine.com—It’s not your imagination: There are more ads during the Super Bowl than ever before.
During last year’s game between the New England Patriots and Philadelphia Eagles there were a staggering 43 minutes of commercials, up seven minutes over the 1996 game, according to a TNS Media Intelligence report issued this week.
Busch leads all Super Bowl advertisers over the past 20 years, spending some $230.5 million. Second is Pepsi at $180 million and, in a distant third, General Motors at $55.8 million.
According to TNS, in 2005, a 30-second spot during the game cost $2.4 million, bringing in total ad revenue of $1.59 billion to Fox.
This year the price has crept up to a reported $2.5 million to $2.6 million.
The study also found that the average Super Bowl creates more ad revenue than the average World Series or Final Four, despite the fact that those two feature multiple games (The Final Four is three games, the World Series between four and seven).
Study: Young people watch Bowl for ads
Despite a noticeable lack of clever and engaging Super Bowl ads over the past few years, the number of people who watch the game just for the ads seems to be on the rise.
According to a survey conducted by BIGresearch for the Retail Advertising and Marketing Association,15.3 percent of respondents said the most important part of the big game is the ads. That’s up from 9 percent who said they watched for the ads in a similar survey conducted by Eisner Communications last year.
The ads seem to be most popular among people 18-24, 18.5 percent of whom said they tune in for commercials. Another 12.5 percent of all respondents said they watch the game to socialize, and 4.6 percent watch to see the halftime show and assumedly any potential wardrobe malfunctions.
http://medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/cat_index_31.asp
About Television
NBC's blast to the past: Perry & Sorkin
MediaLifeMagazine.com—It looks like NBC sees the past as a key to its future.
The network, which has seen ratings slump in the past two years, is bringing former “Friends” star Matthew Perry back and teaming him with another past network all-star.
Perry has signed up to play the genius comedy writer in a drama pilot written by “West Wing” creator Aaran Sorkin. Sorkin’s new creation, which he developed with “Wing” collaborator Thomas Schlamme, is a set behind the scenes of a fictional TV comedy show along the lines of “Saturday Night Live.”
Reports surfaced last week that Perry had failed to reach a deal to appear in the new show but that apparently changed. Also starring in the show, previously titled “Studio 7,” will be Steven Weber and D.L. Hughley.
NBC paid a huge sum for the show’s pilot, $3 million, and it is expected to make the network’s fall schedule.
Perry is the third Friend to headline a show since “Friends” exited two years ago.
Matt LeBlanc’s “Joey” is on hiatus at NBC, and Lisa Kudrow’s “The Comeback” on HBO was cancelled.
http://medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/cat_index_31.asp
About Television
UPN and WB: We'll profit from this merger, too
By Kay McFadden Seattle Times TV Critic
The play's the thing wherein the TV coffers go ka-ching.
This week's merger of The WB and UPN into one network contains giddy financial possibilities for its 50-50 owners, CBS and Warner Bros. Television. With a focus on 12-to-34 viewers, the emergent CW can rake in revenue from the iPod set and other new media users. Driving these groups to ad-sponsored Web sites and cellphone numbers won't be hard.
But it couldn't happen without content. The lesson of the deal is that success in television still rests on creating shows with great story lines and characters, whether they're make-believe or reality.
That will become clear as CW executives get a rare opportunity to ruthlessly winnow out weak performers and create a fall lineup likely to pair programs such as "Gilmore Girls" and "Veronica Mars."
Even more than the delicious prospect of a crossover episode in which Veronica stares Lorelai and Rory into silence, I'm looking forward to what's bound to be a network worthy of attention six nights a week. CW prime time will run 8 to 10 p.m. weekdays and 5 to 10 p.m. on Sundays.
My guess is that in a season or so, it will resemble a younger version of CBS, with a focus on scripted series and the remaining schedule given over to a few consistently high-rated reality series. "The Amazing Race," "Survivor" and "Big Brother" will have their equivalent in "Beauty and the Geek," "America's Next Top Model" and "WWE Smackdown!"
Even better for us, emphasis will be placed on program development and giving decent shows time to catch on. Leslie Moonves, an ex-actor who once headed Warner Bros. Television and has spent the past decade building CBS into the No. 1 network, believes in attracting audiences the old-fashioned way. His former UPN chief, Dawn Ostroff, will run CW.
The transition will be relatively easy because The WB — despite being at the bottom of the ratings heap lately — also embraced this philosophy.
It's a model other networks could follow: consistency, quality and not yanking around viewers.
I'm thinking specifically of NBC, which will end "The West Wing" in May.
Last year in New York, when networks announced their 2005-06 lineups, NBC couldn't praise "West Wing" enough. NBC Chairman Jeff Zucker noted it drew one of the network's highest-income demographics and had the charts to prove it.
Yet NBC shifted "West Wing" to Sunday nights, where it sank in the ratings. Big duh. The move was made to accommodate "The Apprentice: Martha Stewart" and "E-Ring" on Wednesdays, and you know how well that turned out.
That was a case of going for the short grab instead of the long haul. Meanwhile, NBC entertainment head Kevin Reilly has said the network won't bring back "Joey" — a star vehicle that asphyxiated from lack of writing support. Also being put out of its misery in May is "Will & Grace." The short-run series "Book of Daniel" just bit the dust after four episodes.
Let's hope NBC, whose lone Top 20 series performer last week was "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit," takes development, patience and viewer loyalty to heart.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Another network that could use stability even as it brought back America's biggest hit is Fox.
"American Idol" blew past all competitors last week. The network also nailed second place with the Seahawks-Panthers match-up, which drew 35 million viewers nationally and was the fourth most-watched show of the entire TV season.
This is all good news. Still (and tossing in "24" and "House"), comedy and drama series at Fox have been streaky. Sunday night's lineup is the only season-long constant, and other attempts to establish nightly blocks — for example, Mondays and Thursdays — have failed.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
That brings us to the inevitable "Arrested Development" update. Latest word according to statements from Showtime entertainment chief Robert Greenblatt is that the premium cable channel remains in talks with "AD" producer Twentieth Television.
ABC has bowed out of "Arrested" talks, though it does have a Monday-night opening for a comedy or two. The network has axed midseasoner "Emily's Reasons Why Not." Running mate "Jake in Progress" will return at a future time TBA.
Never forget
I wasn't sure I'd be interested in another 9/11-related program at this late date.
But A&E's "Flight 93," airing at 9 PM ET/PT Monday, is a fantastically well-done movie. It stays true to fact while evoking the suspense and heartache of an emotional thriller.
The taut two-hour film reconstructs the events that took place when passengers on a United Airlines flight bound for San Francisco realized the terrorists that had captured their plane were on a suicide mission to attack a national landmark.
Based on research from flight records, news accounts and documented phone conversations between passengers and their families and friends, "Flight 93" is a masterwork of vivid re-creation.
It also binds the disparate details that enable us to understand what took place, and why. I know more than before about the decisions made, the opportunities missed and the risks undergone.
Above all, "Flight 93" brings to life the men and women who took action to prevent another kind of catastrophe. The surreal scene where they vote to take down the terrorists is a testimonial to their belief in democracy — an eloquent double rebuttal to the forces of destruction.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?document_id=2002764129&zsection_id=2002119662&slug=kay27&date=20060127
About Television
Frey's other addiction: Lying
By Maureen Ryan on the Chicago Tribune TV blog January 27, 2006
By now, we all know that James Frey has been treated for drug and alcohol addictions.
That’s seems to be the one aspect of his “memoir,” “A Million Little Pieces,” that has not been disputed.
But what’s Frey going to do about his addiction to lying?
An eternity seemed to pass before the 11 p.m. repeat of “The Oprah Winfrey Show” aired in Chicago on Thursday. The morning edition of Thursday’s live program on “Pieces” was pre-empted by WLS-Ch. 7 for a presidential press conference just as Winfrey began tearing into Frey and his multiple offenses against the word “truth.”
Seen in its entirety, the program was not only riveting television -- Winfrey’s opening abject apology for her defense of Frey was simply jaw-dropping -- but a damning indictment of Frey’s instinctual need to fabricate, embellish and otherwise sidestep reality.
“I still think it’s a memoir,” he whined at one point (and let’s face it, this big guy with the tough guy/hard case reputation came off on Thursday’s “Oprah” like Eddie Haskell put on the spot by the Beaver’s mom).
Really? It’s still a memoir? Well, that would require defining “memoir” as “thing I made up to make boatloads of cash.” If that’s the definition of the genre, I’m going to have to take a break from blogging to pen my memoirs about the career I had as a cross-dressing pirate before becoming the queen of Romania.
Winfrey was determined that the truth about Frey’s book come out, and for that, she should be commended. But she never addressed whether, as two recent New York Times stories have stated, Frey and his publisher talked about how the book should be classified. “We were in discussions after we sold it as to whether to publish it as fiction or as nonfiction,” Frey told the Times in December.
Winfrey had a golden opportunity to ask Frey’s publisher and editor, Nan A. Talese, who also appeared on the program, whether those Orwellian discussions ever took place. But Winfrey didn’t.
Talese, for her part, didn’t come out of Thursday’s broadcast smelling like a rose. She explained that, to her, if something seems plausible, why then, it must be true. It’s plausible that I have a full-time assistant who schedules my interviews and screens my calls. I wish that were true, but it’s not.
But heck, the important thing -- to Talese, anyway -- is that it’s plausible. Believable. Chock full of truthiness, if you will.
Still, Winfrey’s dogged questioning of Frey was to be entirely commended. Once she got into the whole “root canal without Novocain” topic, her relentlessness almost made you feel sorry for Frey (but not quite). Did he, or did he not, she wanted to know, actually have that dental procedure -- twice, in fact -- without any drugs?
“I honestly have no idea,” Frey said.
Come on.
He admitted that The Smoking Gun was right about his fabrications, but he still clearly wanted to leave the impression that most of "Pieces" is truthful. He referred to the two other rehab participants whom his publishers produced to the Times in order to confirm some of Frey's rehab tales (in the Times, these two unnamed sources don't appear to entirely confirm Frey's stories).
Frankly, Frey didn't give the impression of a man hooked on Step 4 of the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous, which directs those who wish to conquer their addictions to make "a searching and fearless moral inventory" of themselves.
At the end of Thursday’s show, when Winfrey asked Frey if he had any other lies he’d like to clear up, he reeled off some pathetic line about how when he was leaving one rehab center, he had one person with him, not two.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
Frey needs to see if there’s some treatment center for serial fakers. Because on Thursday’s show, he made this assertion to Winfrey, who said she felt “conned”:
“I don’t feel like I conned you guys.”
James, the problem is, you’re only conning yourself now. But you can’t see the truth of that.
http://tempo.typepad.com/entertainment_tv/
Critic’s Notebook
Yay, Oprah!
By Rich Heldenfels in his Akron Beacon Journal TV blog
I'm watching the Oprah Winfrey interview with James Frey and am so loving it. (I've also added things here as the show went along.) It's a great common-sense interview, plain and direct questions that require plain and direct answers. She is making Frey look like an even bigger weasel than he seemed on ''Larry King Live.''
While Winfrey could have denounced Frey sooner, it's still admirable that she is taking apart someone that she made a huge emotional, and professional, investment in. (And the groans from the audience just make it all better.) This interview is one of the reasons that people love Oprah. She was heartfelt in her support and defense of Frey, and she is just as heartfelt and passionate -- and even funny -- in taking him apart.
What terrific television.
Oh, and now it's getting better. Nan Talese, who oversaw publication of Frey's book, is doing her own weasel bit -- and Oprah's not buying it either. And she's not buying it in a way that will be perfectly clear to common-sense folks like her viewers, especially by insisting that a self-described true story should be fact-checked.
We have now entered the scorched-earth section of the interview, where Oprah takes apart not only Frey, but the publisher (adding to the unhappiness she expressed with the publisher on ''Larry King Live''). Frey, meanwhile, looks more and more like a convict who sees the guillotine being sharpened outside his cell. He may not realize that his head is already rolling down the stage.
But Oprah's kicking the head into the audience. She wants Frey to use the word ''lies.'' He's trying to avoid saying it -- even in his delusion he must know that would be a major sound bite on cable news -- but he has to at least admit that Oprah's not wrong in using it (and at the end of the show, he finally said it himself).
And now the commentators, Richard Cohen and Frank Rich. More praise for Oprah, who rightly says what she did is ''the only thing to do.''
She knows it wasn't. She knows she could have just kept silent. Or she could have continued her praise of Frey on some paper-thin defense of ''essential truth'' or ''emotional accuracy.'' But no. She stood up and said she was wrong -- AND THEN DEVOTED AN HOUR OF HER SHOW TO THE ISSUE.
I wish politicians could so boldly admit error instead of hiding behind feeble claims of confidentiality. Think of recent reports about White House officials refusing to discuss their actions in response to Hurricane Katrina, including this from David Schuster at msnbc.com: `''Lawmakers say that while FEMA has been cooperative, (former director) Michael Brown has not, refusing, like the White House, to answer questions. But Brown does talk about Katrina for a fee. Recently he was the keynote speaker at a storm response conference where attendees paid $375 each.''
I'm not going to spend $375 to find out if Brown is more forthcoming to a paying audience than he is to Congress. But Oprah knows she paid a price for this Frey nightmare, and she didn't make us pay to hear her regrets. As she said near the end of the show, ''I do believe the truth can set you free.''
All right, so that let-the-healing-begin moment at the end was a bit much. That's very Oprah, too. And I still came away from this both liking and admiring her more than ever.
http://blogs.ohio.com/beacon_tv/
The 2005-2006 TV Season
Ask Matt
(from the Ask (TV Critic) Matt (Roush) column at TVGuide.com
Question: We just heard the news that WB and UPN are merging to create the CW network. We are nonplussed to put it lightly, and shocked out of our socks to put it bluntly. UPN and WB have always been each other's closest competitor! We are wondering what your opinion of this development is — especially pertaining to the effect it will have on programming. On one hand, it could mean bigger budgets and better promotion for quality shows like Veronica Mars (which could definitely use a lot more of both). On the other hand, a bigger network means higher expectations and less patience. By that we mean, will the CW continue to nurture well-reviewed but low-rated niche shows or will they turn into another Fox, axing original, high-quality programming when it fails to be an immediate success? Do you think the merge will have any effect on in-development programming (such as Amy Sherman-Palladino's new series)? Also, will the CW be available in all the same areas that WB and UPN are currently? The whole thing is highly unprecedented. UPN and WB are important alternatives to the big four networks, and we're worried that any difficulties with the merge could bring both channels down. We don't want another DuMont network on our hands! — Luke and Steph
Matt Roush: So many questions, so little real information at this point. Jaws dropped all over this office when the news broke this week about the collapse of WB and UPN into the CW, so yes, I'd say it was a surprise. (For my immediate reaction, check out my Dispatch from earlier this week.) Fact is that both of these mininetworks have struggled with profitability, especially WB of late, and while this does make business sense and should result in a much more competitive and viable fifth network, it's never a good thing to lose any outlet for programming. (Erin wrote in to make a salient point: "I will only briefly mention that the number of African-American-centric shows on network television will presumably be next to nil.") She may well have a point, although CBS titan Leslie Moonves mentioned the importance of minority audiences to this new network's mandate. But where to start on answering these questions? First, anyone who now gets either WB or UPN in their market will get CW. In markets where both were always available, I'm not sure which channel gets CW and what happens to the other. The CW mission statement, targeting young 18-34 viewers (largely female) isn't that different from the current UPN and WB playbooks, so I'm still thinking this network will continue to nurture shows like Gilmore Girls as long as they're buzzworthy and attract a healthy percentage of the core demographic. But beyond that, I can't speculate.
Easily the most-asked questions have involved which shows on WB and UPN will survive the merge, with an emphasis of concern over Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars and Everwood. The best early clue comes from the initial news release, which singled out the following shows as obvious assets of the respective networks: Smallville, Gilmore Girls, Supernatural, Veronica Mars, Everybody Hates Chris, Girlfriends, Reba, America's Next Top Model, Beauty and the Geek and WWE's Smackdown. Keep in mind that both networks may also have a limited number of new series already in development for next season (and new contenders could emerge this mid-season), so who knows what else will be in the mix by the time CW presents its first Upfront presentation in May.
________________________________________
Question: Just heard about the big WB-UPN merger and, although I think it's a great business decision, I'm naturally worried about the fate of some of my favorite shows. Gilmore Girls is safe, I assume. But many fans of Everwood, myself included, are understandably worried. It is the best drama on TV, IMO, with the most beautiful writing and acting anywhere, but I'm afraid its relatively low ratings may cause it to be axed to make enough space in the schedule for another ridiculous reality show. There are certainly worse and lower-rated shows on WB that I would hope would be canceled instead (Charmed and One Tree Hill leap to mind). But considering the barely veiled indifference with which the WB has treated Everwood (hardly promoting it, moving it to Thursday nights for no good reason), I'm more than a little concerned. I would hope that some of the critical accolades that you and others have lavished on the show would be a factor, but considering the fate of Arrested Development, I'm not optimistic. So, what do you think will happen? Can you calm my fears and assure me that my favorite show will be back next season? — Rhonda C.
Matt Roush: As you can see from the above list of shows in the CW release, Everwood was not mentioned. But I wouldn't read too much into that as yet. Still, I've been worried for the show ever since WB moved Everwood to Thursdays, though it held its own reasonably well despite impossible competition. And it's true the show's second lengthy hiatus for the second consecutive season isn't the most hopeful sign, either. Third strike: The programmer in charge of CW, Dawn Ostroff, comes from UPN, not WB, so there's a natural tendency (very possibly ill-founded) to be paranoid that she'd favor UPN shows over WB's. Again, way too early to know what the CW schedule will look like, and what its programming priorities will be among drama, comedy, tragedy, reality, new shows, old shows, etc. What a mind-blowing sea change.
To Matt, who asked if Everwood didn't make the cut, "what are the chances that another network might pick up a show that seems to have several good years left?" The answer is, almost certainly, zero. This was the right show on the right network, which, come fall, will no longer exist. We'll have to wait and see.
________________________________________
Question: I wanted to know your take on NBC's scheduling changes after the Olympics. I personally think that NBC may be putting itself in a grave situation. First I need to talk about the moving of Law & Order to Wednesdays, an hour earlier, at 9 pm/ET. This is a horrible time slot considering its competition. I have to give up Law & Order because I already tape Veronica Mars while I watch Lost. Again Scrubs was denied a Thursday time slot (post-Earl when The Office ends in March). And I feel that NBC is trying to annoy Dick Wolf. First, Trial by Jury was canceled, they move Law & Order to Wednesdays at 9 pm/ET and now they are airing Conviction Fridays at 10 pm/ET (the same slot as Trial by Jury) when they should pair it with Law & Order: Special Victims Unit since many SVU fans are going to watch because of Stephanie March reprising her role as Alexandra Cabot. Also, Deal or No Deal and The Apprentice are the lead-ins to the underappreciated Medium. They should have kept Las Vegas and Law & Order in the same time slots and moved The Apprentice to Fridays, moved Scrubs to Thursdays after Earl and aired Conviction as a lead-in to SVU. — Joshua L.
Matt Roush: Change usually involves risk, and change is almost always met with resistance, even temporary changes like these, and that's the case with the early mail in the wake of NBC's announced mid-season changes. (For my own analysis, check out my Dispatch from earlier this week.) Personally, I think most of these moves (with the exception of leaving Scrubs on Tuesday) are aggressive, provocative and logical. The Law & Order move certainly raised the most eyebrows, but given that NBC has an empty hour on the night, better to use an established franchise like Law & Order to lead an audience to the new Heist than to strand a new mid-season drama against Lost. (As I noted in my Dispatch, Lost and Law & Order couldn't be more dissimilar, and thus this makes for effective counterprogramming, though there's no doubt some viewers watch both.) I don't agree that Conviction and SVU should air back-to-back. I'm leery enough of yet another hour of Wolfian legal drama joining the schedule, but the least NBC can do is scatter them around the week. And I think NBC is right to go after CBS on Fridays with strong, commercial shows. SVU played there successfully for years, so if Conviction is up to snuff (as Trial by Jury arguably wasn't), it may give Numbers a run for its money. Las Vegas is exactly the sort of escapist mind-candy programming that could work on Fridays, and potentially drive an audience to Conviction, but if it doesn't pan out, I'd bet NBC will move Vegas back to Mondays in the fall, depending on how Apprentice does on its new night (and Apprentice will likely make much more money for NBC on a weeknight than it would buried on Fridays, regardless of how many of us feel about this tired show). Bottom line: NBC needs to shake things up, and mid-season's the time to do it.
________________________________________
Question: Does the news that NBC is moving Law & Order up an hour to go against Lost mean good things for Invasion in the post-Lost time slot? I'm hoping that viewers who'd previously tuned to Law & Order might give Invasion a try now and find one of the best new shows on TV. Is this move by NBC as good for Invasion as I hope it is? — Josh
Matt Roush: It's no secret what a booster of Invasion I am, but I'm also a realist. I seriously doubt the audience that has been watching Law & Order on Wednesdays will all of a sudden jump ship to join a show like Invasion in progress, especially given how antithetical it is to L&O in execution, being serialized and fantastical. It's much more likely that the devoted Law & Order fan will follow the show to the earlier time slot and stay tuned for the new crime drama, Heist, which it's providing with a compatible lead-in. Still, it could open up the time period a bit and, if Heist doesn't take off, may result in Invasion looking more competitive than it does now.
________________________________________
Question: I was most disappointed to learn this morning that The Book of Daniel was being dropped from NBC's schedule, but what really irritated me was the crowing being done by the self-righteous group the American Family Association, which is apparently taking credit for forcing NBC to make the move. It is a shame. I was truly enjoying it, uneven as it sometimes was, due to the outstanding cast — particularly Aidan Quinn and Susanna Thompson. Damn, that scene with the mafia guy making a pass at Daniel was funny. Doesn't it make you crazy when those bigoted right-wing groups smugly assert this kind of move is due to their influence when it's really all about the numbers? NBC saw constantly declining numbers and made the decision to give up the chance to build viewership. I highly doubt they'd have paid attention to any so-called watchdog group if the show had proved a cult or breakout hit, so why should they do so when it's a low-rated show? What do you think? — Karen
Matt Roush: The only thing more predictable (and aggravating) than the American Family Association taking an anti-Daniel stance before it even aired is the same group taking credit for its premature cancellation. Groups like this, and the hyperventilating Parents Research Council, have lost so many battles in recent years (such as their foaming over FX shows, which are meant for adults only) that it's only natural to see them acting like such sore winners this time around — and, by the way, how very Christian of them to gloat. Fact is, groups like this did have some impact, creating a climate of controversy over the still-taboo subject of religion that kept spineless advertisers away. NBC didn't help matters by its scheduling of the show, and even before this abbreviated run, mixing up the order in which the episodes were being shown. But if the show had become a cult hit — too bad FX didn't snap this one up (and no, Daniel isn't likely to reemerge there) — or, in the best case, an actual sensation like NYPD Blue (which the AFA unsuccessfully lobbied against), NBC would have kept it on proudly. I still feel Daniel was a worthy risk. It wasn't a perfect show, but it certainly got people talking instead of yawning. Hard to imagine anyone making much of a fuss about flatlining tripe like Courting Alex.
________________________________________
Question: What in the name of god is happening at Commander in Chief? Three or four months ago, ABC fired [series creator] Rod Lurie and brought in Steven Bochco. The show was getting a great deal of publicity and was doing great in the ratings. I really thought that the character of Mackenzie Allen was inspired and a role model for women all over the world. Why they got rid of Lurie is still baffling, but since then the show has taken a horrible turn. The president has now made her first-husband her top advisor (because a woman needs a man by her side), the villain (the great Donald Sutherland) is now her ally with whom she shares Thanksgiving dinner (so all that tension is lost), the kids seemed to have disappeared, the new campaign advisor on the show is a jerk, and I could go on. Worst of all, those two Korean-crisis episodes are not only cinematic rip-offs of The West Wing, but wasn't there an exact same West Wing episode involving a nuclear sub in North Korean waters? According to the Nielsen ratings, the show has dropped like an anvil, and way before American Idol came into the picture. So, finally, the Question: Do you think CiC is suffering from the Sorkin Complex — that is, the show falling apart once its voice has been kicked off the show? — Gerald W.
Matt Roush: What we seem to have here is a case of a network fixing what wasn't broken, and creating a mess in the process. If the network truly felt Lurie wasn't able to produce the show on time or on budget or whatever, the solution this early on — especially considering that the show had the earmarks of an instant hit — shouldn't have been to remove the creator altogether and replace him with someone who had never taken over the reins of someone else's show, even if that someone is as experienced as Steven Bochco. The Bochco hire at first made sense, given his credentials, but these latest episodes make it look like this is an uneasy fit, to put it mildly. Commander in Chief's strength was that it wasn't trying to look like a West Wing clone, but these "crisis" episodes involving the sunken sub and the even worse one about Air Force One held hostage are unconvincing and clumsy rip-offs of West Wing-style action, and they move the show radically away from the domestic melodrama it promised to be. Even more worrying are the character shifts for the president's husband — now her de facto chief of staff, which diminishes Mac's authority and credibility — not to mention her chief nemesis, Nathan Templeton, who now almost seems like he's her acting vice president, the way she leans on him for help and treats him almost like a buddy (albeit a sly one). Worst of all is horndog politico Dickie (Mark-Paul Gosselaar), a flat-out ridiculous character, badly written and played (and I liked him on NYPD Blue). This may be worse than losing a voice: Commander seems to have lost its way. The show may still be salvageable, but first, those in charge need to realize that something is very, very wrong here.
________________________________________
Question: I just read that some other show will be taking the time slot of The Office in April because Steve Carell needed to take time off from the show to film a movie. Does that mean that this season won't last a full 22 episodes? — Andrew
Matt Roush: I'm not 100 percent sure of the show's schedule between now and early April (when the mid-season comedy Teachers gets a tryout), but if The Office doesn't make it quite to 22, it should be close. When The Office goes off the air in early February for the Olympics, 16 new episodes will have aired, leaving room for at least five new episodes to air on Thursdays in March. Whatever the math, the good news for fans is that Office and My Name Is Earl have already been picked up for a full 22 for next season.
________________________________________
Question: Is there any chance Curb Your Enthusiasm will return for a sixth season? I've read that the ratings for Season 5 were down significantly. In addition, the last episode of the fifth season seemed more like a series finale than a season finale. However, I haven't heard any announcements from HBO regarding the future of Curb, so maybe it will return. My hope is that I will get to see one more season of Larry David acting like the world's biggest jerk! — Ryan
Matt Roush: Seems to me that it will be up to Larry David. If he wants to do another season, I imagine HBO wouldn't stand in his way. Even though the numbers were way down this season, that's probably as much a function of HBO's diminished programming slate as it is of Curb's quality. (There's no Sex and the City driving viewers to Curb anymore, for instance.) But as far as I know, HBO hasn't made a statement about the show returning or not. If this was the last season, at least Curb went out with a suitable final episode.
________________________________________
Question: I was wondering if you had been given a chance to screen Showtime's new show Dexter. From what I've heard, it sounds a lot like Profit, with its "evil" main character. I no longer get Showtime, but I am a huge collector of TV shows on DVD (I have about 1,500 episodes of various shows). I was wondering if it would be worth my while and my dollar. I bought Dead Like Me sight unseen. I thought it a true pleasure though I had already fallen in love with Wonderfalls (both from Bryan Fuller). — Tommy
Matt Roush: Now this is a first, a DVD question about a show that hasn't even premiered yet. I understand clips of Dexter were shown at the critics' press tour in Pasadena this month (which I did not attend), and I heard some good buzz. But all I can say for sure is that I can't wait to see this show, about a forensics expert by day (played by Six Feet Under's Michael C. Hall) who by night is a serial killer, which means he sometimes can be found processing his own crime scenes. The twist here, which separates Dexter from Profit, is that Dexter only targets bad guys who deserve it, so he's actually a crusading vigilante of sorts. A while back, I read the novel (Jeff Lindsay's Darkly Dreaming Dexter) that inspired the series, and I thought it was terrific. Hope the TV version doesn't disappoint, but you'll have to wait for the reviews before making a call on whether it's actually a collectible.
________________________________________
Question: I loved the premiere of Bleak House on Masterpiece Theatre Sunday night. I was wondering if you feel that it has any chance of winning the Emmy in September, and if Gillian Anderson has a shot. I was also curious about how many times a Masterpiece Theatre production had won the Emmy for best miniseries. I know The Lost Prince won last year, but I was surprised a few years ago when The Forsyte Saga was not even nominated. Also, thanks to TV Guide for recommending Bleak House. I did not want it to end. — Nicole
Matt Roush: Neither did I, and I watched the whole thing in a daylong orgy. Bleak House's strongest competition in the miniseries arena, as far as I can tell, appears to be HBO's upcoming Elizabeth I miniseries (starring Helen Mirren), which I haven't screened yet. But I can't imagine this won't be nominated. PBS can't mount expensive campaigns the way networks (especially pay channels) tend to do, and there's probably a Hollywood prejudice that has worked against this British franchise for many years. But given the critical buzz over Bleak House, it's got to be seen as an early front-runner, as is Gillian Anderson (but you never want to bet against Mirren). Doing quick research, the Masterpiece Theatre winners list at the Emmys includes, besides The Lost Prince, the peerless The Jewel in the Crown, Tom Brown's Schooldays, Elizabeth R and the breakthrough Upstairs Downstairs (which won four times, several as best drama series). Plus, two seasons of Prime Suspect won best miniseries for Masterpiece sibling Mystery!
http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/askmatt/
Thursday’s network prime-time ratings have been posted at the top of Latest Prime Time Ratings news which is the first post in this thread.
Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
A royal tumble for NBC's "Four Kings"
Off 13 percent in 18-49s to 3.1, a series low
By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Jan 27, 2006
NBC’s “Four Kings” got off to a solid start three weeks ago despite brutal reviews. But the show has stumbled since then, hitting a series-low among adults 18-49 last night, which doesn’t bode well for the sitcom with timeslot competitor “Survivor” on CBS returning next week.
“Kings” posted a 3.1 overnight rating among viewers 18-49, down 26 percent versus the 4.2 it earned for its premiere on Jan. 5. It was off 13 percent from last week’s 3.5.
The show finished third in its 8:30 p.m. timeslot, just barely ahead of a repeat of Fox’s “That ‘70s Show,” which posted a 2.9 that half hour.
“Kings” was also likely hurt by the big death episode of “Smallville” on the WB last night, which earned a strong 2.9 18-49 rating during the 8:30 p.m. half hour. And it also faced ABC’s “Dancing with the Stars,” which posted a 5.4 among 18-49s from 8:30 to 9 p.m.
To be fair, “Kings” is not getting any help from its lead-in, the 8 p.m. “Will & Grace.” It has improved on “W&G” in all four outings, including last night.
But the already tough competition will only become stiffer next Thursday, when CBS premieres its new season of “Survivor.”
http://medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_2514.asp
Critic’s Notebook
Humiliation — but on the last page, absolution
Oprah Winfrey, whatever you think of her, made for remarkable television Thursday
By Paul Brownfield Los Angeles Times TV critic January 27, 2006
Oprah Winfrey delivered an hour that was both substantive and theatrical, featuring a lying writer, James Frey; his chagrined editor, Nan A. Talese; and two journalistic heavyweights, Richard Cohen of the Washington Post and Frank Rich of the New York Times, saying that the truth in our culture still matters.
But the star of it all was — who else? — Oprah Winfrey (she looked great, by the way), whose well-meaning, big-bucks Oprah's Book Club had been duped in its embrace of the partly fabricated "A Million Little Pieces" as straight memoir. Now we would learn what happens when you cross Winfrey, when you go on her show and lie about your pain or your redemption and as a result get her whole Oprah empire behind you and your name is not Tom Cruise.
You get, basically, publicly stoned. And then in the end, Winfrey gives you absolution. And comes out smelling like a rose for being so aboveboard.
Somehow, though, Winfrey broke through her own artifice to deliver something unusual in our culture — something real.
But first, the public stoning.
"It is difficult for me to talk to you, because I really feel duped," she told Frey, who sipped his water and meekly acknowledged the liberties he took in his book. He seemed awesomely frightened. From his point of view, much of the hour must have felt like that scene in the film "Network" when anchorman Howard Beale gets summoned to a meeting with corporate honcho Arthur Jensen for on-air revelations about a company deal.
"You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale," Jensen says, "and I won't have it. Is that clear?"
"Network" ended with the madman Beale being taken out on the air when his ratings fell.
This was a different kind of assassination, one of character, Frey being officially taken down by the woman who propped him up.
If that was the goal, Winfrey did it brilliantly. Because it was, on the one hand, self-serving and hypocritical of her. (Does she not foster "truthiness," a buzzword that came up during the hour, in every group hug with the Hollywood A-list community?)
And yet it was one of those instances in which talk-show artifice dropped away, and nobody was exactly acting. It happened this month on "The Late Show With David Letterman," when Letterman blurted at Fox News' Bill O'Reilly: "I have the feeling about 60% of what you say is crap."
But that was also a laugh line, not really meant to be probed. This was about Winfrey daring to reveal the fact that she isn't omniscient, that her initial instinct was wrong when she made that ill-advised call-in to "Larry King Live," supporting Frey after the scandal broke on the Smoking Gun website.
She kept Frey onstage for the full hour, as journalistic lions came on to deplore him to his face, to hold him up as a symbol of a bigger problem in the culture — arguably described as a blithe disregard for what is truth and what isn't.
"I mean," Frey said in the end, apparently scared straight, "if I come out of this experience with anything, it's being a better person and learning from my mistakes and making sure that I don't repeat them."
It was one of the few false moments of the hour, Winfrey ending the conversation as "Oprah," offering redemption to a guy who had himself, apparently, peddled redemption.
http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et-critics27jan27,0,5498127,print.story?coll=cl-tv-features
Marcus Carr
01-27-06, 02:06 PM
Up Next for HD? Syndication
One of the side topics at the NATPE conference, which ends today, has been HDTV, as syndicators and program producers look to increase the value of their properties. And for local stations itching to get local HD ad dollars HD syndication is a must.
"It's got to happen," says Del Parks, VP of engineering and operations, Sinclair Broadcast Group. "Local stations realize how necessary HD is to get HD to take off for advertisers and there is no question that syndicated HD is coming."
Syndication content providers are getting ready as well. Sony Pictures, for example, will produce Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune in high-definition for the 2006 fall season. And other syndicated programs, like CSI, Everyone Loves Raymond, and E.R. are also available in HD (in fact, Warner Bros. began converting E.R. episodes to HD as far back as 1998 for HD broadcasts in Japan). And as some of the stations that are home to certain syndicated shows make the move to HD, other shows, like Live with Regis and Kelly which is shot at WABC New York, are bound to follow.
All of that content in HD bodes well for TV stations that have been waiting to fill their non-prime time programming slots with HD programming. The big challenge then becomes distribution.. TV stations across the country receive syndicated content via file transfers. Moving HD content introduces bandwidth challenges. Providers of those delivery services, like Pathfire, are currently clearing some of those technical hurdles.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=nocclamp&doc_id=1340006473#NEWS2b
Programming Notes:
ABC Temporarily Votes Out Commander
By Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable
ABC is sidelining Commander in Chief and premiering back-to-back episodes of midseason comedy Sons & Daughters in its Tuesday 9 p.m. time slot beginning March 7.
The network says Commander will return in the spring and would have been running repeats for most of its hiatus, anyhow. ABC has 12 episodes of Sons & Daughters, so if it runs two every Tuesday. Commander would be off the air for at least six weeks.
But the move comes on the heels of ABC Entertainment President Steve McPherson addressing the show's ratings challenges, despite star Geena Davis’ recent Golden Globe win for her role as a female president of the United States.
"Obviously we’re disappointed in Commander ticking down the last few weeks," he said on January 21 at the Television Critics Association press tour. "I think being off for so long, not being able to hit it with aggressive marketing given our midseason launch has hurt it. You know, we feel like we’ve got to get the viewers back in there and get the demo back in there."
ABC used a similar strategy last year, when it sidelined Boston Legal and replaced it with Grey’s Anatomy. Boston Legal did not return for the remainder of the season.
Sports on TV
Big changes in the works for ABC
By Barry Jackson Miami Herald
When you think of ABC Sports, a few events and personalities instantly come to mind -- Monday Night Football, Al Michaels, Keith Jackson. In earlier years, it was Wide World of Sports (1961-1998), Jim McKay, Howard Cosell and Frank Gifford. And for 36 years, there was one constant: the NFL.
Now, the face of ABC Sports is changing rapidly and radically. That will resonate in nine days, when ABC televises its final NFL game -- and final Super Bowl -- for at least the next six years, possibly longer.
More changes will follow. Also exiting will be almost all of the BCS games (which, except for the Rose, move to Fox) and its PGA Tour schedule (ABC will have only the British Open after 2006).
Meanwhile, ABC has acquired this summer's World Cup (with ESPN), the second half of the NASCAR package (with ESPN, beginning in 2007) and the Belmont Stakes. ABC also is considering airing prime-time college football on Saturday nights next season.
At the same time, some of ABC's biggest personalities are leaving, or considering it. Michaels -- who earlier agreed to transition to Monday Night Football on ESPN while remaining the voice of the NBA on ABC -- might instead switch to NBC's Sunday night NFL games, according to published reports and several industry officials. (Michaels, who isn't commenting, would need ESPN permission to bolt a contract he has already signed.)
John Madden already has signed with NBC. Jackson, college football's signature voice, has hinted at retirement -- again. Lynn Swann is leaving to run for governor of Pennsylvania.
Meanwhile, ABC Sports continues to look more and more like corporate cousin ESPN, not surprising considering both are now run by the same management and share many of the same announcers.
ABC Sports' challenge is not only rebuilding an identity, but battling the perception that the over-the-air network without the NFL is the least appealing for sports fans.
''The ABC Sports identity we're starting and working on today is based on three pillars,'' said Len DeLuca, the senior vice president of programming for ESPN and ABC Sports. He lists those as the NBA (including The Finals), college football, and NASCAR beginning 2007.
DeLuca confirmed ABC saw more upside in reacquiring NASCAR than continuing to carry the PGA Tour. Ratings bear that out.
Disney management's decision to bid for Monday Night Football for ESPN -- leaving ABC without the NFL -- was financially driven. ESPN can handle the record $1.1 billion annual rights fee more easily than ABC because ESPN generates revenue not only from advertisers, but also subscriber fees. But DeLuca noted ESPN will be better positioned to air MNF because ''we have the luxury'' of devoting ''24 hours to the game,'' beginning midnight Sundays.
He downplays the loss of the Fiesta, Orange and Sugar Bowls, explaining the fifth game added by the BCS is ``extremely ordinary.''
AROUND THE DIAL
• Several personnel moves this week: Fox's No. 2 baseball voice, Thom Brennaman, will call the next three college football national title games. Former Marlins voice Dave O'Brien will add soccer to his ESPN duties and is expected to call the World Cup. And Rusty Wallace will be the lead ABC/ESPN analyst on NASCAR in 2007 and IRL this year.
• The NFL Network and OLN remain strong candidates for a proposed late-season Thursday/Saturday night NFL package that could compete with ESPN's UM-Boston College game on Thanksgiving.
• Former Bulls center Will Perdue, an NBA analyst for ESPN Radio, told The Chicago Tribune it took him three years to get a broadcasting job because, ``I'm not the proper color they're looking for. That's what I've been told. What's hot in broadcasting are ex-coaches and ex-black players. White males are way down on the list.''
Hmmm. And I thought Perdue didn't get a job for three years because, well, he's Will Perdue, journeymen center. Has Perdue not noticed Tim Legler, Tom Tolbert, Bill Walton and Steve Kerr on network TV?
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/13722780.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
Sports on TV
Azinger: PGA on TGC not a very good idea
By Aaron Bracy Louisville Courier-Post Staff Jan. 26, 2006
The Golf Channel signed a 15-year deal with the PGA Tour earlier this year that makes it the exclusive cable home of the Tour beginning next year. However, the landmark agreement hasn't been met with cheers -- or even golf claps -- from everyone.
Some PGA Tour players, including Paul Azinger and David Duval, have said it is a bad idea for the Tour to leave ESPN, arguing that the network's appeal to sports fans -- and not just golf fans -- is good for golf.
"You have to look for golf to find it on The Golf Channel; you stumble on golf to find it on ESPN," Azinger told USA Today last week, echoing similar feelings to the ones Duval shared with The Associated Press. "You've got ESPN on in all the bars and then golf comes on, which is good for the players. The Golf Channel's not on in too many bars."
Azinger went even further, saying TGC likely won't take an objective, journalistic approach to its coverage of the Tour.
"The Golf Channel already treats the Tour with kid gloves. You won't ever see an expose' of any player coming off The Golf Channel," he said.
Responding to those comments in a phone interview Tuesday, TGC CEO David Manougian said, "I don't even get his comments. I would ask Paul to tell me what stories we haven't covered. And I'd like to know what exposes he has done."
Azinger is an analyst for ABC, a network (along with ESPN, USA Network and Turner Sports) left out of the Tour's new TV deal. Beginning in 2007, CBS and NBC will share weekend coverage of the Tour, with TGC televising early-round (Thursday and Friday) coverage in 33 events and full-round (Thursday-Sunday) coverage in 15 events.
Azinger admitted to USA Today that his comments might be viewed as sour grapes, although he said they weren't.
He's probably correct that TGC isn't on in as many bars as ESPN, and it's a fact that TGC currently is in about 20 million fewer homes than ESPN. Will that change now that TGC has the Tour? Manougian thinks it might.
"We're going to work hand-in-hand with the Tour on how to grow viewership," said Manougian, who expects TGC to be in 85 million homes (ESPN is in 90 million) by the end of '07.
And Manougian dismissed Azinger's notion that TGC will avoid stories. "We're not the PGA Tour network," he said.
Some other issues Manougian addressed:
TGC, which is owned by Comcast, will incorporate the On-Demand feature into its coverage. Not only might it be in the form of Tour highlights, but it could include such features as On-Demand player bios.
Other Comcast platforms, such as OLN and Comcast SportsNet, will be involved. Among the possibilities, those networks could replay PGA Tour tournaments or possibly televise live Nationwide, LPGA and/or Champions events if there's a conflict on TGC.
On-air talent has not been determined, but TGC likely will use NBC and CBS talent in some form for its early-round coverage, much like it's done at present, when those networks have weekend rights.
TGC's Web site (thegolfchannel.com) also will be utilized, with the possibility of streaming video of holes similar to what the PGA Tour currently does with the 17th hole of The Players Championship on its Web site (pgatour.com).
"For us, with all of the other tours we have, the PGA Tour was the next logical step," Manougian said. "From the (PGA) Tour's standpoint, it's very important to have one place, week in and week out, for fans to find golf, and that continuity will help build viewership and build story lines."
http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060127/SPORTS/601270373/1002/SPORTS&template=printart
About Television
Restaurant pulls plug on 'The Biggest Loser'
Crowd control weighs heavy on casting call
By John Wilkens San Diego Union-Tribune Staff Writer January 27, 2006
The turnout was too heavy.
About 1,500 people, some reportedly from as far away as Hawaii, showed up yesterday morning in Mission Valley to audition for the NBC weight-loss show, “The Biggest Loser,” only to have the casting call canceled at the last minute.
NBC blamed it on “the overwhelming response from potential candidates,” who began lining up in the parking lot of Dave & Buster's around midnight for an event that was scheduled to run from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.
By 9 a.m., a disturbing-the-peace call had summoned police – officers reported minor problems like public urination but no arrests – and restaurant managers decided to pull the plug.
“Providing a safe environment for our guests and team members is always Dave & Buster's first priority,” Darin Bybee, a regional operations director, said in a written statement. “Unfortunately the situation (yesterday) was not safe despite our very best efforts to make it so.”
NBC promised to reschedule, perhaps as early as this weekend.
The would-be Losers were not happy. “A lot of people were appalled and upset when they canceled,” said Sam Casas, a North Park resident who got in line about 6 a.m. “Some bought plane tickets and took time off work to come here.”
He scoffed at the idea the crowd was getting out of hand. “They said it was because there wasn't enough security, but it wasn't a rock concert or a Chargers game. Come on, it was a bunch of fat people!”
The popular reality show, which premiered in October 2004, features “severely overweight” contestants battling to see who can drop the most pounds through dieting and exercise. The winner gets $250,000.
Yesterday's audition was one of several scheduled around the country to find candidates for the series' third season. Casting directors said they are seeking “outgoing, charismatic and candid individuals with personality.”
The opportunity prompted Brent Hart, 21, to take two days off work as a land surveyor and fly to San Diego from Tucson. “I've watched it a few times, and I really wanted to get on the show,” he said.
About 100 people were ahead of him when he joined the line about 5 a.m. He said he met people who had come from Hawaii and Oklahoma. Disappointment soon set in.
“The whole thing was just poorly executed,” he said. “They didn't have any Porta Potties in the parking lot. Nobody knew what was going on. Then they came out and said there were too many people, and we had to leave.”
Some of those gathered talked openly about going downtown to protest at the studios of KNSD, the local NBC affiliate, Hart said. (There was no organized demonstration, although a few people went to the lobby and dropped off applications for the show, said Penny Martin, a station vice president.) Others vented their anger at Dave & Buster's, vowing to stay out of the restaurant even though they were hungry.
Dave Cohen, police spokesman, said officers were called at 9:10 a.m. and monitored the crowd for about 2½ hours.
Hart said the final blow came when he tried unsuccessfully to give an application and a five-minute video of himself to the casting crew as the crowd was dispersing.
“I told them I'd traveled a long way to be here, and I didn't know if I could come back for another one, but it just fell on deaf ears,” he said.
In written statements, NBC officials stressed they were “in no way involved with the cancellation” and said the auditions would be rescheduled. They encouraged contestants to phone a “Biggest Loser” hotline at (310) 727-3307 or check nbc.com for updates.
They also noted that auditions are scheduled for Feb. 11 at the NBC studios in Burbank, where, presumably, they'll be ready for a turnout of any size.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20060127-9999-7m27loser.html
harley1
01-27-06, 07:07 PM
Programming Notes:
ABC Temporarily Votes Out Commander
By Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable
ABC is sidelining Commander in Chief and premiering back-to-back episodes of midseason comedy Sons & Daughters in its Tuesday 9 p.m. time slot beginning March 7.
The network says Commander will return in the spring and would have been running repeats for most of its hiatus, anyhow. ABC has 12 episodes of Sons & Daughters, so if it runs two every Tuesday. Commander would be off the air for at least six weeks.
But the move comes on the heels of ABC Entertainment President Steve McPherson addressing the show's ratings challenges, despite star Geena Davis’ recent Golden Globe win for her role as a female president of the United States.
"Obviously we’re disappointed in Commander ticking down the last few weeks," he said on January 21 at the Television Critics Association press tour. "I think being off for so long, not being able to hit it with aggressive marketing given our midseason launch has hurt it. You know, we feel like we’ve got to get the viewers back in there and get the demo back in there."
ABC used a similar strategy last year, when it sidelined Boston Legal and replaced it with Grey’s Anatomy. Boston Legal did not return for the remainder of the season.
I just don't understand the logic of taking a show off for 2 months ,then hope the fans "find" the show again. It's not like ER where everyone knows it's on Thursday @ 10 pm.
Maybe new fans would watch the repeats they missed.
The Boston Legal stratgedy wasn't a real big winner.
I wouldn't hold my breath on CiC coming back at all.
jim tressler
01-27-06, 11:04 PM
Thom Brennaman is a fantastic play by play and color guy.. glad to see that.
• Several personnel moves this week: Fox's No. 2 baseball voice, Thom Brennaman, will call the next three college football national title games.
I agree, Jim. I think he is the about the best.
(Although as a team, Duane Kuiper and Mike Krukow, the Giants guys, are outstanding.)
But Brennaman's work on the Diamondbacks games, by itself, is a reason -- for me at least -- to sign up for the MLB Extra Innings package.
Its the kind of scheduling move that ABC is doing now with Commander that drove me to Tivo. Heck I don't think the networks get it. Appointment television became fragmented in part because programs are temporarily pulled and then shifted to other time slots on other nights. And repurposing a show's exclusive first run followed up the next week on another network or was that a rerun from a previous season? And when did one or two popular series justify the bandwidth for an entire dedicated channel? Just because I tune in to watch that channel during the summer doesn’t make me feel good about paying subscription fees for the rest of the year when I don’t tune in. Too much clutter. The overwhelming odds for a show to even find a place on a network schedule and then get pulled or canceled after a couple of airings? Perhaps there is hope. Due to the new revenue streams from iTunes has put The Office on better footing. And with DVD revenues increasing for television productions, perhaps some of the current programmers will take a page from the old timers and let a show keep its original time slot long enough for an audience to find it. Then keep their hands off in respect to the audience tuning in to watch. Meanwhile I'll pick it up on Tivo rather than get pushed into sampling some new show I haven't been properly introduced to. Programmers need to learn some etiquette on how to treat a loyal audience.
Friday’s network prime-time ratings have been posted at the top of Latest Prime Time Ratings news which is the first post in this thread.
The Business of TV
Identity Crisis
WB and UPN stations are scrambling to find a new model
By Allison Romano Broadcasting & Cable
With The WB and UPN shutting down next fall to form The CW, dozens of orphaned affiliates are scrambling to align with the new network or find a way to go it alone.
The shift could mean more local news and programming in some markets, but it also threatens to put some affiliates out of business. And now some station owners, who had no advance warning about the deal, are threatening legal action.
“These broadcasters woke up one day and found out that, come September, the affiliation agreements were null and void,” says an executive at a major station group who declined to be named for potential legal reasons. “Everyone is trying to figure out what they'll do.”
When Warner Bros. and CBS Corp. unveiled the new network Jan. 24, a large chunk of distribution was immediately resolved. Tribune Broadcasting, a 22% owner of The WB network, and UPN parent CBS Corp. carved up 20 of the top 25 markets. When the CW launches in September, 16 Tribune-owned WB stations and 12 CBS-owned UPN outlets will make the switch. Both companies have agreed to 10-year affiliation agreements.
The smallest TV markets may have also been divvied up. According to executives familiar with the deal, many of The WB 100+ stations, a collection of mostly cable-only affiliates in markets numbered 100 and higher, will likely become CW outlets next fall.
That leaves most of the midsize markets, such as Cleveland, Kansas City, Mo., and Jackson, Miss., still in play. In some, the UPN and WB stations are owned by big media companies and are part of duopolies sharing programming and news. In a handful of markets, one company operates both the WB and UPN affiliates. Many more are owned by small, family-run companies that operate a few stations.
The CW says it will reach 95% of the U.S. TV viewers at launch, but on what stations is still largely unknown. CBS Corp. CEO Leslie Moonves says the deals will be decided in the next few months. “In every market, we're going to look at what is the stronger station,” he said.
Since last week, anxious station owners say they have been calling their UPN and WB representatives but the calls have gone unanswered. Some groups with CBS affiliates hope those ties will help them get the CW affiliation. Others venture that buying Warner Bros. syndicated product might help curry favor. Most are braced for a possible bidding war for the CW affiliation. If they win, it could be more expensive to be a CW affiliate: Like The WB, the new network will take reverse-compensation payments from stations, something UPN outlets did not previously face.
But as they court the new CW, station managers are frantically outlining alternatives. Analysts at influential TV-station consulting firms like Crawford, Northcott & Johnson and Frank N. Magid Associates are fielding calls for nervous clients seeking advice on how to proceed.
“This has put everyone in a mercenary mood,” says Crawford, Johnson & Northcott Managing Partner Bruce Northcott. “You have to take care of your own station.” His advice: Add as much local programming as possible.
The most likely scenario for many is to forge ahead as an independent. Tribune plans to convert three stations to independents. Meredith Broadcasting may do the same with KPDX, its UPN affiliate in Portland, Ore., where Tribune nabbed the CW affiliation. “We are not afraid of the prospect of being an independent,” says Meredith President Paul Karpowicz. “This could be an opportunity for more local programming and more news and sports.”
Those are not luxuries many small owners can afford. Their business is built around network affiliation and programming supplied by The WB and UPN. Losing that supply has some station owners considering legal action.
One such disgruntled operator is St. Louis-based Roberts Broadcasting. The company, run by brothers Michael and Steven Roberts, owns three UPN stations. In St. Louis, its largest market, Roberts already knows The CW will air on Tribune's WB outlet, but its Columbia, S.C., and Jackson, Miss., stations still have a shot. But Michael Roberts says the company has invested millions in branding the stations as UPNs and, even if he wins The CW, the outlets have lost value.
“We've been disadvantaged economically,” he says. “There is a degree of warning, preparation and consideration that should have been given to us.” He and other UPN owners are reviewing their affiliation agreements and evaluating their legal position.
Already, the merger is sending aftershocks across the station marketplace. Granite Broadcasting has deals to sell its WB stations in Detroit and San Francisco for a hefty $180 million, but that was before The CW aligned with CBS-owned UPNs in both markets. At the same time, Granite is in the process of buying the CBS affiliate in Binghamton, N.Y., in a deal that's conditioned on its two WB sales.
Emmis Communications has been trying for months to sell its Orlando, Fla., WB affiliate. In New Orleans, Belo still has not closed its purchase of UPN affiliate WUPN, and the CW affiliation has already been granted to Tribune's WNOL there.
For stranded stations, salvation may come from one of the most affected station owners: News Corp.'s Fox Television Stations unit. At last week's NATPE convention, TV executives were buzzing that Fox may create a second programming service to power its nine UPN outlets that lose their affiliation. Already Fox has begun to remove mention of UPN from the stations.
A “Fox II” service could be first-run shows, such as Twentieth's proposed English-language telenovelas, news from sister Fox News Channel or reruns of Fox shows. The prospect of such a network has other groups, including LIN Television, which owns several endangered UPN affiliates, slightly more upbeat.
“The difference here is that you're not in it alone. You've got Rupert with you,” says LIN Television CEO Gary Chapman, referring to News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The CW and the stations
With deals with Tribune and CBS, the new network is already cleared in 20 of the top 25 TV markets, leaving Fox-owned UPN affiliates out in the cold
Market WB owner UPN owner CW affiliate
New York Tribune Fox Tribune
Los Angeles Tribune Fox Tribune
Chicago Tribune Fox Tribune
Philadelphia Tribune CBS CBS
Boston Tribune CBS Tribune
San Francisco Granite* CBS CBS
Dallas Tribune CBS Tribune
Washington Tribune Fox Tribune
Atlanta Tribune CBS CBS
Houston Tribune Fox Tribune
Detroit Granite* CBS CBS
Tampa, Fla. Sinclair CBS CBS
Seattle Tribune CBS CBS
Phoenix Belo Fox TBD
Minne-St. Paul Sinclair Fox TBD
Cleveland Winston Bcstg. Raycom Media TBD
Miami Tribune CBS Tribune
Denver Tribune Channel 20 TV Co.* Tribune
Sacramento Gannett CBS CBS
Orlando Emmis Fox TBD
St. Louis Tribune Roberts Bcstg. Tribune
Pittsburgh Sinclair CBS CBS
Portland, OR Tribune Meredith Tribune
Baltimore Sinclair Fox TBD
Indianapolis Tribune LIN TV Tribune
*Sale of station pending TBD = Affiliation to be determined
Source: Company releases, B&C research
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6302849.html?display=Feature&referral=SUPP
Sports On TV
NFL Network Will Carry Eight Prime-Time Games
By Richard Sandomir The New York Times January 28, 2006
The National Football League will place eight prime-time Thursday and Saturday games on its NFL Network starting in 2006, a senior league executive said.
The league had been negotiating intently in recent weeks with Comcast, the largest cable operator in the country, about putting games on what would be a reconstituted OLN network and expanding distribution of the NFL Network on Comcast systems, where it is carried on a digital tier.
But yesterday morning, the league decided not to go into business with Comcast and to put the games on the NFL Network, which has had preseason games but no regular-season broadcasts. Comcast had no comment.
Putting the games on the NFL Network is a change for the league, which is accustomed to being richly compensated by networks with rights fees. Now, the NFL Network is building its own asset, for which it can presumably charge higher monthly subscriber fees while still collecting huge payments from CBS, Fox, NBC, ESPN and DirecTV.
The schedule is made up of games that would have been on Saturdays late in the season on CBS or Fox, or on those networks' regional schedules, said the executive, who was granted anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the deal. The first game will be on the Thanksgiving night, between the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins. All games will be simulcast on local broadcast stations in the markets of the teams playing.
The NFL Network has 35 million cable and satellite subscribers, and it the addition of regular-season games will probably vastly increase its customer base and add cable operators like Time Warner and Charter, which have so far resisted signing on.
"They'll be able to build the NFL Network into something far more significant," said Marc Ganis, a sports industry consultant. "On the 357 days when games are not being carried, N.F.L. programming will be going into people's homes."
The eight-game package had been the subject of talks with ESPN and News Corporation, the parent of Fox Broadcasting, but at the end, the discussions were between Comcast and the league.
The league's decision to build the NFL Network with regular-season games comes nine months after it completed deals with NBC Universal Sports on a six-year, $3.6 billion deal to carry Sunday night games and with ESPN on an eight-year, $8.8 billion contract to show "Monday Night Football." In November 2004, CBS and Fox extended their Sunday deals for six years, with CBS paying $622 million annually and Fox paying $712 million. DirecTV extended its contract for $3.5 billion over five years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/28/sports/football/28nfl.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print
Question for all: (I assume the answer is yes, but) does the NFL Network broadcast in HD?
Sports On TV
NFL Network to televise regular-season games
(NFL.com)
(Jan. 28, 2006) -- NFL Network, the NFL's two-year-old television channel, will begin airing a "run up to the playoffs" package of eight primetime regular-season NFL games starting in the 2006 season, Commissioner Paul Tagliabue announced.
The eight-game package will consist of primetime games airing from Thanksgiving to the end of the regular season on Thursday and/or Saturday nights.
The inaugural game of the package is scheduled for Thanksgiving night on Thursday, Nov. 23, as part of a new Thanksgiving Day tripleheader. Games telecast on NFL Network will include pregame and postgame shows.
"After discussing this new package of games with many potential partners, we decided it would be best presented on our own, high-quality NFL Network, which has developed so rapidly that the time had come to add live regular-season games to the programming," Commissioner Tagliabue said. "In the end, we wanted these games on our network, which is devoted 24/7 to the sport of football, and not on a multi-sport network."
NFL Network will make all of its games available on free, over-the-air television in the participating team markets, continuing the NFL's long-standing practice of making all of its games, including the playoffs and Super Bowl, available on free, over-the-air television.
"The NFL has traditionally been at the forefront of innovation and new technology dating back to starting NFL Films in the ‘60s, and Pete Rozelle and Roone Arledge creating Monday Night Football in 1970," said Commissioner Tagliabue. "With NFL Network, we are creating a fresh, innovative programming package that will complement all of our television partners."
NFL Network's new eight-game package was created by shifting Saturday and Sunday games from previous arrangements. In November of 2004, CBS and FOX agreed to extend their packages for six more years. NBC and ESPN last April secured rights for six and eight years, respectively.
"It was decided after surveying the rapidly evolving media landscape that a year-round channel dedicated to our sport was the best way to continue to develop and serve our fan base," NFL Network President & CEO Steve Bornstein said. "This is an opportune time to present these games ourselves and develop new ways to deliver the game of football at all levels to sports fans."
Agreements for all available NFL television packages now are concluded. Following are the rights holders beginning in 2006:
• CBS -- AFC package -- Sunday afternoons [1 & 4 p.m. ET]
• FOX -- NFC package -- Sunday afternoons [1 & 4 p.m. ET]
• NBC -- Primetime broadcast package -- Sunday evenings [8:15 p.m. ET]
• ESPN -- Monday Night Football package -- Monday evenings [8:30 p.m. ET]
• NFL Network -- Special Late-Season package -- Thursday and/or Saturday evenings [8 p.m. ET] (beginning Thanksgiving)
• DirecTV -- Sunday Ticket satellite package [1 & 4 p.m. ET]
http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/9193472
Fred, if you use the CODE switch it helps with charts like the one below, it didn't do so well with this particular one, but it generally makes those sort of charts easier to read.
The switch is (CODE) and (/CODE), just replace the () with brackets [].
Market WB owner UPN owner CW affiliate
New York Tribune Fox Tribune
Los Angeles Tribune Fox Tribune
Chicago Tribune Fox Tribune
Philadelphia Tribune CBS CBS
Boston Tribune CBS Tribune
San Francisco Granite* CBS CBS
Dallas Tribune CBS Tribune
Washington Tribune Fox Tribune
Atlanta Tribune CBS CBS
Houston Tribune Fox Tribune
Detroit Granite* CBS CBS
Tampa, Fla. Sinclair CBS CBS
Seattle Tribune CBS CBS
Phoenix Belo Fox TBD
Minneapolis Sinclair Fox TBD
Cleveland Winston Bcstg. Raycom Media TBD
Miami Tribune CBS Tribune
Denver Tribune Channel 20 TV Co.* Tribune
Sacramento Gannett CBS CBS
Orlando, Fla. Emmis Fox TBD
St. Louis Tribune Roberts Bcstg. Tribune
Pittsburgh Sinclair CBS CBS
Portland, Ore. Tribune Meredith Tribune
Baltimore Sinclair Fox TBD
Indianapolis Tribune LIN TV Tribune
Question for all: (I assume the answer is yes, but) does the NFL Network broadcast in HD?
Yes, but it doesn't have anywhere near the carriage of the other major networks. I think it's on a DirecTV special events channel(90-100), but on low bandwidth Comcast systems it's not available. I think Dish has it as well but I'm not positive,
This will be interesting, if I don't have DirecTV come next season it may be the first season in awhile that I won't be able to see some games in HD
Inundated
01-28-06, 03:59 PM
NFL Network does have an HD channel, which right now only has "Game of the Week" and some pre-season games in HD. We have it on Adephia/Cleveland. Its distribution is not nearly as broad as other HD channels, though I assume this will change now.
Inundated
01-28-06, 04:01 PM
Sacramento Gannett CBS CBS
They're wrong here...WB in the Sacramento market (KQCA "WB 58") is owned by Hearst-Argyle (duopoly with KCRA/3 NBC). Gannett owns ABC affil KXTV/10.
Fred, if you use the CODE switch it helps with charts like the one below, it didn't do so well with this particular one, but it generally makes those sort of charts easier to read.
The switch is (CODE) and (/CODE), just replace the () with brackets [].
Thanks Jim -- maybe it will help with the weekly ratings, too.
I'll experiment a bit.
Commentary: The Business of TV
The Math Behind The CW
Does combining two struggling networks equal one success?
By John M. Higgins Broadcasting & Cable 1/30/2006
Time Warner is the largest media company, not just in the country but in the entire world. Its Warner Bros. Television dominates the TV-production industry, supplying more shows to broadcast networks than anyone. Yet, for all that clout, Time Warner executives couldn't manage to successfully program The WB for two prime time hours, six nights a week.
Viacom and its new spawn, CBS Corp., are smaller but did no better with UPN.
After a decade on the air, the networks are folding, with the pieces combined into a new channel, The CW network.
The inability of such powerful companies to make even modest channels work on the air speaks volumes about the state of TV networks. Consolidation is a classic response of companies stuck in a mature business, and every network is stuck. The broadcast networks' revenue growth averaged an unimpressive 4% over the past five years, and the next five look no better. If the ad market is slow and programmers can't chisel audience from rivals, combining operations is often the only way to squeeze some earnings growth.
“A major, major change”
Irwin Gottlieb was a little bit alarmed by the shrinking number of major broadcast networks. The CEO of Group M—who controls ad-buying firms that spend $20 billion of clients' ad dollars—suggests rewinding five years: “Would you have ever contemplated that we're going from six networks to five, instead of going from six networks to seven? We haven't taken a step back in a long time. We've always moved ahead.”
He adds, “For the first time, we are contemplating the ability to economically produce content for six networks; we are clearly questioning the ability of the [ad] market to support six networks. That's a major, major change.”
Univision and Pax would no doubt object to their exclusion from Gottlieb's network headcount. (Indeed, Univision instantly protested The CW proclaiming itself “the fifth network” since the Spanish-language network's audience already exceeds both The WB's and UPN's.) But Gottlieb's point is clear: Broadcasters' profits are imperiled, nibbled away by cable and further threatened as viewers and advertisers are distracted by the Web.
CBS and Time Warner will be 50-50 partners in The CW, but no money changes hands. Tribune Co. will surrender its 22% stake in The WB (which analysts believed was worthless, anyway) in exchange for an affiliation agreement to The CW for 16 of its old WB stations. CBS Corp. CEO Leslie Moonves says CBS' Paramount Television and Warner Bros. will co-produce programming that appears on CW.
The deal may initially look like a merger of The WB and UPN, but it's carefully crafted in a different way. The two networks are being shut down and some of their assets drawn upon to create what CBS and Time Warner tout as “the new fifth network.” That's more than mere hype. Executives believe that closing the old networks frees them of obligations to angry former WB and UPN affiliates not chosen for The CW. That's a contentious issue roiling station groups, even big ones like Fox TV Stations.
The deal is being driven by years of losses. The WB and UPN were launched for the same reason, providing a TV platform for their studio parents. Executives at Warner Bros. and UPN parent Paramount worried that loosening federal rules would have the networks developing more of their own entertainment programming or strong-arming studios for a big piece of backend sales. So The WB and UPN were started to ensure that the studios' TV factories always had a ready outlet.
But it has been an expensive outlet. Securities filings show that The WB has burned through about $600 million; Morgan Stanley media analyst Rich Bilotti estimates that UPN has lost at least $500 million. The studios have had few giant hits to make up those losses through syndication or DVD sales.
Without detailing any numbers, Moonves says, “These two networks would have closed or would have continued to stumble along.” But by cherry-picking the strongest shows—like The WB's Smallville and Gilmore Girls plus UPN's Veronica Mars and America's Next Top Model—The CW should be profitable from the start.
“You keep the best of both networks,” Moonves says. “That's a pretty good way to start a network.”
However, there is no guarantee that combining the leavings of two troubled networks will breed success.
Is cable next?
Moonves dismisses the notion that the deal is driven by maturity of the whole broadcast-network sector. These netlets aren't in decline; they never really gelled to begin with as they fought it out behind the Big Four networks.
“Five networks was probably the right number of networks all along, even way back when,” Moonves says.
Perhaps. But maybe broadcast networks are simply in the same maturity slump that's gripping TV stations. Local broadcasters are stuck with average revenue growth around 4%, and there's no end in sight. Station groups generally complain that ownership restrictions—particularly those limiting duopolies—keep them from following the natural course, consolidation.
That's the path you see in slow-growth industries around the country from department stores to telephone companies.
Could cable programming be next? Major basic networks are generally growing now, but the easiest gains are from increasing distribution and raising license fees paid by cable and DBS operators. Meanwhile, smaller networks peck away at the top 10 channels, limiting their audience and advertising growth.
Nobody likes to grow old.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6302852.html?display=John+Higgins&referral=SUPP
gsg8838
01-28-06, 06:11 PM
"The deal may initially look like a merger of The WB and UPN, but it's carefully crafted in a different way. The two networks are being shut down and some of their assets drawn upon to create what CBS and Time Warner tout as “the new fifth network.” That's more than mere hype. Executives believe that closing the old networks frees them of obligations to angry former WB and UPN affiliates not chosen for The CW. That's a contentious issue roiling station groups, even big ones like Fox TV Stations."
If I read this right what will keep Fox from raiding WB & UPN for non Warner Bros. & Viacom shows ?
If they are shuting down then the shows should be free to go to "Fox2"?
I would not put this past Fox trying this for a little pay back.
Excellent observation, gsg8838.
Payback is always fun.
(And welcome to the forum!)
jim tressler
01-28-06, 06:47 PM
:) My favorite Cleveland Indian player when I was a kid (grew up in Cleveland) was Duane Kiper !! lol - I knew he was broadcasting.. seen him a few times on ESPN national game.. but didnt know he was a regular Giants announcer
jim
Duane Kuiper and Mike Krukow, the Giants guys,
jim tressler
01-28-06, 06:49 PM
Directv was dead on last year with game of the week in HD.. always there.. This year it's been off more often then on.. damn you directv!!! lol
Yes, but it doesn't have anywhere near the carriage of the other major networks. I think it's on a DirecTV special events channel(90-100), but on low bandwidth Comcast systems it's not available. I think Dish has it as well but I'm not positive,
This will be interesting, if I don't have DirecTV come next season it may be the first season in awhile that I won't be able to see some games in HD
GeorgeLV
01-28-06, 06:52 PM
I think the "Fox 2" rumor is only viable if Sinclair get on board.
:) My favorite Cleveland Indian player when I was a kid (grew up in Cleveland) was Duane Kiper !! lol - I knew he was broadcasting.. seen him a few times on ESPN national game.. but didnt know he was a regular Giants announcer
jim
If you get MLB EI, make sure to tune them in.
(And if you don't taker advantage of the early season free looks).
Kuiper and Krukow are delightful, knowledgeable, have a lot of fun, and while they take the game seriously, they understand it is just a game -- and there are 162 of them!)
(And this comes from a lifetime Giants-hater.)
I think the "Fox 2" rumor is only viable if Sinclair get on board.
That could be, although everyone at NewsCorp has been quick to quash those "Fox2" rumors.
And I am not sure it is in Rupert's style to make deals with small fish (and I don't mean to be offensvive to any Sinclair fans) like Sinclair.
He much prefers to go it alone, or make deals with the (other) big players. I don't think Sinclair is in Rupert's league.
Certainly it isn't financially, and as best I can see, not when it comes to business/financial imagination, either.
Commentary: The Business of TV
CW: Can You Feel the Love?
By J. Max Robins Broadcasting & Cable 1/30/2006
Certainly a number of factors were at play in the decision to combine the flagging fortunes of UPN and The WB, and make lemonade from a couple of lemons. Timing was essential in the birth of The CW, as the new CBS Corp./Warner Bros. network has been dubbed. Both sides' pacts with affiliates were about to run out. Corporate parent Time Warner, with barbarian Carl Icahn at the gate, and the newly single CBS didn't need any more red ink from their respective network offspring.
Without a deal, “these two networks would have closed or would have continued to stumble along,” CBS Corp. CEO Leslie Moonves tells B&C's John Higgins (see Money Talks, page 8). With Wall Street particularly unforgiving toward media companies of late, the former was a more likely scenario than the latter.
Still, none of this would have happened, claim the deal's architects, if the principals didn't have personal and professional bonds that go back some two decades.
Moonves calls Warner Bros. Entertainment chief Barry Meyer a “mentor” from the days when Moonves ran the network-TV department at Meyer's studio.
The deal was put in motion at a dinner party around Thanksgiving. “We started kicking it around there in front of our wives, who got mad because we were talking business,” says Moonves.
Dawn Ostroff, who ran programming at UPN and will do likewise atop The CW, has a relationship with Moonves that goes back to the 1980s, when he was an executive at 20th Century Fox and she was a secretary.
The point guy on the WB side, Warner Bros. TV chief Bruce Rosenblum, calls CBS Paramount TV head Nancy Tellem, herself a Warner alum and Rosenblum's UPN counterpart during almost three months of super-secret negotiations, “somebody who is like a sister” to him. “We talk in shorthand,” he says. “There's a long history of respect and trust.”
Decades-old friendships, personal and professional, not only helped keep this deal quiet but likely were a factor in a co-venture that both sides had discussed privately, on and off, for years. (Though such ties were not enough to protect WB entertainment chief David Janollari, who was a key Moonves lieutenant when both worked at Warner Bros., or Garth Ancier, the departing WB chairman.)
But chumminess is certainly no guarantee of success for The CW. Certain elements of the partnership appear structured to create power centers on each side that play to respective strengths. Most of the sales and marketing functions will come