Hot Off The Press! The Latest Television News and Info [Text View] - Page 42

fredfa

04-12-06, 10:20 AM

The 2006-2007 TV Season
The pilots

A Complete survey of network pilot orders for the 2006-07 television season
By Andrew Wallenstein The Hollywood Reporter Published April 12, 2006

If the 2006-07 primetime schedule is a puzzle, consider the pilots as the missing pieces.

Nearly 100 comedies and dramas are in contention next month for a dwindling number of time slots on five networks (bye-bye, WB Network and UPN; hello, CW).

But as broadcast execs begin scrutinizing tapes of each project, here's something to keep in mind: Pilots don't get series orders on creative merit alone. A complex web of factors dictate their desirability, and none of them is more important than the scheduling needs of each network for the fall and beyond.

Perhaps the biggest question mark hovering over the 2006-07 schedule is whether ABC will break up its Sunday lineup to help patch potholes on other nights. The network is said to be weighing moving either "Desperate Housewives" or "Grey's Anatomy," which could very well leave the most desirable piece of primetime real estate for a pilot in the Sunday 10 p.m. slot.

"We have three big shows on Sunday, so there will be pressure to spread the wealth," ABC executive vp entertainment Jeff Bader said, noting "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" at 8 p.m.

Because ABC's Sunday series presently have broad appeal, a distinct female skew and touches of comedy and soap opera, the network will likely tap a series with those same qualities.

There are more than a few options, including Warner Bros. Television's "Men in Trees," with Anne Heche playing a psychologist looking for love in Alaska; Touchstone Television's "Brothers & Sisters," a family drama with Calista Flockhart and Rachel Griffiths, or Sony Pictures Television's "Women in Law," a workplace dramedy with Regina King and Kelli Williams.

The failure of comedy pair "Jake in Progress" and "Emily's Reasons Why Not" leaves a vacuum at 9 p.m. Monday. With the pressure on to measure up to the absent "Monday Night Football" and ABC's strong female skew on the night with "Wife Swap" at 8 p.m. and "The Bachelor" at 10 p.m., "Housewives" or "Anatomy" could end up there as well. That would leave room for another launch spot at 10 p.m. because "Bachelor" isn't likely to run more than one cycle per season.

Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday are other nights where ABC might seek to shore up crumbling comedy lineups with new product. Leading the list of likely candidates for an open slot is "In Case of Emergency," a Touchstone project that already has a six-episode commitment.

Fox will come into the fall largely at the mercy of its postseason baseball coverage, which weighed down its fourth-quarter ratings. All the network can do is repeat the strategy it employed in 2005-06: establish its entertainment programs as early in the season as it can and use baseball as a promotional base for male-friendly fare.

That strategy helped first-year standouts "Prison Break" and "Bones," which gives the network more strength to build around. "We plan to stick with our fourth-quarter strategy again this year, but now we have a bigger stable of shows," said Preston Beckman, executive vp strategic program planning at Fox.

That likely will mean new dramas come in as companions for established hours Monday-Wednesday. 20th Century Fox TV probably had the sexual tension between the protagonists in "Bones" in mind when developing "Primary," which features romantically entangled hostage negotiators; the serialized suspense of "Vanished" seems in the mold of "Break."

"Because we have 'Break,' 'House' and 'Bones,' we have clear targets for our dramas," Beckman said. "Our development was informed by those shows."

A bigger challenge awaits on Thursday and Friday, when Fox will lose some of the few remaining programs it has in "That '70s Show" and "Malcolm in the Middle," which end their runs this season. With Fox struggling on an important night like Thursday, the network might have to make a big move, maybe with its most anticipated comedy pilot: "Raymond" co-star Brad Garrett in Sony's " 'Til Death." If Fox doesn't get a foothold on Thursday in the fall, the long-rumored switch of "American Idol" just might be in the offing.

"Idol" has been a midseason boon to Fox, but CBS also has made some fortuitous gains in 2006 that will help come fall. Early indications are that new additions "The Unit" and "The New Adventures of Old Christine" have the ratings power to stay on the schedule next season, which means CBS may need few pilots to bolster its stable schedule.

"It's been a nice shot in the arm," Kelly Kahl, senior executive vp programming operations, said of the eye network's midseason successes. "As we continue to build this wall, it's (potentially) two more pieces."

But the wall could require some work. On Monday, a slot could open up in CBS' healthy comedy lineup if the network doesn't come to terms with Sony on a ninth season of 8 p.m. entry "The King of Queens." That would likely mean "How I Met Your Mother" would move back 30 minutes to provide lead-in support for a new comedy.

The eye also might try again to reload the genre into the difficult Wednesday 8-9 p.m. berth, where "Out of Practice" and "Courting Alex" tanked late in the season. "We'd like to see comedy viable somewhere else on the schedule" besides Monday, Kahl noted.

The surest bet to join CBS next season on the comedy front is WBTV's "The Class," which got a 13-episode order last year. CBS likely will also go in-house for another comedy or two, perhaps "Play Nice" from "Everybody Loves Raymond" executive producer Phil Rosenthal.

CBS is as solid as they come on the drama front, but there are gaps that could see new hours installed Tuesday at 10 p.m. or Friday at 9 p.m. The perennial speculation that CBS will scrap its two-hour Sunday movie persists as well, which could leave room to launch a pair of dramas on the back of "Cold Case." It's an audacious gambit, but with NBC out of the drama business in the fourth quarter because of football, there might be no better time to try.

The big question for CBS drama is whether it can resist piling yet another procedural drama onto a schedule teeming with successes in that genre. The network has a few to choose from including a project from "CSI" executive producer Carol Mendelsohn. There also are some hours with high-profile names attached, including James Woods in Imagine Entertainment's "Shark," Ray Liotta in WBTV's "Smith" and John Leguizamo in CBS Paramount Network TV's "Edison."

Trailing its competitors in the ratings, NBC may be the most in need of new blood but will likely make the fewest additions come fall. It already has committed to two new dramas for next season, "The Black Donnellys" and "Kidnapped," and a third, "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," is virtually assured a spot on the schedule.

"There's a very good chance all three can be used in the fall, but one could be reserved for midseason," said Mitch Metcalf, executive vp program planning and scheduling at NBC.

The midseason emergence of "Deal or No Deal" was a godsend for NBC, which was weak at 8 p.m. every night of the week. The game show likely will be pressed into anchor duty on at least two nights -- Monday and Friday are good bets -- but Metcalfe could see a pilot stepping in on Tuesday or Wednesday at 8 p.m.

"We're going to rely on new scripted development in combination with reality at 8," Metcalfe said.

That means a broad-appeal project like "Heroes," NBC Universal TV Studio's take on superheroes, could get the nod. That likely won't mean stacking comedies from 8-9 p.m.; don't be surprised to see NBC take all its viable comedies -- "The Office," "My Name Is Earl" and, to some extent, "Scrubs" -- and use their collective strength to block out Thursday from 8-10 p.m., leaving room for just one comedy to join them. Perhaps NBC Uni/Sony's "Community Service," with Jay Mohr as a big-city jerk seeking redemption in a small town, may be in keeping with the tone of "Earl."

NBC will get some breathing room when the NFL kicks off a new Sunday night game on its air. It also will be a good promotional base for male-skewing programming to launch when the season ends, the most obvious candidate being the football-themed NBC Uni/Imagine TV drama "Friday Night Lights."

"When we launch Sunday in January, we will launch midseason product not just for Sunday but for other nights of the week," Metcalfe said.

That leaves the CW, whose schedule will take shape in the combined form of the best assets drawn from the WB and UPN. That will likely leave just one or two projects to be drafted from a field of just seven pilot orders. Strong consideration has to go to WBTV's untitled Aquaman project that could be just the companion it needs to keep its momentum going on Thursdays.

And if the CW keeps its urban-skewing comedies together, don't count out "The Game," CBS Paramount TV/Grammnet Prods.' "Girlfriends" spinoff.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/feature_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002315613

fredfa

04-12-06, 10:40 AM

The Business of Television
TiVo and DIRECTV Agree to Extend Relationship for Three Years
(TiVo Press Release)
Wednesday April 12, 8:00 am ET

Agreement Guarantees Quality Service for Existing DIRECTV TiVo Subscribers;
Also Addresses Intellectual Property

ALVISO, Calif., April 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO - News), the creator of and a leader in television services for digital video recorders (DVR), and DIRECTV, Inc. (NYSE: DTV - News), the nation's leading digital television service provider, today announced a three-year extension to the TiVo-DIRECTV commercial agreement.

Existing DIRECTV TiVo subscribers will be able to continue to receive the award-winning TiVo® service, with TiVo providing ongoing maintenance and support. In addition, TiVo and DIRECTV agree not to assert patent rights against the other. The agreement also extends the advertising relationship between the two companies.

DIRECTV will continue to service existing DIRECTV receivers with TiVo service. While specific financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed, the recurring monthly economics of the agreement are similar to the economics for DIRECTV receivers with TiVo service activated since 2003.

"We are pleased to have reached an agreement with DIRECTV that will allow us to continue to provide our service to the more than 2 million DIRECTV TiVo households," said TiVo CEO Tom Rogers. "As the pioneer in the DVR market, we have created a service that is highly valued by consumers because of our technology, the wide range of our unique features and the unparalleled ease of our user experience. This agreement reflects TiVo's popularity among DIRECTV subscribers and importantly respects the value of our intellectual property as well."

"By extending our agreement with TiVo, we are ensuring quality support for DIRECTV customers who already own a DIRECTV TiVo unit," said Romulo Pontual, DIRECTV's chief technology officer. "We are pleased to cooperate with TiVo in a way that will best serve DIRECTV and our DIRECTV TiVo customers."

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060412/sfw019.html?.v=44

CPanther95

04-12-06, 10:43 AM

If only they'd include Tivo firmware updates as part of the agreement. But I doubt D* wants to allow a widening of the already wide gap in functionality between the Tivos and D* DVRs. :(

fredfa

04-12-06, 10:52 AM

The Cable Ratings
Steam heating: HBO’s 'Big Love' looks lasting

By Abigail Azote MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 12, 2006, 01:10

Pressure has been on for HBO to come up with its next big hit, as old ones like “Sex and the City” and “Six Feet Under,” and soon “Sopranos,” end their runs.

The network has tried, with often disastrous results, as with Lisa Kudrow’s quickly canceled “The Comeback,” or simply disappointing results, as with “Carnivale,” which was canceled after two seasons.

But in the meantime the network appears to have set its mind to mastering the craft of developing series that will prove solid performers with the network’s core viewers, relying on elements that have worked for HBO in the past.
Enter “Big Love,” the new series about the ever-so-complicated lives of polygamist Bill Henrickson, played by Bill Paxton, and his three wives. If "Sopranos" is a super hit, “Six Feet Under” was a solid performer, and certainly the model for "Big," as a drama about an unusual family.

Last week the show averaged a 2.7 household rating, up 23 percent from the previous week and down just a tenth of a point from its premiere average. The show is averaging a 2.5 through five episodes, 47 percent more than what “Under” averaged when it concluded its final season last year.

“Big" is far from a breakout hit, routinely losing about half of lead-in “Sopranos’” audience. And in a highly competitive Sunday 10 p.m. timeslot, it slumps against original episodes of the ABC hit “Grey’s Anatomy.” Last week it faced a repeat.

Yet it could very well prove to have the staying power of “Under,” which lasted five seasons, with the endless twists and turns one comes to expect from an HBO series. It also has some shady undertones in the tradition of the “Sopranos.”

“The soup starts out cold, but give it a chance to warm up,” says the Philadelphia Inquirer. “‘Big Love’ is big and lovely enough to keep Sundays on HBO bubbling on for a few years.”

Residing in suburban Salt Lake City, Bill and his clan are just like any other dysfunctional family, only multiplied three times over.

First wife Barb, played by Jeanne Tripplehorn, wants a life outside of the home. Second wife Nicki, played by Chloe Sevigny, has secretly racked up some $60,000 in credit card debt. And third wife Margene, played by Ginnifer Goodwin, struggles to assert her position as more than just the babysitter.

Work is equally complicated for Henrickson, who is being squeezed for more payback by the Prophet, head of the cult/clan to which he used to belong, for money he borrowed to start his growing chain of Home Depot-type stores. The Prophet, played by Harry Dean Stanton, also happens to be a father-in-law.

All the while the family has to keep their unique arrangement a secret, even in Utah. The Mormon Church has outlawed the practice of polygamy since 1890.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4062.asp

fredfa

04-12-06, 12:09 PM

(From Marc Berman’s Wednesday, April 12, 2006, Programming Insider column at Mediaweek.com )
National Ratings in Primetime

Week of April 3-9, 2006

CBS and Fox maintained leadership for the week of April 3, 2006, with the Eye net first in households, total viewers and adults 25-54, and the home of American Idol and House No. 1 among adults 18-49 and adults 18-34. Fox built by margins of 15 to 25 percent year-to-year, while CBS was close to comparable levels. Worth noting at Fox was House at a series-high 22.71 million viewers and a 9.3/23 among adults 18-49.

NBC found itself on the plus side thanks to two more editions of Deal or No Deal, tying ABC for No. 2 among adults 18-34, and finishing third elsewhere. Year-to-year, NBC increased by as much as 12 percent. ABC, which finished fourth in four of the five surveyed categories with losses of 6 to 12 percent, took a hit minus Desperate Housewives and an original episode of Grey’s Anatomy. UPN and the WB shared the No. 5 and 6 spots at levels close to one year earlier.

In new time period news, CBS’ The Amazing Race got respectable sampling Wednesday at 8 p.m. with the highest rating in the time period among adults 18-34 (2.4/ 8), adults 18-49 (3.1/ 9) and adults 25-54 (3.8/10) with regularly scheduled programming since Star Search on March 12, 2003. NBC’s Heist, which flipped time periods with Law & Order, sunk to a series-low 6.20 million viewers (#68) with a 1.8/ 4 among adults 18-49 (tied for #76) in the Wednesday 9 p.m. hour. Opposite a repeat of CBS’ CSI: NY, fading Law & Order perked up to 10.84 million viewers (#24) with a 3.5/ 9 among adults 18-49 (tied for #26) Wednesday at 10 p.m.

Also at NBC, Friday 8 p.m. musical special Tim McGraw: Reflected hit a sour note at 6.75 million viewers (#61) and a 1.7/ 6 among adults 18-49 (Tied for #81).

Elsewhere, the final game of the NCAA men’s basketball championship closed with 17.54 million viewers -- down 27 percent from last year’s North Carolina-Illinois match-up.

As a benchmark, meanwhile, for the recent midseason entries, what follows are the rankings in order of total viewers:

Deal or No Deal (NBC) – Mon. 8 p.m.
Viewers: 17.75 million (#5 overall)
A18-49: 5.9/15 (tied for #8)

The Unit (CBS) – Tues. 10 p.m.
Viewers: 15.44 million (#10)
A18-49: 4.3/11 (tied for #16)

Inan1mous (Fox) – Wed. 9:30 p.m.
Viewers: 14.01 million (#14)
A18-49: 6.2/15 (tied for #6)

Deal or No Deal (NBC) – Wed. 8 p.m.
Viewers: 14.00 million (#15)
A18-49: 4.3/13 (tied for #16)

American Inventor (ABC) – Thurs. 9 p.m.
Viewers: 9.22 million (#35)
A18-49: 3.7/ 9 (tied for #23)

The New Adventures of Old Christine (CBS) – Mon. 8:30 p.m.
Viewers: 8.28 million (#43)
A18-49: 2.6/ 8 (tied for #50)

The Evidence (ABC) – Wed. 10 p.m.
Viewers: 7.73 million (#53)
A18-49: 3.0/ 8 (#42)

Miracle Workers (ABC) – Mon. 10 p.m.
Viewers: 7.32 million (#56)
A18-49: 2.7/ 7 (tied for #47)

Conviction (NBC) – Fri. 10 p.m.
Viewers: 6.62 million (#63)
A18-49: 2.1/ 6 (tied for #66)

Heist (NBC) – Wed. 9 p.m. (time period premiere)
Viewers: 6.20 million (#68)
A18-49: 1.8/ 4 (tied for #76)

Teachers (NBC) – Tues. 9:30 p.m.
Viewers: 5.61 million (#73)
A18-49: 2.5/ 6 (tied for No. 53)

Free Ride (Fox) – Sun. 9:30 p.m.
Viewers: 4.74 million (#77)
A18-49: 2.4/ 6 (tied for #57)

The Loop (Fox) – Thurs. 8:30 p.m.
Viewers: 3.61 million (#93)
A18-49: 1.7/ 6 (tied for #81)

Sons & Daughters (ABC) – Tues. 9 p.m.
Viewers: 3.28 million (#97)
A18-49: 1.2/ 3 (tied for #99)

Sons & Daughters (ABC) – Tues. 9:30 p.m.
Viewers: 3.13 million (#100)
A18-49: 1.2/ 3 (tied for #99)

Pepper Dennis (WB) – Tues. 9 p.m. (premiere)
Viewers: 2.61 million (#106)
A18-49: 0.7/ 2 (tied for #113)

Modern Men (WB) – Fri. 9:30 p.m.
Viewers: 1.80 million (#112)
A18-49: 0.7/ 2 (tied for #113)

The Bedford Diaries (WB) – Wed. 9 p.m.
Viewers: 1.69 million (#115)
A18-49: 0.8/ 2 (tied for #111)

Survival of the Richest (WB) – Fri. 8 p.m.
Viewers: 1.63 million (#116)
A18-49: 0.7/ 2 (tied for #113)

Here are the final national ratings for the week of April 3-9, 2006 (with percent change versus the comparable year-ago period in parentheses).

-Households:
CBS: 8.1/13 (no change)
Fox: 6.1/10 (+15)
NBC: 6.1/10 (+ 7)
ABC: 5.2/ 9 (-12)
WB: 2.0/ 3 (no change)
UPN: 1.9/ 3 (-10)

-Total Viewers:
CBS: 12.39 million (no change)
Fox: 9.92 (+18)
NBC: 9.32 (+12)
ABC: 8.08 (-10)
WB: 2.93 (no change)
UPN: 2.93 (- 4)

-Adults 18-49:
Fox: 4.2/12 (+20)
CBS: 3.6/10 (- 5)
NBC: 3.1/ 9 (+ 3)
ABC: 3.1/ 9 (- 6)
UPN and WB: 1.2/ 3 (no change each)

-Adults 25-54:
CBS: 4.6/12 (- 2)
Fox: 4.4/11 (+19)
NBC: 3.7/ 9 (+ 6)
ABC: 3.5/ 9 (-10)
WB: 1.2/ 3 (no change)
UPN: 1.1/ 3 (- 8)

-Adults 18-34:
Fox: 4.0/13 (+25)
NBC: 2.5/ 8 (no change)
ABC: 2.5/ 8 (- 7)
CBS: 2.4/ 8 (-14)
UPN: 1.4/ 4 (+17)
WB: 1.3/ 4 (+ 8)

• Source: Nielsen Media Research data

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/newsletters/proginsider/index.jsp

fredfa

04-12-06, 12:13 PM

Tuesday’s prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

04-12-06, 12:32 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Glory be for the 'Ten Commandments'

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 12, 2006

Thou shall not doubt the power of Moses to deliver stronger ratings.

Part two of ABC’s “Ten Commandments” miniseries averaged a 3.9 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 from 9 to 11 p.m. last night, down 15 percent from Monday night’s 4.6 for part one but a 77 percent improvement on what ABC had averaged in the timeslot over the last four weeks.

For the past month ABC had aired an hour of the dismally low-rated new comedy “Sons & Daughters” on Tuesdays at 9 p.m. and episodes of “Boston Legal” at 10 p.m.

Though part two’s rating was down from part one, that was not unexpected. It faced much tougher competition last night.

At 9 p.m. “Commandments” went head-to-head with Fox’s powerhouse medical drama “House,” which posted an 8.4 overnight rating among 18-49s. It also faced CBS’s “The Unit,” which delivered a 3.8. The miniseries’ top competition on Monday was Fox’s “24” with a 5.0 average.

“Commandments” grew in its second hour against lesser competition, a “CSI” rerun on CBS and NBC’s “Conviction,” jumping 11 percent from a 3.7 rating at 9 p.m. to a 4.1 at 10 p.m.

As usual, Fox led the night easily among 18-49s with a 10.0 average rating and a 27 share. CBS was a distant second at 3.3/9, ABC third at 3.2/8, NBC fourth at 2.2/6, Univision fifth at 1.6/4, WB sixth at 1.3/3 and UPN seventh at 0.9/2.

Fox started the night bettering the combined broadcast competition in the 8 p.m. hour with an 11.7 rating for “American Idol.” CBS was second with a 2.3 for a repeat of “NCIS.” The WB and ABC tied for third at 1.7, WB for “Gilmore Girls” and ABC for a “Charlie Brown” Easter special (1.8) and “Hope & Faith” (1.5), and NBC was fifth with a 1.4 for “Outrageous Moments.” Univision was sixth with a 1.3 for “Barrera de Amor” and UPN seventh with a 0.9 for a repeat of “America’s Next Top Model.”

At 9 p.m. Fox led again with its 8.4 for “House,” followed by a 3.8 for CBS for “The Unit” and ABC’s 3.7 for the first hour of “Commandments.” That left NBC fourth with a 2.6 for “Scrubs” (2.7) and “Teachers” (2.4), Univision fifth with a 2.0 for “Alborada,” WB sixth with a 0.9 for “Pepper Dennis” and UPN seventh with a 0.8 for “Veronica Mars.”

At 10 p.m., with Fox out of the picture, ABC led with its 4.1 for the second hour of “Commandments.” CBS was second that hour with a 3.9 for a repeat of “CSI,” NBC third with a 2.5 for “Conviction” and Univision fourth with a 1.3 for “Ver para Creer.”

Fox also finished first for the night among households with a 14.9 average rating and a 23 share. CBS was second at 8.3/13, ABC third at 6.2/10, NBC fourth at 3.8/6, WB fifth at 2.2/3, Univision sixth at 2.0/3 and UPN seventh at 1.4/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4065.asp

dturturro

04-12-06, 06:25 PM

I'm missing something here. When you add sports programming,it raises the costs up to where you are now with packages now.Why not just block the channels that offend you?

Because that would call for personal responsibility. We can't have that in a free society, EVERYTHING must be legislated! :rolleyes:

dturturro

04-12-06, 06:29 PM

If only they'd include Tivo firmware updates as part of the agreement. But I doubt D* wants to allow a widening of the already wide gap in functionality between the Tivos and D* DVRs. :(

I'll be the glass is half full guy and just be happy that I won't have to give up any of my DirecTiVo's for at least another 3 years :)

dline

04-12-06, 07:20 PM

The 2006-2007 TV Season
The pilots

A Complete survey of network pilot orders for the 2006-07 television season
By Andrew Wallenstein The Hollywood Reporter Published April 12, 2006
... The failure of comedy pair "Jake in Progress" and "Emily's Reasons Why Not" leaves a vacuum at 9 p.m. Monday. With the pressure on to measure up to the absent "Monday Night Football" and ABC's strong female skew on the night with "Wife Swap" at 8 p.m. and "The Bachelor" at 10 p.m., "Housewives" or "Anatomy" could end up there as well. That would leave room for another launch spot at 10 p.m. because "Bachelor" isn't likely to run more than one cycle per season ...
Interesting. Could be risky, though. I seem to remember what happened when they tried that with a little show called The Practice...

AFH

04-12-06, 07:54 PM

Interesting. Could be risky, though. I seem to remember what happened when they tried that with a little show called The Practice...

Yeah, I hear ya. Networks always get in trouble when they start moving shows around. It never fails. ABC also needs to remember that CSI Miami and on at 10pm on Mondays as well. ABC, do you really want to go there? ;)

fredfa

04-13-06, 01:09 AM

TV Notebook
As Networks Plan for the Fall, Many New Shows Teeter on the Brink

By Bill Carter The New York Times April 13, 2006

The prime-time lineups of network television shows are like any other species; they need new generations to come along constantly or they face extinction.

With just one month to go before the so-called upfronts, the announcements in New York to advertisers of their new schedules, which will include the ritual designation of which shows will survive, the network programmers are poring over the results for the new shows this season.

They will shortly decide which they can count on to keep regenerating their schedules, and which will die young.

Kelly Kahl, the chief scheduler for CBS, said he had a basic formula for how to determine whether a network had had a successful season in introducing new shows. "In my head I always think that to keep perpetuating the schedule you need two to three new shows to stick every season," Mr. Kahl said.

By that measure, every network can claim at least minimal success this season. Each of the five networks, including the new CW network, which will take shape in the fall combining the offerings of WB and UPN, is likely to bring at least two new series back from the current season. Some of those will be much easier calls to make than others.

Each network has its frail nestlings. As in every year, the shows still on the fence will have their fates decided by the quality of the new pilots that will be screened at each network over the next few weeks.

Interviews with several network executives generated widespread agreement on which were the most likely shows to return next season. Some of these have been decided because the networks have already ordered renewals on series like "Prison Break" on Fox, "Criminal Minds" on CBS and "My Name Is Earl" on NBC.

None of these new entries were quite the monster hit that ABC enjoyed the season before with "Desperate Housewives" and "Lost," but all were safely in hit territory. ABC has again had the highest-rated of the new series introduced this season with its reality hit "Dancing With the Stars." That is certain to come back, though it is not guaranteed to be next fall.

Over all, the network with the widest success was CBS, which has enhanced its competitive position over a series of years through the steady introduction of solid, if not spectacular, new series. As Leslie Moonves, the chief executive of CBS put it, "We hit a lot of doubles."

CBS may be able to bring back five or even six new shows, a sterling performance in a business where failure remains a dominant outcome for new series. Beyond "Criminal Minds," CBS also has confirmed that it will return the drama "Ghost Whisperer," as well as the comedy "How I Met Your Mother."

CBS also seems highly likely to renew both the midseason drama "The Unit" and the Julia Louis-Dreyfus comedy, "The New Adventures of Old Christine," which, if not quite up the level of the Red Sox in 2004, would represent a curse-busting moment of sorts: the first of the "Seinfeld" alumni to get a comedy past one season.

CBS could also choose to save at least one more drama, "Close to Home," a truly close call that would almost surely make it on another, less stocked network. Also on the fence are a couple of other comedies, "Out of Practice" and "Courting Alex."

The other network with the fewest concerns is Fox, which at 15 hours a week has fewer hours to fill than its other three major competitors, which all program 22 hours. "American Idol" is such a juggernaut these days — and Fox has added so many more hours of that series this season — that the network's programmers could whistle pass any graveyard of failed shows. But Fox has added a couple of useful new pieces, including "Prison Break" and another drama it has already renewed, "Bones."

Most of Fox's comedy efforts have tanked, but the network is pleased with "American Dad" on Sunday, which it ordered for a second season, and it also seems likely to bring back one fence-sitting sitcom, "The War at Home."

Preston Beckman, the chief scheduler for Fox, said the network will likely "emphasize stability" when it announces its plans next month. That might also bode well for one longer-running drama perceived to be teetering on the brink of cancellation: "The O.C."

For a network that has enjoyed more spectacular success over the past two seasons than any other, ABC is facing an unusual degree of uncertainty. A third drama introduced a year ago, "Grey's Anatomy," exploded this season into a monster hit, but the new scripted series ABC initiated included no instant successes.

ABC had great hopes for "Commander in Chief," which opened the season to hit-level ratings. But the show has fallen off almost every week since, has lost two executive producers and has been off the air for several months. It returns tonight, but if it doesn't come back with some promise, its chances of seeing another season will be marginal.

Beyond the "Dancing" series, ABC's only other significant new entry has been another reality series, "American Inventor." ABC may need a few more weeks to be certain that show is for real. Most of ABC's comedies have been all but vaporized by having to compete against "Idol," but one new addition, "Freddie," may have done enough to win a renewal.

ABC's potential problems are compounded by having to fill the hole being left by the departure of "Monday Night Football." That will necessitate adding two new hours of programs on Mondays in the fall. Looking for more of the kind of success it experienced two seasons ago, ABC ordered an unusual number of pilots for this development season, 34, as many as 10 more than any of its competitors.

NBC would still surely trade places with ABC, because it has none of the mega-hits ABC now owns; but NBC still may have fewer holes to fill in the fall because of the addition of N.F.L. football on Sunday night. That will not only take care of three hours of programming, it will also free up two dramas, "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" and "Crossing Jordan," to move elsewhere.

That will help because NBC did not replenish its diminishing store of hits with a long roster of replacements this season. "My Name Is Earl" was a gratifying hit, and became the most successful new comedy in several seasons. And NBC finally started to build some ratings for the much-admired "Office" in its second season.

But NBC's only true new hit this season has been the game show "Deal or No Deal." Unfortunately for NBC, the network has needed to run the show three times a week, which may be diluting its popularity. It will be back, of course.

None of NBC's other new entries offered much help to that struggling network. "Conviction," the new drama from Dick Wolf of "Law & Order" fame, may still have an outside chance to stay alive, but little else does.

That leaves the newly configured CW network, which will have an unusual number of existing shows to choose from, thanks to the combination of the two mini-networks. That may mean fewer opportunities for this year's new series, though one, the UPN comedy "Everybody Hates Chris," is almost surely coming back. The best prospect among the new crop at WB is the drama "Supernatural."

The one wild card in the planning for every network is the list of programs set to start up this summer. Reality hits have emerged almost every summer in the past six years, and the networks are fervently hoping to find one or two more — ones that could return during the regular season, perhaps bumping off a few of the frail survivors from this season.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/13/arts/television/13tube.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

harley1

04-13-06, 10:17 AM

WILL SHE BE IMPEACHED?
Thu Apr 13 2006 08:14:38 ET

ABC is preparing to dismiss the first female president of The United States -- after less than a year on the job!

While it is not clear if the country is ready for a woman to take the title of COMMANDER IN CHIEF, TV executives at ABC have all but decided to pull the plug on the breakthrough drama, top sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

MORE

"No one here will say publicly that it's over [for the show]," a well-placed insider said this week from Los Angeles. 'But it is over."

The program returns this evening after a long recess -- with the president's husband groping an intern!

THE IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE: LOW VIEWERSHIP

ABC suits will not renew COMMANDER unless audience levels can hold a 15 share, a source claims. The show crashed from a high of nearly 17 million viewers for its second episode to 10.4 million for its last, Jan. 24.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2cc.htm

fredfa

04-13-06, 10:21 AM

DaypartsRatings Update
For CBS, its 'Late, Late' is better better

By Abigail Azote MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 13, 2006, 01:10

For CBS, “Late Late Show” has long been a work in progress, as they say, as several hosts cycled through, each trying but failing to clock gains in viewers against NBC’s “Late Night with Conan O’Brien.”

CBS’s search could very well be over.

Almost exactly a year ago, Media Life reported on the promise of the “Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson,” which scored what was then the show’s most-watched first quarter ever. Ferguson had just taken over as host that January.

A year later, Ferguson has improved on that performance. Season to date, “Late Late Show" is up 7 percent with 1.94 million total viewers, from last year’s 1.82 million. In comparison, “Late Night” is flat with 2.5 million viewers.

That puts the Ferguson show closer to “Late Night” in households, viewers and adults 25-54 than it's been in more than a decade, according to CBS. And that's been through a slew of hosts before landing Ferguson: Tom Snyder, Craig Kilborn, and guest hosts D.L. Hughley and Michael Ian Black.

For certain, “Late Late Show,” which airs at 12:35 a.m., is not likely to overtake “Late Night” any time soon, but its performance thus far suggests Ferguson is finding his own audience, which is key, rather than serving as a button-jump for the dull interludes on “Late Night.”

In sharp contrast to O’Brien's acerbic style, Ferguson, a former “Drew Carey Show” cast member, is the warm and fuzzy sort, his humor kinder, gentler and often self-deprecating. He's also credited with being an astute interviewer of actors.

“The beauty of his show is that the interviews he conducts with other members of that profession are quite different, and mostly much better, than the other three hosts, because he's one of them,” writes Greg Stepanich of the Palm Beach Post. "The result is interviews that are much more interesting than the usual I'm-here-for-a-plug thing.”

Ferguson is also getting lots of off-camera exposure these days for “Between the Bridge and the River,” his first novel, which was released this Monday. New York Magazine calls it a “messy but highly entertaining hodgepodge of coming-of-age story, Hollywood send-up, and Jungian spirit quest.”

Meanwhile, in other daypart ratings in the week ended April 2:

Among Sunday morning shows, NBC’s “Meet the Press” and ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” were both down 8 percent from the week before, while CBS’s “Face the Nation” and “Fox News Sunday” were up 2 percent. “Press” led with 3.8 million viewers, followed by “Nation” with 3 million, “Week” with 2.4 million and “News” with 1.3 million.

NBC’s “Today” was the only morning show to dip, though by just 1 percent, to 6.1 million viewers. Both ABC’s “Good Morning America” and CBS’s “Early Show” were about flat with 5.1 and 2.9 million viewers, respectively.

In late night, NBC’s “Tonight Show” was up 4 percent with 5.5 million viewers, while CBS’s “Late Show” was down 5 percent, with 4.1 million. ABC’s “Nightline” and NBC’s “Late Night” were both up 4 percent from the previous week, with 3.5 and 2.4 million viewers, respectively.

After a bump the previous week that had NBC tying ABC among women 18-49 in daytime dramas and outperforming it in full day, NBC slid back to third place this week. It was down 21 percent to a 1.5 in daytime dramas and full day.

“Everybody Loves Raymond” was again the No.1 comedy in syndication, up 3 percent to a 6.3 household rating. The show conceded that spot to “Friends” the week before, which dropped back down to a 4.6 from a high of 6.6 fueled by a TBS marathon. Top game show “Wheel of Fortune” and top talk show “Oprah” were both down 6 percent, to a 9.0 and 6.2 rating, respectively.

For the week ended April 9, all evening newscasts again saw declines. “NBC Nightly News” averaged 8.4 million viewers, down 7 percent; “ABC World News Tonight” drew 7.8 million, down 3 percent; and “CBS Evening News” averaged 6.9 million, down 10 percent.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4091.asp

fredfa

04-13-06, 10:27 AM

A Critical View:
Trouble awaits President Allen

By Hal Boedeker Orlando Sentinel Television Critic April 13, 2006

The presidency of Mackenzie Allen enters its most perilous phase tonight. Her stay in the White House depends on whether Commander in Chief can win new constituents.

It won't be easy, because ABC has slotted Commander in Chief at 10 p.m., opposite CBS' formidable Without a Trace and NBC's durable ER. Commander in Chief remains the most-watched new series from the fall, but ABC's confusing scheduling damaged the series. So did changes at the series' helm: Creator Rod Lurie was replaced by Steven Bochco, who has been supplanted by Dee Johnson.

Tonight's episode underscores another reason the series about the first female president (played by Geena Davis) lost momentum. The program arranges engrossing conflicts, then resolves them in pat, unbelievable ways.

First gentleman Rod (Kyle Secor) is photographed in an embarrassing situation with a female intern, humiliating the president as she prepares her State of the Union message. (The episode carries the clever title "State of the Unions.")

The couple's arguments worry their three children. The president's mother, Kate (Polly Bergen), tries to comfort her daughter. Nathan Templeton (Donald Sutherland), the speaker of the House, dismisses Rod as "the town drunk."

Templeton is the show's Wile E. Coyote, a colorful villain who's always falling short. Even so, he's more dynamic than the president, because Sutherland gives a colorful, exuberant performance. As the president, Davis is limited to being strong, principled and right. Portraying a stolid role model, Davis isn't allowed to display the sly humor she revealed in her Golden Globe acceptance speech.

Next week, the president's mom disappears from the White House. The president stands by her embattled attorney general nominee (Adam Arkin). Templeton conspires to cause the president more heartache because he wants to be president. More resolutions come quickly and easily.

"It's great to lose a battle. It teaches you how to win the war," a character says.

Commander in Chief is going to have a hard time winning the war for renewal. Its main ratings sin was becoming a favorite among older viewers, a no-no in advertising-driven broadcast television. Its downfall in storytelling is a simplistic approach: It's never as complex or as credible as NBC's The West Wing.

Commander in Chief seems to be arranging a second season that would focus on a presidential race between Allen, an independent, and Templeton, a Republican. But The West Wing told such a story in superb fashion this season.

Renewal for Commander in Chief seems unlikely because of ABC's shoddy treatment and the turnover in the top producers. But Sutherland supplies zesty moments, and maybe something good lies ahead for him. Would he be available for son Kiefer's 24 next season?

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/tv/orl-commander06apr13,0,4896149,print.story?coll=orl-caltvtop

fredfa

04-13-06, 10:38 AM

The 2006-2007 Season:
ABC at the upfront: Lots of holes to fill

By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 13, 2006, 01:15

ABC has had the biggest ratings bumps and the most-buzzed-about shows the past two seasons, and so you might think that it is in the best shape heading into next month’s upfront.

That’s not the case. In fact, ABC may have more hours to fill than any other broadcast network, and it has more pilots in development, 34, than any other network.

There are three major problems ABC must address when it unveils its new schedule May 16. First, it must come up with a strong Monday strategy to take the place of “Monday Night Football,” which moves to ESPN. “MNF” was a top-20 staple, and ABC’s ratings will suffer without it.

Second, the network has to fix its comedies. Only one has averaged better than a 2.8 this season, the quickly yanked “Crumbs.” ABC has by far the weakest comedy lineup of any Big Four network, and just one of this year’s launches, “Freddie,” has a shot at a second season.

Finally, it must use hit shows “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Lost” and “Desperate Housewives” to better advantage. It did not launch a new hit show out of any of them this year, and they all rank in the top 10 among adults 18-49.

The network must make smart scheduling decisions to leverage these shows into a stronger overall schedule, instead of concentrating its strength on just two nights, Sunday and Wednesday.

"ABC, in a sense, has some of the same problems NBC faced when it was the No. 1 network—strong success in a few time periods masking problems on other nights,” says a report issued by Magna Global U.S. this week. “The network is relatively weak during two hours on Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday, and without football, needs something solid on Monday.”

Season-to-date numbers

ABC is the only network that’s grown among adults 18-49 this season, up 8 percent from a 3.8 rating to a 4.1, but some of that can be attributed to the Super Bowl. It’s averaging a 3.3 among 18-34s, up 6 percent over last season’s 3.1, and a 4.7 among 25-54s, up 7 percent over last year’s 4.4.

Safely returning

“Desperate Housewives,” “Lost,” “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” “Boston Legal,” “20/20”

Though “Legal” ranks well behind “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” among adults 18-49 Tuesdays at 10 p.m., the margin is much smaller among households, and “Legal” does well with affluent viewers. Its multiple acting Emmy wins and critical cache don’t hurt, either.

“Grey’s,” the highest-rated drama on broadcast since its post-Super Bowl outing, is expected to move from Sundays after “Housewives” to Mondays, thus giving the network a Monday anchor and opening a spot for a new show to launch where it’s guaranteed an audience.

On the bubble

"Commander in Chief,” “Hope & Faith,” “According to Jim,” “George Lopez,” “Invasion”

Actually, no ABC comedy is guaranteed a safe return, but “Hope” looks to be the most endangered. “Lopez” will likely be back because it has the best ratings of the three, and “Jim” is a former timeslot winner that was shifted to earlier in the night, where it struggled.

But “Hope” flopped on two different days, Tuesdays and Fridays, and with nearly 20 comedy pilots in development, it’s likely a goner, as are “Less Than Perfect” and “Rodney.”

In development

MediaVest, in a report issued this week, estimates that ABC has only seven solid returning hours of programming out of 22 total. Some bubble shows will make it, but there’s the potential for four new dramas and perhaps five or six comedies.

“ABC will need a successful development slate for fall 2006 more than CBS, Fox or even CW,” MediaVest predicts.

Drama “Secrets of a Small Town” sounds a lot like “Housewives,” centering around a quirky local mystery. ABC Entertainment president Steve McPherson has singled out drama “Brothers and Sisters,” with Calista Flockhart and “Six Feet Under’s” Rachel Griffiths. The network is also high on "Men in Trees" with Anne Heche.

As for comedies, “In Case of Emergency” with David Arquette already has a six-episode commitment. An untitled Patricia Heaton project looked promising until rumors surfaced that she was going to daytime. A project with Heather Locklear entitled “Women of a Certain Age” is also getting strong buzz, and the network has yet another Bonnie Hunt show in development.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4092.asp

fredfa

04-13-06, 11:21 AM

TV Notebook
`Commander in Chief' struggles

Show back, but has tough time slot, plot problems
By R.D. Heldenfels Akron Beacon Journal television writer Apr. 13, 2006

These are not good times for presidents.

In the real-life White House, President Bush is facing low approval ratings and ongoing public debates about his policies. On 24, the president is the major villain. On The West Wing, the end of Bartlet's presidency includes military action that will carry over into the next administration, and Bartlet's closest friend is dead.

Then there's Commander in Chief, which returns to ABC at 10 tonight. Trouble still swirls around Mackenzie Allen, the independent incumbent played by Geena Davis. More trouble still has been on view behind the cameras.

The show premiered last fall to mixed reviews but a large audience, and Davis won a Golden Globe for her performance. But the ratings began to slip and the show underwent a series of production changes.

Series creator Rod Lurie, reportedly having trouble meeting production deadlines, gave way to Steven Bochco. But Bochco did more than make the show run on time, trying to put his own stamp on the production. Ratings did not improve, and the series is reportedly on its third show-runner, Dee Johnson.

Then there was the long hiatus as ABC tried out other shows. And the network is bringing Commander back in a brutal time slot, with two successful shows as competition, CBS' Without a Trace and NBC's ER. (On the other hand, ABC hopes that reality show American Inventor will give Commander a reasonable lead-in audience.)

And that, finally, brings us to the show itself. Which is not very good.

I have seen two new episodes, the one airing tonight and the one airing next week, and they follow a pattern that should be familiar to returning viewers of the show.

Allen has a mess to deal with. Her enemies are many, with the most constant being the ambitious Speaker of the House, Nathan Templeton, played with sleazy delight by Donald Sutherland. Things look bad. But, in the waning minutes of the show, Allen and her team figure out a way to win.

That may be reassuring to some viewers. And Commander in Chief traffics in reassuring fantasy, such as having Allen beholden to neither major political party and so able to beat the system. Tonight's episode plays with the downside of being independent, but not in a way that keeps it from a semi-happy ending.

This is a far cry from The West Wing at its best. Yes, that show also had an element of fantasy. But the Bartlet White House lost a lot of fights. And even when it won, the win came in a world that felt real, full of talk and crowded with complicated characters.

Commander in Chief almost dares comparisons to West Wing, with one upcoming scene even imitating the dialogue of the NBC series. But as messy as West Wing was willing to get, Commander in Chief lives in a small and overly tidy world that readers of political news may not recognize.

Take tonight's episode. Allen's husband, Rod Calloway (Kyle Secor), is caught up in a scandal when, stumbling outside a party, he appears to grope a young, female political intern. The media are all over the story, which takes attention away from major legislation Allen is pushing.

So far, you can see how it would make sense. And half the audience will probably nod when the scandal proves a set-up, and the villain is revealed.

But along the way, there are scenes that don't even feel right as drama. The intern, for instance, meets with Allen's chief of staff without bringing one of the lawyers we are told she has. And the villain of the piece, once revealed, can go and have a drink in a crowded bar without a reporter or news camera in sight.

Small things, maybe. But they represent a larger struggle to figure out what the show is, a struggle that still isn't over. Tonight, for example, includes yet another change in how Allen's husband fits into things -- even as viewers are deciding whether Commander should fit into their lives.

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/entertainment/14332087.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

fredfa

04-13-06, 11:28 AM

TV Notebook
'Chief' adversaries indeed!

By David Hinckley The New York Daily News Thursday, April 13th, 2006

You'd think the producers of a TV drama about politics would realize that perhaps their most important task is to create a villain with a heart of darkness.

Just like real-life Democrats, Republicans and talk hosts do.

Yet TV's two main political series, ABC's "Commander in Chief" and NBC's "The West Wing," keep making their bad guys go good.

Both shows have been featuring story lines about elections, which are politics at its most raw, yet they refuse to make anyone an incarnation of pure evil.

The situation on "Commander in Chief," which returns from hiatus tonight, is that Geena Davis' President MacKenzie Allen has decided to run for re-election as an independent.

On "The West Wing," Republican Arnold Vinick (Alan Alda) and Democrat Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits) have just finished, or apparently finished, a season-long presidential election campaign.

True, winning the election on "The West Wing" is like winning a ticket to the unemployment line, since the show has been canceled, and "Commander in Chief" may not last long enough for MacKenzie to file petitions.

Still, you give it your best shot while the game is on, and you'd think TV, of all media, would understand bad guys.

What would "Dallas" have been without J.R. Ewing? Would "Desperate Housewives" have lasted 10 minutes if the ladies didn't have long claws?

Ironically, both "Commander" and "West Wing" have villains in the house. They just haven't maximized their potential.

Donald Sutherland's Nathan (Bloody Hell) Templeton on "Commander" personifies the smooth, smug, cynical old-boy politics that makes Allen seem like such a golden girl.

Yet the show keeps flirting with the idea he's got a good heart, which is touching but throws the show - now on its third set of writers - off-balance. If Templeton isn't the bad guy, who is? If not now, when?

"West Wing," which has always seen characters in shades of gray, put cynical characters on both campaign teams, and for a moment seemed to have a full-fledged cad: Vinick's campaign manager, Bruno Gianelli, played brilliantly by Ron Silver.

Bruno found some deep dirt on Santos, the kind that could tip an election. But Vinick decided it wouldn't be moral to use it.

Does anyone think that's how it would shake down in real life?

Does anyone think most real-life TV and radio talking heads would have moral reservations about headlining something that made "the other side" look bad?

In the real world, progressives speak of George W. Bush in terms ordinarily reserved for things found inside the shower drain. Conservatives blame Bill Clinton - five years out of the White House - for every problem this side of a cold latte.

So maybe what we've really got here is a case where TV doesn't want to imitate life.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/ent_radio/v-pfriendly/story/408297p-345622c.html

fredfa

04-13-06, 11:32 AM

TV Notebook
ABC's 'Commander' in grief

By Verne Gay Newsday Staff Writer April 13, 2006

No one ever called television an exact art, much less an art, but there is this widely held view that the hardest feat after creating a hit is killing one. A network's executives almost have to conspire to exterminate the thing - with baffling production moves, bizarre scheduling shifts or other willfully birdbrained schemes.

At least this would be the easy (or facile) way of explaining what's become of ABC's "Commander in Chief." Returning tonight after an 11-week break, "Commander" would appear as doomed as any show on the network's lineup. It goes up against an immovable cement block called "Without a Trace" - an average 19 million viewers - and a tired old cow called "ER" that nonetheless still keeps producing milk week after week. "Commander" has lost a creator, a top producer, a few writers and several million viewers, along with that initial halo of hype, goodwill, buzz and chattering class speculation that if America embraced Geena as POTUS, then why not Hillary?

"Commander's" problems have been widely reported, but 11 weeks is 11 weeks, so here's the Evelyn Wood overview: Bowing Sept. 27, "Commander" got 16.4 million viewers and 16.9 million the following week. The first drama hit of the season was prematurely crowned by the media even though inside ABC, the Maalox moments had already begun. The show's creator-producer, Rod Lurie, had fallen behind with scripts, and much worse, ABC discovered that most viewers were geriatric by TV standards (50-plus), which is to say "Commander" was advertiser-unfriendly. Lurie was soon replaced by Steven Bochco, who was, in turn, bugged by the network's constant meddling, and because no one bugs Steve, he was history before long. Viewers? All the way down to about 10 million by late January.

The show's future now belongs to Dee Johnson, who got her writing chops at "Melrose Place" and, later, at "ER" - a minor if insignificant irony. Asked about the turmoil, she conceded in a recent interview that "like all first-year shows, it was pretty chaotic, [but] there was an enormous amount of pressure on the show to begin with, and it's kind of a big show, too, in the sense that you're telling stories about the president. ... So when you get behind early at the production end of things, then you find yourself in a situation that rarely gets better. It only gets harder."

Johnson also cites a couple of other reasons that certainly added to "Commander's" burden: Fox's "House," which started banging away at it by November, then "American Idol," which supplied the coup de grace in January. Why so long to get back on the air? "As we ramp back up we wanted to get as much traction as we can to bring people back, and hopefully this new time slot will bring us some new viewers. And for the first time, we'll have a lead-in that'll help" ["American Inventor"].

Now, some additional perspective. First, the numbers: "House" (and later "Idol") did hurt, but "Commander" actually started shedding bodies long before "House" got on the air in November. "Commander's" Oct. 25 episode was off by 1 million viewers from the 16.9million high-water mark and would fall all the way to 12.6million by Nov. 15. Translation: Viewers had sampled and bailed.

Next, Bochco. He's not talking, but in a much-cited interview with Entertainment Weekly back in the relatively halcyon days of late winter, he said, "The show felt a little too broad. I wanted to create an environment of urgency. I want to show why this job really ages people."

Translation: Steve thought it was boring and Steve was right. Prime-time culture circa 2006 is effectively defined by "CSI," "24" and, to a lesser extent, "Lost." And "The West Wing" long ago established the standard of excellence that any political drama of the future would have to match or exceed. These are among the best commercial TV has to offer, and viewers - particularly trigger-happy younger ones - won't waste time with something that doesn't belong on the same playing field.

Can "Commander" survive? In tonight's, "State of the Unions," President Mackenzie Allen (Davis) is prepping for her State of the Union address while evildoer/Oval Office challenger Nathan Templeton (Donald Sutherland) is attempting to torpedo her much-cherished homeless bill. "First Gentleman" Rod Calloway (Kyle Secor) is snapped by newspaper photogs as he stumbles against a female Democratic operative, and if this isn't bad enough, a shipment of Stinger missile launchers is (presumably) stolen by terrorists.

Scandal! Intrigue! Terrorists! The future of the free world at stake! And yet ... "Commander In Chief" still feels slow, sappy, languid and forever trapped inside a Disney World version of Washington that is neither urgent nor believable.

Can this presidency be saved? Sure - fans are a forgiving lot, but not forever.

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/ny-ettel4699103apr13,0,2076746,print.column?coll=ny-television-headlines

fredfa

04-13-06, 12:26 PM

Wednesday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-13-06, 12:36 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Fox's 'Unan1mous' losing its animus

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 13, 2006

In Fox’s continual search for a lead-out that will hold more of “American Idol’s” sizable audience, it looked as though it had found a winner in the oddball reality game show “Unan1mous.” But after a strong premiere, the show has begun falling off noticeably.

“Unan1mous” last night posted a 5.4 overnight rating among viewers 18-49, down 23 percent from the 7.0 its premiere earned three weeks ago. It lost about 50 percent of “Idol’s” 10.7 lead-in audience at 9:30 p.m., even with a bit more help than usual from “Idol,” which didn’t end until 9:32 p.m. Overnights measure timeslot, not actual show, data.
Among total viewers the dropoff was even more pronounced. Fox averaged 26.4 million total viewers during that last half hour of “Idol,” but then slipped 54 percent to 12.2 million viewers for “Unam1mous.”

The show has a unique concept. Players’ task is to decide who will take home the cash grand prize. One contestant is eliminated each week, but the show won’t end until they’ve decided on a winner. In the meantime, the cash prize diminishes each week.
“Unan1mous” did finish No. 2 in its timeslot among viewers 18-49 and No. 3 among total viewers. But at this point it’s not doing much better than past post-“Idol” experiments like “Stacked” or “Wanda at Large.”

Elsewhere, NBC’s “Heist” showed exactly why the network has decided to remove it from the schedule. The final episode of the yanked show posted a 1.9 overnight rating among 18-49s and averaged just 5.5 million total viewers, both a distant fourth in the 9 p.m. timeslot.
On the strength of “Idol,” Fox took the night among 18-49s with a 6.3 average rating and a 17 share. ABC was second at 3.7/10, CBS third at 3.3/9, NBC fourth at 2.9/8, Univision fifth at 1.4/4, UPN sixth at 1.3/4 and WB seventh at 1.0/3.

At 8 p.m. Fox led with a 4.5 average rating for “The Loop” (2.1) and the first half hour of its special hour-long “Idol” results show (7.0). NBC was second with a 4.0 for “Deal or No Deal,” CBS third with a 2.5 for “The Amazing Race” and ABC a disappointing fourth with a 2.2 average for the season finales of “George Lopez” (2.3) and “Freddie” (2.1), both below their season averages.
UPN was fifth with a 2.0 for “America’s Next Top Model,” Univision sixth with a 1.2 for “Barrera de Amor” and WB seventh with a 1.1 for “One Tree Hill.”

Fox led again at 9 p.m. with an 8.1 average for the last half of “Idol” (10.7) and “Unan1mous” (5.4). ABC moved to second with a 6.0 for “Lost,” with CBS third with a 3.3 for “Criminal Minds” and NBC fourth for “Heist.” Univision was fifth that hour with a 1.8 for “Alborada,” with WB sixth with a 0.8 for “Bedford Diaries” and UPN seventh with a 0.7 for a repeat of “Veronica Mars.”

At 10 p.m. CBS took the lead with a 4.2 for “CSI: NY.” ABC was second with a 2.9 for “The Evidence,” NBC third with a 2.7 for a repeat of “Law & Order” and Univision fourth with a 1.1 for “Don Francisco Presenta.”

Fox also led the night among households, averaging a 9.2 rating and a 15 share. CBS was second at 7.3/12, ABC third at 6.1/10, NBC fourth at 6.0/10, UPN fifth at 2.3, Univision sixth at 1.9/3 and WB seventh at 1.5/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4094.asp

fredfa

04-13-06, 05:05 PM

TV Notebook
Shotgun Eviction
SHOTGUN EVICTION

By Michael Starr The New York Post April 13, 2006

ABC will likely rejigger its Sunday-night lineup next season - moving "Grey's Anatomy" or "Desperate Housewives" to a different night.

The move would free up some valuable real estate for one of three incoming shows ABC holds in high regard.

It would also give ABC a jolt elsewhere on its schedule, since both "Housewives" and "Grey's" average over 20 million viewers a week as two of TV's hottest shows.

A Sunday re-shuffling is likely, considering the network is high on three pilots - "Men in Trees" (starring Anne Heche), "Brothers & Sisters" and "Women in Law" - that it envisions airing on Sunday, ABC entertainment exec Jeff Bader told The Hollywood Reporter.

"We have three big shows on Sunday, so there will be pressure to spread the wealth," Bader said.

(The third "big" show is "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition," which is a dark-horse candidate to move nights.)

The most probable night for a "Grey's" or "Housewives" infusion would be Monday, since ABC no longer has "Monday Night Football" to prop up its prime-time schedule through the fall.

"I can't imagine ABC would move 'Housewives' because it's anchoring Sunday nights and is already working at 9 p.m., so why move it?" says industry analyst Marc Berman of Mediaweek.

"They could move 'Grey's Anatomy' to Mondays at 9 since they don't have football there anymore and they need to build that night ... and set up a long-term schedule."

Berman says Monday makes the most sense for an infusion of "Grey's" or "Housewives" - but there are other nights on ABC's schedule that could accommodate either show.

"There's a hole on Tuesdays at 9, but Thursday would be dead-in-the-water for them," he says. "Friday is not in good shape, and they wouldn't waste those shows on Saturday."

And, he says, moving either show wouldn't necessarily guarantee they could replicate their Sunday-night success.

"Even if one of these shows moved to Monday, they wouldn't get the numbers they do on Sunday."

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/66930.htm

fredfa

04-13-06, 05:26 PM

The Business of TV
Winter Olympics, Prime-Time Lineup Drag Down Q1 Profit for NBCU

By Jay Sherman TVWeek.com April 13, 2006

NBC Universal saw its segment profit fall 8 percent in the first quarter as persistent ratings weakness in NBC's prime-time lineup, along with red ink generated by the network's airing of the Winter Olympics in February, weighed heavily on the media giant.

NBCU, which is a unit of conglomerate General Electric, produced a first-quarter profit of $654 million, down from $709 million a year ago. Revenue surged 24 percent to $4.5 billion, fueled in large part by robust Olympics advertising sales and strength at NBCU's cable and film businesses. The results were released Thursday as part of GE's overall financial results for the quarter, in which GE posted a 9 percent gain in profit of $4.3 billion on a 10 percent jump in revenue to $37.8 billion.

GE officials maintained the results met their guidance for the first quarter, with the profit decline coming in weaker than initial estimates of a 10 percent drop.

However, the results continued to illustrate that woes at NBC remain a drag on NBCU's overall performance. Though prime time, television stations and television production account for 25 percent of NBCU's overall segment profit, its combined profit sank 25 percent in the quarter.

That compared with the rest of the NBCU's businesses, which posted a 22 percent increase in profit, thanks to increases in subscriber fees at its cable networks, improved prime-time ratings at news channels CNBC and MSNBC and robust DVD sales of the film "King Kong."

NBCU's airing of the Winter Olympics proved to be a money loser for the media giant, generating red ink of around $70 million in the first quarter even as $684 million in revenue was booked from the Games. However, CE officials said they expected the broadcast of the Olympics to be profitable by the end of the year, once NBC collects nonrefundable contributions from NBC affiliates.

GE Chairman and CEO Jeff Immelt said during the company's first-quarter earnings conference call that NBCU's Olympics results were in line with expectations and were due in part to Torino being what he described as "a tough venue" that offered few opportunities for other GE businesses to participate.

That won't be the case with the Summer Olympics in Beijing, which Mr. Immelt described as the "Big Magilla," that could generate up to $1 billion in revenue for the entire company.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=9773

fredfa

04-13-06, 07:15 PM

The Business of TV
Fox, affils sync up

Net agrees to share non-linear revenue
By Michael Schneider Variety.com

Fox has sealed a new deal with its affiliates that will finally allow it to enter the iPod age.

The six-year pact -- an extension of affils' previous agreement to contribute to Fox's costly NFL rights package -- dramatically increases the amount of programming the net can repurpose on the air and distribute over new media platforms, such as the Internet.

Stations will share in any revenue Fox receives from posting programming on "non-linear" media, like iPods or on-demand.

Moving forward, Fox this year will be able to repurpose 60% of its primetime programming on "non-linear" platforms, followed by 80% next year and a full 100% in year three of the deal. Affils will receive 12.5% of the revenue from any program that runs on a non-linear platform after its primetime broadcast run, and 25% of revenue from shows that hit the non-linear world before airing on the network.

Deal was hammered out by Jon Hookstratten, Fox's exec VP of network distribution, as well as Peter Levinsohn, president of digital media for the Fox Entertainment Group. Fox affiliate board leader Brian Brady, as well as Fox TV Network president Ed Wilson and Fox Networks Group prexy/CEO Tony Vinciquerra, also took part in drafting the arrangement.

"We now have complete flexibility to repurpose content broadcast on the network in a way that takes advantage of all of our new media opportunities," Levinsohn said. "The beauty of this deal is that we have created a structure with affiliates that makes them our partner. It's a symbiotic relationship between network affiliates and content companies to maximize value."

Fox had previously only been experimenting with non-linear repurposing in markets where it owned its stations.

The deal is the first between a network and affiliate body to extensively hammer out parameters on allowing programming to be distributed on alternative platforms such as the iPod or on-demand. Some specifics of the deal -- such as whether programming will show up on individual stations' websites -- still need to be ironed out.

As for more traditional TV repurposing, Fox will now be able to repurpose six hours a week of programming elsewhere on the dial (including sib cable nets like FX) - and shows will now be available for rebroadcast the day after its run on Fox. (Until now, Fox could only repurpose four hours of programming per week - and not until a week after air.) Fox will also now be able to run marathons of its shows (such as "Prison Break") on other channels up to six times a year.

Fox affils have helped contribute to Fox's pricy NFL deal for several years by buying back a set number (between 90 and 105) of 30-second spots a week. That's unchanged under the pact extension, although Brady said the stations still hope to renegotiate that buyback program.

fredfa

04-13-06, 08:35 PM

The Business of TV
TiVo Wins Patent Suit Against EchoStar

By Nick Wingfield and Andy Pasztor The Wall Street Journal April 14, 2006

TiVo Inc. won a closely-watched patent battle with EchoStar Communications Corp., in a case likely to shape competition in the market for digital video recorders.

A jury awarded TiVo of Alviso, Calif., $73 million after brief deliberations Thursday afternoon following closing arguments in a federal court in Marshall, Tex. The jury found that EchoStar willfully infringed TiVo's patent, which means the judge in the case could order up to triple the jury award in the case.

TiVo shares jumped almost 24% in after-hours trading on the news. The stock traded at 4 p.m. at $8.05, up seven cents, on Nasdaq, before the announcement. It subsequently jumped to $9.98, according to Inet ATS Inc.

TiVo's victory could give the Silicon Valley company badly needed leverage as it faces an onslaught of competitors from the cable and satellite industries. DVRs, as the popular devices are often called, help consumers record TV shows. Though TiVo helped create the category, EchoStar has also heavily marketed DVRs to its Dish Network satellite customers and is now the top provider of the technology, by some analysts' estimates.

TiVo said it intends to seek a permanent injunction preventing EchoStar from shipping its DVR products. In an interview, TiVo CEO Tom Rogers said the verdict puts TiVo in a better position as it seeks to expand its distribution alliances.

"This will send a very clear message in terms of the importance of our intellectual property," Mr. Rogers said.

Although the ruling is likely to be followed by appeals that could drag on for years, the favorable outcome for TiVo in the case could have profound implications for the Alviso, Calif., company. TiVo is facing blistering competition from much larger rivals with already-established relationships with tens of millions of television subscribers.

A win, among other things, could strengthen TiVo's financial footing. TiVo would also be in a better position to negotiate business deals with cable companies and equipment suppliers that make competing DVRs.

• Note: Wall Street Journal subscribers can read the entire story here:
http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB114496605331025525.html

Marcus Carr

04-14-06, 09:14 AM

Are Digital TVs Being Returned Because Some People Don't Understand High Definition?

Martin O'Donnell recently visited Costco Warehouse #1 in Seattle, where he saw the following sign:

All Digital TVs at Costco are displaying High Definition content. In order to view the same picture quality at home, you must upgrade to HD programming.

Martin added, "It goes on to explain how a standard definition signal displayed on an HDTV may be 'disappointing'. I'm guessing that the number of returns by 'disappointed' consumers has hit a fairly high level."

This story may have more legs than readers of Operation Gadget realize. According to an article on HomeTechNews.com, a recent survey of HDTV owners commissioned by Scientific Atlanta indicated that 49 percent of HDTV owners aren't taking advantage of the HD features of their sets. This means that they don't receive HD programming because they lack "an HD set-top box, a CableCARD, and/or an {over-the-air HD} antenna".

The article goes on to point out:

"... 28% of HDTV owners reported that they did not get any special equipment from their service provider to watch HDTV channels because the picture quality was already improved with the purchase of an HDTV."

"23% of HDTV owners did not invest in special equipment to watch HDTV channels because a message at the beginning of the programs they watch tells them that those programs are being broadcast in HD."

"... 18% reported that they believed the HD television would give them high-definition channels without additional equipment."

If a relative or friend who isn't technically-oriented suddenly announces that he or she is buying an HDTV set, try to assess their understanding of the technology and equipment and service requirements. If they don't seem to know what they need to know in order to take best advantage of the technology, consider recommending a how to book such as HDTV for Dummies or The Home Electronics Survival Guide.

http://www.operationgadget.com/2006/04/are_digital_tvs_being_returned.html

HDTV-NUT

04-14-06, 09:21 AM

fredfa

04-14-06, 10:24 AM

As sad as the story is, it actually indicates people are a lot more educated about HDTV than they were a few years ago.
And thank God Costco actually posts such a sign. There have been numerous stories over the years of people being told just to take their HDTV or HD monitor home and enjoy the HD pictures.
Surveys a couple of years ago showed close to half of buyers simply used their new HD sets to watch DVDs...and were -- for the most part -- very happy.
So if we are now down to just one of four or one of five blissfully unaware of how to receive HD pictures, that is a major improvement.

fredfa

04-14-06, 10:29 AM

The TV Column
Comedy Central Again Steals 'South Park' Thunder

By Lisa de Moraes The Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, April 14, 2006; C01

Comedy Central has gone all cautious and timid again, this time banning an image of Muhammad from an episode of its irreverent cartoon series "South Park," citing "recent world events."

Just last month, the cable network pulled a rerun of an episode in which creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker took on Scientology, citing "events of earlier this week."

The most recent cave-ola occurred during this week's denouement of a two-part episode called "Cartoon Wars." In it, Stone and Parker addressed the violence that erupted over cartoons featuring images of Muhammad that first appeared in a Danish newspaper. Representations of the prophet are banned by most schools of Islamic thought.

Weeks ago, when they were mulling the episode on this subject, Cowardly Central told Parker and Stone they could not run an image of Muhammad on the network.

Ironically, about five years ago, "South Park" did just that. That episode was called "The Super Best Friends" and in it Jesus and his Super Best Friends -- including Muhammad, Krishna, Buddha, Joseph Smith, Laotzu and Moses -- took on the church of Blaintology, founded by David Blaine, the street magician who is a sweeps special staple of ABC.

Of course that episode ran before the Sept. 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks in Manhattan and Virginia.

In Wednesday telecast of the two-parter, South Park moppet Kyle tries to persuade a Fox broadcast network executive to air, uncensored, an episode of its animated series "Family Guy" featuring an image of Muhammad.("Family Guy" was, you need to know, standing in for Parker and Stone's own show to make the point.)

Meanwhile, South Park's residents have gathered to figure out how to save themselves from the wrath of radical Muslims in the wake of the "Family Guy" broadcast.

When a pundit suggests they all bury their heads in the sand so the extremists will know they were not watching the episode, one citizen dares speak out:

Freedom of speech is at stake here, don't you all see? If anything, we should all make cartoons of Muhammad and show the terrorists and the extremists that we are all united in the belief that every person has a right to say what they want.

Look, people, it's been really easy for us to stand up for free speech lately. For the past few decades, we haven't had to risk anything to defend it. One of those times is right now. And if we aren't willing to risk what we have now, then we just believe in free speech, but won't defend it.

The Fox suit decides to stand up for free speech and show the episode. But at the point at which "South Park" viewers should have seen Muhammad handing a football helmet to one of the toons of "Family Guy," the screen went black and on that was the message:

"Comedy Central has refused to broadcast an image of Muhammad on their network."

Yesterday the network said in a prepared statement when called by The TV Column, "In light of recent world events we feel we made the right decision." A Comedy Central spokesman declined to elaborate.

In Wednesday's "South Park," after the "Family Guy" episode airs, al-Qaeda responds with its own cartoon. It involves the president of the United States, the American flag, Jesus and pooping.

In an interview with the Associated Press, William Donohue of the conservative Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights -- who totally didn't get the point -- went after Parker and Stone over the Jesus bit, but not Comedy Central.

"Like little whores, they'll sit there and grab the bucks. They'll sit there and they'll whine and they'll take their shot at Jesus," he said.

Stone and Parker did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It's the second time in recent weeks that Comedy Central has lost its nerve over this show.

Last month, the network yanked a rerun of an episode that poked fun at Scientology and its most prominent celebrity member, Tom Cruise.

Several days before it was scheduled to air, Isaac Hayes asked to be let out of his contract providing the voice of Chef on the edgy animated series, because he had just noticed that the cartoon series about four precocious potty-mouthed fourth graders in South Park, Colo., makes fun of religious groups.

Stone and Parker fired back in interviews, saying the surprise resignation of Hayes, who had voiced Chef since 1997, had 100 percent to do with Hayes being a Scientologist and the upcoming episode rerun.

A couple of days later, when viewers tuned in to see "Trapped in the Closet," it wasn't there.

Comedy Central said the next day it had decided to pull the episode because "in light of the events of earlier this week, we wanted to give Chef an appropriate tribute by airing two episodes he is most known for."

This, naturally, led to rampant speculation that the episode had been pulled, and Hayes had resigned, because someone speaking for Tom Cruise had let Viacom -- which owns both Comedy Central and Paramount Pictures -- know he was unhappy the episode was about to be rerun. Cruise at the time was out promoting Paramount's upcoming expensive flick "Mission: Impossible III."

That wasn't the first time Comedy Central got squeamish over an episode of "South Park" that addressed religion. Last year the basic cable network yanked the rerun of an episode called "Bloody Mary," featuring a menstruating Virgin Mary statue, when Donohue's faction objected.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/13/AR2006041302212_pf.html

CPanther95

04-14-06, 10:32 AM

fredfa

04-14-06, 10:32 AM

The Business of TV
TiVo Wins EchoStar Patent Suit

The victory could give it leverage as it seeks licensing deals with cable TV operators
By Dawn C. Chmielewski Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 14, 2006

TiVo Inc. on Thursday won a pivotal patent infringement lawsuit that might allow it to pause and rewind the marketplace the way its pioneering digital video recorders do with live TV.

A federal jury in Texas awarded TiVo $73.9 million after finding that satellite dish provider EchoStar Communications Inc. infringed its patents in a case described as "life or death" for the money-losing video recorder company.

TiVo lawyers said they would seek an injunction barring EchoStar, which owns the Dish Network, from selling digital video recorders. That could help TiVo tamp down competition as it tries to build market share.

Although TiVo is virtually synonymous with the increasingly popular digital video recorders, the company's machines have been overshadowed by those offered by cable and satellite providers. Analysts said TiVo's court victory could give it leverage as it seeks licensing agreements with cable operators that offer set-top boxes with built-in recorders.

"If you're going to defend your patents and try to license it, this kind of win certainly makes those negotiations easier," said Larry Gerbrandt, senior vice president and general manager of Nielsen Analytics, which specializes in emerging media technology.

The verdict sent TiVo's shares up 22% to $9.80 in after-hours trading, after falling 7 cents to $8.05 in regular trading. EchoStar's shares closed up 12 cents at $29.97 during regular trading. They were little changed in late trading.

EchoStar issued a statement calling the verdict a "first step in a very long process" and expressing confidence that the verdict would be overturned on appeal or through a continuing U.S. Patent Office review of TiVo's technology.

"We believe the patent, as interpreted in this case, is overly broad given the technology in existence when TiVo filed its patent," the company said in a statement. "We believe the decision will be reversed."

Only about 12% of U.S. households have digital video recorders, Gerbrandt said. But he expects that number to grow to 18% by the end of the year.

Alviso, Calif.-based TiVo was one of the first companies to develop and market recorders that could pause and rewind live television. But in the seven years since the company went public, it has posted only one quarterly profit — in the second quarter of last year.

Thursday's verdict was the second piece of good news for TiVo in two days. On Wednesday, satellite television provider DirecTV Group Inc. agreed to extend a partnership with TiVo for three years. DirecTV accounts for nearly 66% of TiVo's 4.4 million subscribers.

As part of the deal, TiVo and DirecTV agree not to assert patent claims against each other. Last fall, DirecTV launched a $30-million ad campaign to promote its own DVR boxes.

TiVo also has an agreement with cable giant Comcast Corp. to sell its recorders.

TiVo sued EchoStar in 2004. The two-week trial was at times highly technical in nature, with dueling experts testifying about whether the device marketed by EchoStar was so similar to TiVo's that it infringed TiVo's patents. EchoStar said its Dish Network DVRs used different software and hardware.

TiVo General Counsel Matt Zinn said testimony from the company's co-founder and chief technical officer, James M. Barton, proved the turning point. Barton, whose name is on TiVo's July 1998 "time warp" patent, described how the technology allowed viewers to pause live television when the phone rings, then resume watching the show even though it's still being recorded.

Mark D. Litvack, an intellectual property lawyer with Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp in Los Angeles, said the effect of Thursday's verdict depended on whether the judge grants TiVo's request for an injunction. A shutdown could pose a serious problem for EchoStar.

"Losing money is bad — and that's a lot of money," Litvack said. "If you get put out of business, that's doubly bad."

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-fi-tivo14apr14,0,6633593.story?coll=cl-tvent

fredfa

04-14-06, 10:58 AM

The Business of TV
Networks upbeat on 'upfront' fall ad season sales

By Theresa Howard USA TODAY

NEW YORK — While much has been made of ad dollars shifting from the 30-second TV spot to new formats, the pace is still like the drip-drip of an ice cube melting. That's good news for the TV networks about to start the "upfront" sale of ad time for the new season in the fall.

"All this new media is starting to pick away, but it's hard to say when the bottom is going to fall out," says Michael Burgi, editor of industry magazine MediaWeek. "It's not going to be this year."

Burgi and other industry watchers say that the major broadcast networks have a good shot at at least matching 2005's sales of 30-second ad slots in the "upfront," the annual May ad bazaar in which broadcasters and cable networks try to get commitments for the bulk of their fall ad time inventory.

While marketers are spending more on Web ads and prime-time ratings have ebbed for years — as much as 4% in 2004 from 2003 — broadcasters still could nail about $9 billion in sales. But it won't be easy.

"It's going to be a tough sell," says ad buyer Bill Cella, chairman of media buying agency Magna Global USA. "Clients are really looking at harboring money for new media and digital opportunities."

Industry hot buttons that will put drama in the sale:

• Price increases. The major broadcast networks are aiming for a 3% to 5% price increase. The average $108,681 price for a 30-second ad in the current 2005-2006 season was flat from the year before, according to tracker Nielsen Monitor-Plus.

Insurer Allstate is "upfront" about not paying more: "We're willing to be a big national advertiser, but I'm not willing to pay for declining audiences," says Joe Tripodi, chief marketing officer at Allstate, which has cut national TV ads to about 60% of total media spending.

• Ratings. Networks will try to justify higher prices with new Nielsen ratings that add in delayed viewing that day or week, such as with digital video recorders. A show's so-called live-plus-same-day and live-plus-seven-days audience could be larger.

But Andy Donchin, ad buyer Carat's director of national broadcast, says time-sensitive advertisers, such as movie studios, don't want to pay for viewers watching an ad after opening weekend. "Some clients have a legitimate beef about time-shifted ratings," he says.

• New media. Some networks are trying to turn new media into a sales asset by offering new media opportunities, such as Web video content, in addition to or packaged with TV ads. CBS saw huge success by offering more NCAA tournament games on the Web.

"The model for March Madness on Demand was brilliant," says JoAnn Ross, network sales president at CBS. "We were able to generate ad revenue and it opened a lot of people's eyes that this can work if done right with a property that is compelling."

She says CBS will be at the upfront "to sell ads however (advertisers) want to package them."

http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2006-04-14-upfront-ad-sales_x.htm

fredfa

04-14-06, 11:01 AM

23% is significant enough that they need to consider something like:

You are watching the new
Standard in TV - High
Definition Television
on CBS

HDTV is now available with DD 5.1 sound
in most areas.

where only HD viewers can see the portion of the text I've marked as green.

Good point, CP95.
But 23% is a whole lot less than we were seeing three-five years ago.
So despite the problems, people are -- apparently -- slowly getting educated.

fredfa

04-14-06, 11:41 AM

Wednesday’s prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

Marcus Carr

04-14-06, 12:59 PM

Nets Take Indecency Fines to Court

By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 4/14/2006 11:54:00 AM

In an apparently unprecedented move, the broadcast networks and Hearst-Argyle are going to court as a group to overturn some of the FCC's recent proposed indecency fines, saying some of the proposed fines were unconstitutional.

Last month, the commission released a raft of proposed fines totaling over $3 million against stations airing a variety of shows, including CBS' Without a Trace, althought that fine was for sexual content and the statement from the four networks said they were targeting "several" of the rulings that deal with profanity. It was not initially clear whether they were challenging all the fines or just those dealing with profanity

In their statement about the suit, the networks said:

“We strongly believe that several of the FCC rulings issued on March 15 are unconstitutional and find them inconsistent with two decades of previous FCC decisions. In filing these court appeals we are seeking to overturn the FCC decisions that the broadcast of fleeting, isolated--and in some cases unintentional--words rendered these programs indecent.

"The FCC overstepped its authority in an attempt to regulate content protected by the First Amendment, acted arbitrarily and failed to provide broadcasters with a clear and consistent standard for determining what content is indecent. Furthermore, the FCC rulings underscore the inherent problem in growing government control over what viewers should and shouldn’t see on television. Parents currently have the ability to control and block programming they deem inappropriate for family viewing from entering their home through the use of the V-chip and cable and satellite blocking technologies."

The language in the last sentence is important, tying the V-chip to the cable and satellite blocking technologies. The Supreme Court has ruled that available content blocking technology--it does not necessarily have to be used, is a less restrictive means to the governemnt interest in shielding children from indecent content than a ban. The networks have emphasized the V-chip/ratings system in recent months, with NBC last year agreeing for the first time to use content discriptors, as do the other networks.

Getting everyone on the same page could preface the court argument that broadcasters, like satellite and cable, have available blocking technology and should have the same immunity from FCC content regs."

The appeal was filed by the four network affiliate groups representing over 800 stations.

http://broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6324990.html?display=Breaking+News

fredfa

04-14-06, 06:53 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Big 'Crossing' point arrives for Hennessy

By Marisa Guthrie The New York Daily News Staff Writer Friday, April 14th, 2006

NBC's "Crossing Jordan" ends the season with a milestone and a cliffhanger.

The May 7 finale, in which Jordan (Jill Hennessy) finds herself the prime suspect in the murder of her former beau, marks the show's 100th episode.

The hour ends ambiguously: The murder leads Jordan to Washington, D.C., in search of the truth. But fans of the show may have a long wait for answers to this mystery.

The Sunday night show will be displaced in the fall by football. According to Hennessy, the network is likely to keep the show on Sundays, but delay the premiere until January.

"I think [the network] is definitely going to wait until midseason," said Hennessy. "That's sort of the in-house rumors I've been hearing, and I think it's a really wise move on NBC's part to acquire Sunday night football and target that male demographic, especially since ABC's [Sunday] lineup is such a female juggernaut."

Hennessy said there was another rumor, that "Crossing Jordan" would be moved next fall to Friday, a night that has been challenging for NBC.

But, she said, after five seasons and 100 episodes, "I'm just happy to be on at all."

An NBC spokeswoman said no programming decisions have been made for the fall.

Hennessy will spend her hiatus at home in New York, recording her first CD. The actress, who names Sarah McLachlan, Gordon Lightfoot, Woody Guthrie and Bruce Springsteen among her influences, calls her style "folky Americana."

"Some of it's a little dark," she said. "A couple of people started crying when they heard one of my songs."

Before her big acting break on "Law & Order," Hennessy was a regular on the New York City music scene. She played guitar and sang in bands that gigged at places like Cafe Sine, Back Fence and the Red Lion.

Since she'll be taking time to work on her music, might she take it for a test drive at, say, friend and former "Law & Order" castmate Chris Noth's club The Cutting Room?

"He's actually asked me to sing there a couple of times, and I've never been in town at the appropriate time to make that work," said Hennessy. "I'd love to sing at Chris' place. I love that guy."

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/v-pfriendly/story/408614p-345896c.html

fredfa

04-14-06, 08:56 PM

TV Notebook
'CSI' Do

By Don Kaplan The New York Post April 14, 2006

Maybe they will throw bullets or DNA samples instead of rice at the first-ever "CSI" wedding next month.

The big day unfolds on the May 8 episode of "CSI: Miami" when Horatio (David Caruso) walks down the aisle with Marisol (Alana de la Garza) after months of keeping their love a secret from her brother - his underling - Eric Delko (Adam Rodriguez).

It's a first for any one of the popular CBS crime franchise programs, which tend to spend more time focusing on unraveling gruesome crimes than soap-opera storylines. Of course the episode won't be without a dead body: a Paris Hilton-like socialite turns up dead when she's electrocuted in her bathtub during a party. And, despite the happy nuptials, the show ends with a cliff-hanger with Horatio in danger.

On "CSI: Miami" Horatio and Marisol fell in love this season after they met when she was busted for buying pot. The luscious Latina was trying to get the drugs to combat the ill effects of chemotherapy she needed to treat her leukemia.

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/67008.htm

fredfa

04-15-06, 03:32 AM

The 2005-2006 TV Season
Ask Matt

(from the Ask (TV Critic) Matt (Roush) column at TVGuide.com
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: I was impressed and gratified by The West Wing's handling of the death of John Spencer/Leo McGarry in last week's episode (April 9), and I wonder if this is the road to the kind of classy ending you hoped for for the show. Clearly it was a story line that couldn't be delayed — no other plausible way to explain the absence of the vice-presidential candidate, especially given the real-life circumstances — but the writers wisely kept the ultimate focus on election results. Grief was expressed by the characters closest to Leo, while others showed the harsh reality of politics. Josh's turnaround was evident but not overplayed. Best of all, throughout the show the presidential candidates displayed the kind of nobility that drew us to this series in the first place. I lost my enthusiasm for The West Wing a while back, but for me this episode is close to full circle. — Belinda

Matt Roush: Isn't that the truth. The West Wing at its best has always been an idealized romance about public service, and the election episode was a perfect example of that. I'm anxious to see this Sunday's tribute to Leo/John Spencer, but mostly, I'm satisfied — no matter how these last episodes turn out — that West Wing is going out with the dignity befitting a series that was once truly great.

On the issue of the show's imminent farewell on May 14, Colleen writes: "In your last Q&A, you brought up West Wing and how if the fans were 'true fans,' we would want to let the show go on a creative high. I agree and disagree with that statement. Earlier in the year, when I first heard about the cancellation, I was very glad. Being a true fan, I've recognized the show's downward spiral in the past two or three years. And I was excited to know that it was going to end on a high note by letting us a little bit into the character's lives. However, having seen this season unfold, I have to admit that there is a part of me that really wants to have the show continue under Matt Santos. I think it would have been a very different show, a very different White House, and I would have loved to explore it, at least for a year or two. I don't know if it would have been done well, but I would have tuned in, if only because shows like West Wing are becoming more and more extinct.

"And what I mean by that is, most hourlong dramas that are on right now are either procedurals (which bore me to tears) or the action-adventure high-speed dramas, which don't give the viewer much in the way of substance. I miss those old soap-opera-like dramas, where we got to know a group of characters and watched them learn and grow through the years. Often in a police station, a hospital, a courtroom or even a school, but to me, they were the best shows on TV. And now that WB and UPN are merging, destroying half of those shows, and many of the others are going off the air, or have already been canceled, I would have taken a subpar West Wing over "CSI: Vermont" or American Idol 83. Often viewers settle for mediocrity in a show that was great because it's still better than what's out there. Not to say that there aren't any good serials left (Grey's Anatomy, Veronica Mars, Everwood, Gilmore Girls, Desperate Housewives, just to name a few) and that some of the other types of shows aren't good shows (Lost, 24, Bones) but I still miss the shows that have gone before. And I wish someone at the networks would remember what keeps most people coming back: the characters."

Colleen makes a good point and puts The West Wing's departure in an important context. I'd still rather it bow out now and not risk another decline (it's hard to imagine the show yet again topping the drama of the campaign), but we could certainly use more series with this kind of ambition and humanity.
________________________________________
Question: First, let me say that I really look forward to reading your columns each week; we seem to have the same taste in programming. My question is about how and why there seems to be an ever-growing incongruity in this country these days in terms of what passes for good TV comedy. To be honest, it really bothers me that shows like Arrested Development and Sons & Daughters could never bring in viewers despite being two of the sharpest and wittiest comedies to be produced in recent memory. Even Scrubs has never been a commercial success, and I frankly marvel that (thankfully) it's been able to stick around for at least five seasons.
At the same time, inane drivel such as According to Jim and Yes, Dear have enjoyed great success in viewership (even making it to syndication!). It just seems that more often than not the only TV comedies that survive are the stale, formulaic ones, while the innovative, edgy, truly funny ones die premature deaths. Are these comedy gems just ahead of their time, or does most of the country just have a more conservative sense of humor? — Geoffrey B.

Matt Roush: The best way to answer your question is to hedge and say a little bit of both. Risky, smart and subtle comedy is always going to face an uphill battle for mass acceptance, and not just on TV. And let's not forget all those years of columns in which readers took me to task for what they saw as an attempt to shove Arrested Development down their throats. Everything about this column (and my job, to be honest) is subjective, but few things are more subjective than humor.

I don't want to overgeneralize about those who reject a show like Sons & Daughters or who find comfort in traditional sitcoms like Yes, Dear and Jim. There's nothing wrong with wanting. Good comedy can be done old-style and in more innovative forms — bad comedy, too — and I am at least a little hopeful when a truly hilarious show like My Name Is Earl can find an audience. That one manages the rare trick of being fresh, original, accessible, lovable and very, very funny.
________________________________________
Question: I know that The Book of Daniel was canceled months ago, and I am still crying over its cancellation, but I was wondering if you think there might have been a different outcome if the show had been titled something different. Or would the same thing have happened? — Matt

Matt Roush: Sadly, they could have called the show "Win a Million Dollars if You Watch This" and NBC probably still would have found a way to screw this one up — and screw it over. Look, Book of Daniel was always going to be a polarizing show; I know no one who was neutral to it. They either loved or hated it, and of course there were always going to be those who were offended by the very idea of it (regardless of whether they bothered to watch), not to mention NBC's own skittishness toward the project. The title wasn't really an issue, though. I'm not sure what you could have called it ("Father Knows Least"? "7th Heaven — Not!"?) that would have made it more commercial or, to its critics, less objectionable.
________________________________________
Question: Please tell me it's not true that Heist has been canceled. This is the only decent show NBC has except Deal or No Deal. There has got to be some place they can fit it in their schedule to make people watch. Maybe they can put it on in the summer. Also, I've seen reruns on the USA network. Could USA possibly pick up the show? — Paul

Matt Roush: Well, we couldn't live on two more different planets. I hated Heist and am counting the days until this insipid fad of Deal or No Deal fades. But it's true: Heist is dead, at least where NBC is concerned. I suppose there is a chance that one of NBC's corporate cable cousins (A&E, Bravo, CNBC), which occasionally repurpose NBC programming, could present some of the unaired Heist episodes. But I'm not aware of that happening right now. I know it's particularly annoying when a serialized show is cut off midstream. But Heist struck me as an iffy idea done in by unbearably smug and inept execution.
________________________________________
Question: More about Gilmore Girls: I've read a lot recently about Rory being attracted to Logan because (subconsciously, I hope!) he reminds her of Christopher. However, after discussing this theory with friends, we feel an argument could be made that Logan is actually more like Lorelai, but without the cataclysmic event that forced her to become an independent woman. The reason that we have reached this conclusion is that, like Lorelai, Logan has an extremely hostile relationship with his parents, yet he has a vibe that is fun about him: the lighthearted aspect of being wealthy. I certainly don't think that he is exactly like Lorelai, but I see more of a connection there than I do to Chris. Especially after the episode where Luke and Lorelai stayed with Rory and Logan at the beach house. What do you think? — Summer

Matt Roush: So let me consult my Freud textbook. You think Rory is smitten by Logan because he has her mom's vibe, not her dad's? Either way: ewww. I bet Lorelai would differ with this interpretation and would not like her hard-earned independent spirit likened to this spoiled rich-kid rebel. But I'm just so glad to get a question for a change that doesn't beat the show up, so I'll put this out there and see what comes next. But seriously: ewww.
________________________________________
Question: I started watching Grey's Anatomy this fall, and I agree with you: This show is on fire! Every episode makes me love the characters more, and Addison, who could have been a stereotypical Evil Wife, is rapidly becoming my favorite. By contrast, Desperate Housewives (which, to be fair, I don't watch and never have) is enduring tons of criticism for not living up to its first season. It seems like Grey's has been able to grow as a show and find its audience and its voice, while Desperate Housewives is under a lot of scrutiny and pressure. So here's my Question: Is a slow but promising start actually better for a show than instant success? Which kind of series do you think is more likely to sustain long-term quality and ratings? — Lindy

Matt Roush: That's a tough question; it really depends on the show. And it's not quite true that Grey's started slowly. It was an instant hit (displacing Boston Legal from Sundays for a start), but it certainly has grown throughout this season, especially with the Super Bowl boost. There are many shows that benefit from flying under the radar as they find their voice (Grey's has gotten considerably better since the pilot episode), and there are shows that explode on the scene and then wither under the hype and the expectations of a second act. But then, there are also quality sleepers that somehow never enter the cultural zeitgeist, and instant hits (say, ER) that take years before they begin to cool. As with most things on TV, it takes all kinds, and I'm not sure one way is better than another. But it's no doubt true that a show like Desperate Housewives has an unfair burden to sustain buzz against the inevitable backlash. It's much more satisfying, I'm sure, to come out of left field with fewer expectations, as Grey's so magnificently did. On a similar note...
________________________________________
Question: Love your column! Just wanted to ask you something: Over the years, we've seen great shows like ER and others take a tumble. It seems to eventually happen to every show. Even Friends seemed a little pushed on us at times. With such an intriguing and inspiring show like Grey's Anatomy on the air, how long do you think it'll be until its fire burns out and a new hit show comes in to compete? How long can Grey's, in your opinion, last? — Jackie

Matt Roush: I have no idea. The show churns through stories and relationships like mad, and I don't know how it'll be able to sustain this pace and/or top itself next season. But I know it will try, and I know I want it to succeed. We can only hope that a couple of new shows emerge next season with the same broad appeal as Grey's, but there should be room for many more hits across the spectrum. Bring 'em on. On the other hand, will there be those sharpening their knives in anticipation of a slump after this amazing season? No doubt. But I don't want to play that game.
________________________________________
Question: When CBS moved The Amazing Race to Tuesday at 10 pm/ET, I assumed the ratings would suffer, as it's not a 10 pm show and there were already established shows in the time slot. I see now that the new Wednesday at 8 pm/ET time slot didn't really help the ratings, either. If anything, they are lower. My question: do you think the family edition of the race in the fall may have put a permanent hit on the show's ratings, where it may not be able to recover? I believe the show was renewed for next season, but CBS can't be happy with the slide. — Gary S.

Matt Roush: I'm sure there's cause for concern, but not irrevocably so. Almost any show suffers when it changes time period suddenly, and during daylight saving, shows in the earlier hours often tend to drop in the ratings a bit. Plus there's other reality competition in this time period. But all of these are excuses. It's entirely possible that the underwhelming family edition cost Amazing Race some fans who haven't returned, but this is still one of the best reality shows ever, and its demographics and Emmy wins ensure its continued survival, at least into the next season. If the numbers keep trending south next season, who knows?
________________________________________
Question: Just a couple of quick questions. Why do you think Veronica Mars is struggling? Is it just a flaw with the gathering of statistics? I ask this because most people (of various ages and background) I know love this show and think it's the best one on television right now. Also, I was wondering what you thought of the Huff second-season premiere. I know that you're not very fond of shows that try to squeeze too many tragic/dramatic/shocking moments (Six Feet Under, Queer as Folk) into one series but I thought it was really entertaining. Do you agree? — Angela

Matt Roush: I'm just being realistic when referring to Veronica's ratings woes — it's not pretty. I like the show a lot (though I've felt it's lost its focus from time to time this season), and I'm reasonably sure that it will end up on the new CW. But I'm not going to paint a rosier picture than the facts support just because its fan base is so passionate.

As for Huff: Read my recent review. If anything, I think the show has gotten worse. I watched more than half of the new season (seven episodes) before writing that review, and each hour was a struggle. It's a mess, stranding some very good actors in an incoherent jumble of overdone tragicomic attitudes. (By the time I bailed, the only character I remotely cared about was Huff's emotionally damaged brother, Teddy.)

http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/askmatt/

fredfa

04-15-06, 03:39 AM

The 2006-2007 Season
Networks Focus on Fall

The time is near to decide if late-season shows get second act

By Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable 4/17/2006

Might there be new life for Old Christine? With the broadcast networks announcing their fall schedules next month, it's almost time to decide if late-season additions such as the Julia Louis-Dreyfus comedy and Conviction have earned spots in the lineup. With many pilots still being shot, the networks are surveying their existing shows before they review the new product that will compete for slots on the fall schedule.

“We'll be looking at rough cuts soon, but this is the quiet time before the storm hits,” says NBC Executive VP of Program Planning and Scheduling Mitch Metcalf.

While there are a few sure bets among the late arrivals, such as CBS' The Unit, the fate of many shows is still unclear; it remains to be seen whether they will be beaten out by shows in development.

Here is a look at the late-season programs' prospects at the major networks.

A B C

ABC may have discovered a new unscripted franchise in American Inventor, but the network is disappointed that the heavily hyped Sons & Daughters has become this season's Arrested Development. Inventor continued ABC's Dancing With the Stars-inspired rebirth on Thursdays, getting a strong sampling in its first two weeks, with CSI on the bench during CBS' airing of NCAA basketball. After averaging a 5.3 rating/14 share in the adult 18-49 demo those two weeks, Inventor dropped off to a 3.7/9 average in the next two airings, but ABC is still pleased with that performance.

As for Sons & Daughters, the comedy drew critical acclaim but never found an audience. “It's not that the show was rejected,” says Jeff Bader, executive VP of program planning and scheduling for ABC Entertainment. “Like Arrested,it just was never exposed to many people to begin with.” Its premiere earned just a 3.5/8 in the 18-49 demo and averaged just over a 2 rating for its first 10 episodes.

Still, Bader won't rule out a return for next season, saying the network may look for a more appropriate time slot. If Sons does come back, look for ABC to try to build viral buzz online, as NBC did with The Office, which grew after a similarly slow start.

As for other late-season additions, Miracle Workers probably won't be back as a series, although Miracle specials are a possibility. Dramas The Evidence and In Justice are long shots to return.

ABC also has single-guy drama What About Brian, which was scheduled to debut Sunday, April 16, and will be closely monitoring the return of Commander in Chief to see whether the Geena Davis drama gets a second term. Putting it on the schedule this month at 10 p.m. Thursday, up against CBS' Without a Trace and NBC's ER, seriously hurts Commander's chances.

C B S

CBS will apparently come away from the late season with two solid additions, in red-hot Army Rangers drama The Unit and Louis-Dreyfus sitcom The New Adventures of Old Christine.

The Unit has been a great fit coming out of NCIS on Tuesdays, and it seems a sure bet to return next season. It has found its own fan base, as evidenced by the 23% jump the April 4 episode had over an NCIS repeat lead-in.

Old Christine feels like a CBS comedy, say industry insiders, and has held up where others (Out of Practice, Courting Alex) have failed coming out of tentpole Two and a Half Men. Whether CBS keeps Christine on Mondays or moves it elsewhere come fall, it at least appears that the Seinfeld curse has finally been lifted. “It got off to a nice start, and if things keep up, we'd love to see it back on the schedule,” says CBS/UPN Executive VP of Scheduling and Program Planning Kelly Kahl.

Fox

The best news for Fox this spring was the strong return of Prison Break after a long layoff. The show worked well with 24 to give Fox a potent Monday-night lineup. The jailhouse drama has already been picked up for a second season, and Fox has told producers to be ready to come back in mid August.

As it did this season, Break will run before and after the baseball playoffs, but the network is looking at other ways to use the series, even considering a third season that could run from June to December.

How Break is used will depend on whether Fox is successful in finding companion pieces for both it and 24, or if they will be paired again next spring.

Fox Executive VP of Strategic Program Planning and Research Preston Beckman says there is a “good possibility” the network will order another iteration of rookie reality series Unan1mous, but how it would return is still undecided. “We have to figure out, is it a series or is it these one-shots we bring on periodically?” he says.

The prospects are not as good for comedies The Loop and Free Ride. “They are players for next season,” Beckman says. “But I would be lying to you if I said that either of them broke out in terms of ratings.”

N B C

Led by the Aaron Sorkin-penned Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, NBC's development slate has great early buzz. And the network may need it, because the network's late-season additions have yet to produce a hit.

The brightest of the bunch is the Dick Wolf drama Conviction, a slickly produced show that NBC's Metcalf says has a “very good shot” of coming back in the fall, despite its inability to find a big audience on Friday nights.

“Admittedly, it is off to a slow start,” says Metcalf. “I wish ratings were higher, but because the quality is there and the later episodes in the first 13 will be even better, we think people will continue to find it.”

NBC has already pulled crime drama Heist off the schedule, and it will have to decide if Teachers can be the next adaptation of a British show to bounce back from modest early numbers, à la The Office. Metcalf notes that, while the show has not done a significant number, retention out of Scrubs has been in the 90% range.

Who will survive?

So four weeks before the fall lineups are announced, for every network chief hoping a late-season addition displays signs of life, there is a producer with a pilot in development who's pulling for it to tank and free up some prime time real estate.

fredfa

04-15-06, 06:09 PM

Friday's overnights have not been posted yet. When they are, I will add them.

fredfa

04-15-06, 07:10 PM

Friday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-15-06, 10:06 PM

TV Notebook
Face up to the perky

Katie Couric can't escape the adjective. Some say it's descriptive. Others call it sexist.
By Robin Abcarian Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 15, 2006

It remains one of the most famous lines ever uttered on a sitcom pilot. On "The Mary Tyler Moore Show," Ed Asner's curmudgeonly Lou Grant looks at Mary, who is applying for a job, and says, "You've got spunk." "Well … " she starts to reply, obviously flattered. "I hate spunk!" he snarls.

Years after the 1970 show, Asner had a change of heart. "No one could hate spunk, not even a curmudgeon," he told the AARP magazine. "I should have said, 'You know what? You're pretty goddamn perky. I hate perky.' "

So, it turns out, does the woman to whom the word has been applied more often, quite possibly, than anyone else in America. That would be Katie Couric, who, in September, will become the first woman to solo at the anchor desk of a nightly network newscast.

Like the VW Beetle with its dash-mounted daisy vase, SpongeBob SquarePants and Molly Ringwald's breasts in "Sixteen Candles," perkiness is an ephemeral, know-it-when-you-see-it quality, combining cuteness, a certain bubbly energy and optimism. It is a vaguely 1950s quality, not a 21st century quality. In fashion, perkiness went out with the pointed bra cup.

In Hollywood, the Golden Age of Perkiness may have passed with Sandra Dee, Patty Duke and the Gidget/flying nun years of Sally Field. Local television news teams continue to be bastions of retro perkiness, but in the world of cable television, the women tend to be harsh or hectoring, in the manner of Nancy Grace and, despite the well-publicized beauty makeover, Greta Van Susteren.

So what are the semiotics of perkiness?

Apparently, the word harks back to the French word "perquer" — to perch, as a bird. The adjective "perky," which connotes liveliness, buoyancy and cheer, first appeared in the mid-19th century, in Alfred, Lord Tennyson's poem "Maud" ("There amid perky larches and pine … ").

A century and a half later in this country, "perky" would come to be synonymous, for better or worse, with a certain American television news personality.

Earlier this week, a search of the word "perky" in the massive database Factiva turned up more than 64,000 hits. At the top of the list was this story from the April 17 edition of Newsweek: "The Katie Factor: After 15 years, the perky star of morning television finally gets to sleep in. Will she change evening news or will it change her?" If there was a dash of irony in the body of the story, where Newsweek referred to the 49-year-old star as "our Katie," it was hard to detect.

Just try to find a published account of Couric's switch from host of "Today" to the "CBS Evening News" that does not employ, straight-faced or not, the word "perky" to describe her. Most of the coverage has been laudatory, but with its slightly negative edge, the word always seems to slice at Couric's authority. "Why can't we have a reassuring mother figure instead of turning immediately to one of the perky kids?" carped John Leo in the New York Sun. A column in the Chicago Tribune's RedEye was just as blunt: "Is she too perky for prime time?"

Couric, who is not a fan of the word, has been described as "terminally perky." As far as can be determined, she has not yet been described as perkadelic or perkalicious. But give it time. She doesn't even start her new job until September.

A spokesman for Couric, who declined to be interviewed for this story, said he thinks the word has attached to her like a limpet because of simple journalistic laziness. "It's an incomplete depiction of a versatile multidimensional success story," said Matthew Hiltzik.

Perhaps the word has stuck because of her diminutive stature (she is about 5 feet 2), her big smile or her youthful appearance. Indeed, when Couric, a 34-year-old deputy Pentagon correspondent, succeeded the untouchably sexy Deborah Norville as Bryant Gumbel's co-host on "Today" in 1991, she wore a pixie haircut. Almost immediately she helped perk up the broadcast and boosted the ratings. And the label stuck. Over the course of her career, she has interviewed heads of state, world leaders, American presidents. And the label still stuck.

There may be such a thing as a perky man (Richard Simmons comes to mind), but in reality, "perky" belongs in the realm of adjectives used to modify women. Its antonym, "gravitas," is presumed to apply to men only. (Tell that to Margaret Thatcher.) " 'Gravitas' is a code word," according to Connie Chung. Chung, who co-anchored the "CBS Evening News" with Dan Rather in the mid-1990s, told Newsweek for its cover story that people who say Couric lacks gravitas are implicitly endorsing a sexist point of view. "It has an offensive, chauvinistic connotation that should not be applied to any newswoman today."

But Camille Paglia, a feminist who is often at odds with the feminist establishment, thinks many women possess gravitas, a term that was applied to the Roman senators of antiquity, who were expected to demonstrate leadership and sobriety. She would exclude Couric but include California Sen. Dianne Feinstein ("I really regret that she has not run for president; she has far more gravitas than Hillary Clinton"), the novelist Toni Morrison and the late writers Ayn Rand, Lillian Hellman and Simone de Beauvoir. "Women, if they ever expect to ascend to the presidency and be commander in chief, had better learn what 'gravitas' is and stop blowing it off as some sort of backlash word," she said.

When it comes to Couric, Paglia, who is not a fan, said simply, "Perky, yes, perky … and girly, OK? That's the problem."

In 1994, Paglia said she was interviewed by Couric during a book tour. "I found her pleasant but weightless, depthless. Backstage in the green room, she said to me with a look of wonderment in her eyes, 'But Camille, why do you say all those controversial things when you know you will be criticized?' I was dumbfounded."

When an adjective is so gender specific, and tinged (as some believe) by a slightly patronizing odor, the question must be asked: Is "perky" — particularly when used to describe a middle-aged woman who will earn a reported $15 million a year to read the nightly news — a sexist term?

"I have no problem with it," said Stuart Fischoff, senior editor of the Journal of Media Psychology. "It's slightly derisive, but … perky is perky."

Others, including the subject herself, who once told an interviewer, "I don't do perky," find it offensive.

"In the end, it's all sexism," said Robert Thompson, a professor of media and popular culture at Syracuse University. "If I were Katie Couric and someone described me as perky, I would hit them upside the head. It's just a ridiculous thing to be talking about," he added with a self-aware chuckle.

Some have even suggested that Couric might think about changing her name from the diminutive Katie to her given name, Katherine, when she takes over at CBS in the fall.

That idea made Thompson nearly sputter. "That would be considered the most ridiculously egregious attempt to gain gravitas. If you were going to change your name to Katherine to get rid of the 'perky' thing, maybe you should just knock out a tooth or scowl more often or put a big devil's head tattoo on your cheek."

In the end, Couric's perkiness may be the single ineffable quality that led CBS to lure her away from NBC.

"It's what's earned her all the money and made the 'Today' show No. 1," said Peter Shaplen, a Northern California freelance network news producer who also trains clients for media appearances. Many surveys show that viewers don't remember TV content but have very good recall about the messenger, he said.

And apart from a certain level of talent and experience that one presumes any national newscaster must bring to the table, it's a cosmetic decision, said Shaplen. "It's all packaging. Katie is the most recent package to be tried out."

He added: "I think they probably put in people like Walter Cronkite because he was fatherly and properly dour. Same thing for Dan Rather. He had talent, but he had boyish, rugged good looks, and they thought that would appeal to the audience. Let's face it, TV strives for easy. And Couric is easy to look at and easy to listen to. You don't want to struggle with 'The end of our world is at hand tonight, and here is our first report from Quasimodo.' "

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et-perky15apr15,0,6331610,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

fredfa

04-15-06, 10:10 PM

TV Review
In 'What About Brian,' a Hopelessly Single Guy Has a Dirty Little Secret

By Alessandra Stanley The New York Times April 15, 2006

Coffee, cardiac angioplasty and leisure wear are among the many things that have improved over the last 20 years. ABC's throwback to "Thirtysomething" is not one of them.

"What About Brian," (10 PM ET/PT Sunday) a series that focuses on seven friends in Los Angeles, has an irritating title. What about him?

Brian (Barry Watson of "7th Heaven") is a 34-year-old single man in a clique of couples who despair of his ever finding a match, but he is secretly in love with his best friend's girl. The series is sentimental in a sleek way, and there are surface glints of humor in the script, but mostly, "Brian" is a blander, less distinctive version of "Thirtysomething."

And that prompts another question. What about Miles? Miles Drentell, played by David Clennon, was the creepily cool advertising boss who tormented Michael Steadman and Elliot Weston on "Thirtysomething," and brought a hint of spice and venom to their yuppie Eden.

Brian and his friends are nice but dull, and there are no mitigating secondary characters.

"What About Brian" needs better writing and a more compelling cast. But the premiere tomorrow (after which the series moves to Monday nights) does serve as a useful reminder of the evolution in television dramas over the last two decades. In an era of HBO and infinite cable and satellite choices, the bar of excellence is higher than ever, and so are the stakes for networks. But certain patterns keep repeating themselves.

ABC came back from the dead by finding fresh material: "Desperate Housewives," "Lost" and "Grey's Anatomy" are all hits that owe part of their success to originality; there was nothing like "Lost" on television when it began, and now imitations keep multiplying.

"Thirtysomething," which began on ABC in 1987, also stood out right away: it was a knowing, humorous and realistic soap opera about yuppie angst at a time when network schedules were cluttered with over-the-top "Dallas" knockoffs, including "Knots Landing" and "Dynasty." There were other good shows at the time, but they tended to be variations on conventional genres — police shows like "Cagney and Lacey," or hospital dramas like "St. Elsewhere."

"Thirtysomething," created by Marshall Herskovitz and Edward Zwick, didn't focus on professionals interacting on the frontlines of life and death; it found poignancy and wit in ordinary middle-class life in Philadelphia. The series, which lasted until 1991, quickly found a cult following of viewers who loved, and loved hating, its main characters.

And in any genre, that is a good formula: the most successful series are the ones with characters who become part of the public conversation. For the last 10 years on network television, the pendulum had swung back to work-based dramas. Some of the best put appealingly flawed characters in police headquarters or hospital corridors, from "NYPD Blue" to "ER."

ABC's latest hit, "Grey's Anatomy," is a hospital drama where medical emergencies take second place to chick-lit subplots in the style of "Sex and the City." It showcases the love lives of female surgeons, but it also provides at least one enjoyably grating personality, Dr. Cristina Lang, as portrayed by Sandra Oh.

Work appears to be the last thing on the minds of Brian and his friends; sex and dining alfresco is what keeps them busy. (Even the pediatric surgeon never seems to be paged during a meal.) But none of the characters are strong or odd enough to hold viewers' attention for long.

The women are Southern California beautiful, and so are most of the men, and all have airbrushed personalities and few interesting quirks. Brian is a sweet, sensitive soul who pines for Marjorie (Sarah Lancaster), a pediatrician who is engaged to Brian's best friend, Adam. He is a pleasant cad who is unworthy of Marjorie, but that is shown not by the writing but in the casting: Adam is played by Matthew Davis, who played the pleasant cad in the movie "Legally Blonde."

Brian's older sister, Nic (Rosanna Arquette), is in her 40's and desperately seeking to have a baby with her young Italian husband, Angelo (Raoul Bova). Brian and his friend Dave (Rick Gomez) have their own company designing computer games (an echo of Michael and Elliot's advertising company). Dave has three children and no sex life with his yoga-loving wife, Deena (Amanda Detmer).

Outside WB, which is aimed at younger viewers, there are not many dramas that focus more on love than on danger: prime time is still ruled by procedural crime shows or terrorism thrillers like "24" and "The Unit." ABC has discovered that viewers, particularly women, also want shows that accentuate romance. "What About Brian" is cut to order, but somehow doesn't fit the bill.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/15/arts/television/15bria.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-16-06, 02:00 AM

The fight over a la carte
Why Can't I Have Just the Cable Channels I Want?

By Richard Siklos The New York Times April 16, 2006

AT the National Cable and Telecommunications Association convention in Atlanta last week, the cable guys were at it again. They were kvetching that the Federal Communications Commission had gotten it terribly wrong in pushing to loosen the way that cable television channels were packaged and sold. Essentially, the cable contingent says that its current practice of selling a package of 75 or so broadcast and cable channels is better for consumers and the public good than letting people pick and choose the 10 or 20 stations they actually watch.

The average price of extended basic cable — the type of channel package to which most of the nation's 73 million cable-watching households subscribe — is $41 a month, according to Kagan Research. Plenty of other premium channels and services are available, but the only cheaper option is truly basic: a package of mostly local stations with none of the popular cable channels (ESPN, MTV and CNN, to name but a few). At my house in Connecticut, for instance, basic cable runs me $13 a month.

The cable operators say that forcing them to give people more latitude over the channels they buy would constitute rank government interference, the equivalent of forcing restaurants to sell burgers and buns separately. The à la carte model favored by some regulators would lead to much higher rates for individual channels, executives argue. Whereas that same $41 might get you only 10 hand-picked channels, the bundle model both pays for the infrastructure — all those pipes and set-top boxes and servers and repair trucks — and preserves the smorgasbord of big and small channels to suit all demographics and tastes.

Without bundling, programmers like Disney and Viacom might no longer be able to afford shows with smaller but loyal followings. Under the current system, they can produce niche channels like ESPN Classic because they are bundled with ESPN and other channels, the programmers say.

For the most part, the F.C.C. rolls its watchdog eyes and notes that the price of expanded basic has increased well beyond other goods and services over the past few years. It and the cable association have drawers full of studies disputing the other's studies about their studies. Kevin J. Martin, the F.C.C. chairman, showed up briefly in Atlanta to reiterate that he was not giving up the fight, even after recently cajoling cable companies to agree to put together a new, smaller tier of family-oriented channels that was a few dollars less than extended basic. "Putting more control in the hands of consumers is always good," he said.

Alas, the legislative year is rapidly winding to a close in Washington, making it unlikely that Congress will pass any à la carte legislation this time around. Still, even a few renegade television providers are finding it difficult not to side with Mr. Martin. Cablevision Systems in New York and the satellite service EchoStar have done so, though they remain a clear minority. Comcast, Time Warner, the News Corporation, Walt Disney and others are lined up to harrumph at Mr. Martin.

The great paradox of this debate is that it comes as the number of media options is exploding and the way they are being priced is all over the map. The much-maligned bundle will most probably prevail as the most popular business model for media, although it, too, is likely going to need an extreme makeover.

Just look at the big picture: At one end of the spectrum is the push to sell more and more programming on a per-show or per-viewing basis, via video-on-demand or some kind of download service. Whether it is iTunes from Apple Computer, the new video services from Google and Yahoo, or the newest iterations of nascent mobile telephone services through Verizon, Sprint and others, it's clear that we are approaching a future where there will be no chance that a favorite show can be missed.

Last week, Disney pushed the ball forward by announcing a trial to show four of its popular television shows free on www.abc.com, with commercial sponsors. And Fox said it had worked out a deal with affiliate stations that would let it join the other big networks in making popular shows available in new digital and online formats.

All this is happening not so much because content makers sense gigantic riches in these new ventures, but out of fear that if they don't make their programming more freely available, younger audiences will grow up accustomed to getting their favorite shows free via illegal file-sharing services and DVD's burned by their pals.

At the other end of the spectrum from selling individual shows is the equally au courant concept of überbundling — selling digital cable services combined with high-speed Internet and telephone service, and maybe throwing some wireless into the mix.

Ask cable industry executives, and most will argue that a majority of people still prefer buying the existing pre-ordained packages of cable. And the addition of new services like high-speed access gives viewers conveniences like a single bill and shared customer service. Yet a recent USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll found that 54 percent of television viewers said they would prefer to buy channels individually, while only 43 percent said they'd rather pay a flat fee for a fixed number of channels.

Strangely, these colliding views make sense. When asked whether they want total choice, especially from historically monopolistic quasi-utilities, it's no shock that most people say: heck, yes. Yet, as the author and psychology professor Barry Schwartz and two of his colleagues pointed out a few weeks ago in The New York Times Magazine, Americans have this funny habit of confusing freedom, which they cherish, with choice, which can give them headaches.

"We're definitely at an overwhelming number of options," Maribel D. Lopez, a media analyst at Forrester Research, told me. "It's frequently difficult to understand what you're buying. There's also different content that goes on different devices. We run the risk of consumers moving to indecision because they have a lot of choice."

Stephen B. Burke, the chief operating officer of Comcast, also contends that people are most comfortable paying for subscription services they can rely on at a set price, even if they don't consume every minute or inch of it — whether the subscription is to cable service or Time magazine.

Mr. Burke pointed out to me that well under 10 percent of subscribers bought pay-per-view or video-on-demand movies from Comcast. But as many as 70 percent of Comcast's customers avail themselves each month of the free video-on-demand programming that is part of its digital package.

Mr. Burke says part of the problem with buying individual shows is that, amazingly, more than 90 percent of Comcast's 22 million customers still pay monthly cable bills by cash or check. That kind of customer isn't ideal for impulse digital purchases.

And Ms. Lopez says that one reason new mobile services may be slow to take off is that even tech-savvy consumers in the United States are not as culturally attuned to prepaying for communications services as those in Europe and elsewhere.

There are examples to the contrary that suggest that consumers are more than keen to buy products by the bite — but they are fewer than you'd expect. Ring tones, music downloads and pornography come immediately to mind, but, needless to say, these models don't translate across all media.

Rather than unfettered choice, maybe what most people yearn for is more, better choice. Video providers in Britain, Hong Kong and Canada have figured out how to offer a much wider variety of ways for their audiences to pay for TV without invoking video Armageddon.

The cable operators are indisputably right about one thing: they shouldn't need Mr. Martin to tell them to do the right thing.

(Ken Belson contributed reporting for this article.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/business/yourmoney/16frenzy.html?pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-16-06, 10:53 AM

TV Notebook
Greg Berlanti on the future of 'Everwood'

By Maureen Ryan from the Chicago Tribune TV blog April 16, 2006

Fans of "Everwood" are facing the very real prospect that the wonderful WB drama might be coming to an end.

For four seasons, a loyal audience has followed the fate of widower Andy Brown, his son Ephram and daughter Delia, as they've tried to rebuild their lives in a small Colorado town. Whether their story will continue on the new CW network next year, in the wake of the WB-UPN merger, is unknown.

Creator Greg Berlanti, in town for a recent event at his alma mater, Northwestern University, said he thinks, in a way, the merger might help his show. After all, the WB has moved his show twice this year, and CW execs might look at "Everwood" with fresh eyes.

“I actually think our chances are the same if not improved” by the merger, Berlanti said. “I would blame a lot of people at the WB who haven’t, I think, gotten behind the show when they needed to. With the exception of our first year when we got terrific promotion and a terrific launch, it’s never gotten the kind of push” that it should have by the WB.

As far as what will happen in coming weeks on “Everwood,” Berlanti said, “We have a series of relationships that are going to come to a head. There’s a Jake-Nina-Andy triangle, that will come to a head yet again. … What we have in store for [Hannah and Bright’s] relationship will be of interest. … And there is the death of a major character on the show.”

Of the death, Berlanti said, “while sad, it’s not tragic.”
And if the show does end this year, “it brings us out sort of the way [death] brought us in,” Berlanti says. “We say a lot at the show that tragedy makes us real. It’s not the happy times that define us, but how we get through our struggles, and the people we lean on and rely on during those times. That defines what kind of people we are.”

Will Andy Brown finally get together with his next-door neighbor, Nina? Berlanti was cagey about that, but he did say this:

“This show has been the journey of a widower,” Berlanti said. “I think the fans that have been rooting for him to learn how to love again - I’m not going to let the show go down without figuring out a way to please them.”

Berlanti, who’s working on some new (and top-secret) shows for Touchstone Television, also talked a bit about what the legacy of “Everwood” would be, if the show does go off the air.

He mused that the show may have proved that “sentiment isn’t necessarily a bad thing. That sentiment and quality go well together, without it being just us trying to tug at the heartstrings for the sake of it.”

The text of my conversation with Greg Berlanti at

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/entertainment_tv/2006/04/greg_berlanti_o.html#more

RussTC3

04-16-06, 11:28 AM

I'm really looking forward to "What about Brian". I think that's going to be a really great show.

Also, am I the only one who thinks that ABC is going to pair Grey's Anatomy and What About Brian together on Monday night (Grey's at 9PM and Brian at 10PM)?

What would really just be awesome is if NBC dropped Scrubs, ABC picked it up and then we'd have this Monday night lineup:

Sons & Daughters at 8PM
Scrubs at 8:30PM
Grey's Anatomy at 9PM
What about Brian at 10PM

Of course this all depends on whether or not Brian is any good, but assuming it is, wouldn't that lineup just be too good to be true?

I just don't think ABC will let go of Son's so soon. Sure it's ratings have been in the crapper, but I think they're going to give it at least one more year. And Scrubs seems like a pipe dream, but I'm sure they could find another show to occupy that timeslot.

Regardless, I'm about 99% sure Grey's will be moved to Monday night, of course the two hour finale may decide that for certain.

Oh and Happy Easter Fred to you and yours and for doing such a great job with this thread. And Happy Easter to everyone else. Hope you have a great day today! :D

fredfa

04-16-06, 02:03 PM

Thanks for the kind words, Russ, and for all your contributions here.

And I echo your thought for all to have a HAPPY EASTER!

fredfa

04-16-06, 03:48 PM

Saturday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-17-06, 03:21 AM

The 2005-2006 TV Season
Ask Matt

(from the Ask (TV Critic) Matt (Roush) column at TVGuide.com
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: (Tv Guide’s Michael) Ausiello keeps talking about a film version of 24. Am I the only person who thinks making a 24 movie is, well, a total oxymoron on a level with "military intelligence" and "sugar-free caramel?" The real-time format is the show's trademark, even if some stretching has to happen to make everything fit without people getting stuck in L.A. traffic. In general, I don't think many shows, especially those still on the air, would make a good translation to the big screen. (I'm ignoring remakes like the recent Dukes of Hazzard.) To me, the best TV shows are about the development of characters and their relationships over time. 24 is more action-oriented than that, but wouldn't making a movie just be a grab at more money and exposure, as opposed to a real organic evolution of the show? (The X-Files movie was especially superfluous, since it wasn't even a stand-alone story. Maybe I'm just a medium purist, but it should just have been a two- or three-episode story arc. Not to say I wouldn't enjoy another movie now, especially as the series has been off the air several years.) — Karen B.
Matt Roush: At the risk of prejudging, which I usually live to regret, I'm also at sea as to why 24 would want to risk cheapening or diluting the franchise with a feature-film version. It does sound like an unnecessary exploitation of a format that works uniquely well on TV. And I worry that expending energy on a feature film while the weekly series is still underway (with at least three more seasons to go, according to Kiefer Sutherland's new contract) could be counterproductive.

But then I begin to look at the upside, at how 24 is so often trapped by its formula. This season alone there have been a ludicrous number of public calamities, any one of which would be enough to stop the world in its tracks for several days, let alone requiring these characters to keep the adrenaline going for 24 consecutive hours of action. But that's the suspension of disbelief we sign on for when we come along for the ride. A two-hour movie could condense the events of a single day (always with clock ticking) in what potentially would be a less credibility-straining adventure. And given how cinematic the TV show is, I would think a larger budget and a tighter focus could make for a blockbuster. But still, why do it when the weekly series is still around? (I agree the X-Files movie would have been a better idea if it came after the series had wrapped.)

________________________________________

Question: I'm wondering if you know what's happening to In Justice? I think that show is wonderful, and it's the only Friday show I have ever watched. The three issues of TV Guide magazine I have sitting here don't have the show listed. Tell me it wasn't canceled! — Amy

Matt Roush: First off, bless you for having all of those TV Guides around; your TV room sounds a lot like mine. As for In Justice: ABC aired all of the episodes that were produced for the mid-season tryout run. They aired consecutively, in order and without interruption (or without much), and the last scheduled episode aired March 31. We won't know if it's renewed until May. The numbers weren't great, but on Fridays they rarely are. And my mail suggests that the audience that watched the show was loyal. So we'll just have to wait and see.

I'd guess its chances are 50/50 at best, and its renewal would depend on how strong ABC's drama development is for next season, although it's tough to know just what would work for ABC on Fridays. I wasn't a huge fan of In Justice, but it sure beat the lousy comedies ABC used to air in that spot.

________________________________________

Question: Just a quick question here: Rumors have been going around the Web that Battlestar Galactica is getting some early Emmy buzz. Have you heard anything concrete about that? I just love that show (and honestly believe it's the best thing on TV right now), but I don't see the Emmy people nominating a science-fiction show. — Nevo

Matt Roush: Well, that's the rub. Sci-fi and genre shows are rarely given much respect at the Emmys, but given the acclaim and renown Battlestar Galactica has enjoyed lately — a Peabody, a slot on AFI's top-10 shows of 2005 — I would think that Sci Fi Channel would launch an all-out campaign for the show to get some recognition in something other than technical special-effects categories. I'm not overly positive about its chances, given the overall strength of TV dramas nowadays. Just a cursory list would likely include Lost, The Sopranos, Grey's Anatomy, 24, maybe an FX drama (The Shield or Rescue Me, if there's justice), possibly the resurgent final year of West Wing, an HBO spoiler like Deadwood, and you can see how many we're already choosing among. The buzz is there for Battlestar Galactica, but I'm just not sure the odds are in its favor.

________________________________________

Question: Do you think that bringing Gilmore Girls over to CW is a good long-term strategy? I can't see Lauren Graham or Alexis Bledel signing on for an eighth season, and if they don't, this show has only one season left. It is hard to get new fans interested in a show that has just come off a lackluster season and has only one season remaining. I understand that Gilmore Girls' ratings make it an appealing show for the new network, but it seems like in the long run they'd have better luck with a show that wasn't so near its end. Are new fans going to invest in this show? — Brandy

Matt Roush: It's not about bringing new fans to the show, which would be nice. CW would just be thrilled if the WB fans who watch it now come back for the new season. Everything about CW is such uncharted territory that it's hard to analyze until we know what exactly the network will present in the fall. All we know is it's going to be a mix of WB and UPN programs that already exist, with a smattering of new programs that are now in the pilot-development hopper.
The challenge in setting the schedule is finding a balance between long-in-the-tooth series with loyal followings that will be signature shows for the network's launch (which would include Gilmore Girls and Smallville, among others) together with fresher hits (Everybody Hates Chris, Supernatural and, we expect, Veronica Mars) that potentially still have plenty of life left in them. It's true that Gilmore Girls and Smallville are much closer to the ends of their runs than to the beginnings. But it's no doubt a smarter strategy for CW to launch with a number of highly promotable brand names than to try to sell a bunch of new titles on a brand-new network.

________________________________________

Question: After reading your latest Dispatch about The West Wing going out on a creative high (but with lousy ratings), I began to wonder. When was the last time a drama or other hourlong show went out on both a creative and ratings high? In recent years we've had Everybody Loves Raymond and, arguably, Friends go out before they got stale and the audience grew bored, but when was the last time a drama was allowed to go out with some dignity? Certainly not once-great shows like ER and NYPD Blue. I can't think of a single one. Can you, Matt? — Jonathan H.

Matt Roush: That's a good question. If I get some readers' answers worth sharing, I'll do so in a future column. Or maybe in my Dispatches area, which, starting later this week, will evolve into a blog format. It is a sad fact that successful drama series rarely retire at their peaks. I'm hard-pressed to think of one that didn't either exit too early because of ratings or stay on past its prime because the network and studio kept it going long beyond its glory days (usually after significant original-cast defections).

________________________________________

Question: Now that Joey is DOA on its return, again we have the debate about the death of what we know as the traditional sitcom. My question is, was Joey that bad? No, it wasn't as topical as Sex and the City or as well written as Frasier, but Joey never set out to be either of those shows. It was a sitcom with some basic, familiar characters and uncomplicated story lines. Twenty years ago shows like Growing Pains and Who's the Boss? were top-10 hits, and I think Joey compares in format to these shows. Do you think that Joey was a substandard version of the traditional sitcom, or have we so evolved due to clever writing that it has all but destroyed the basic sitcom? A show like Frasier or Seinfeld at its peak only comes along once in a decade, so if that has become our benchmark for comedy, of course anything else is going to pale in comparison.

On a related note, can you envison a day when the comedy categories in the Emmys will become obsolete now that, by default, noncomedy shows (like Desperate Housewives) have to be nominated just to fill up the numbers. Although, if TV goes in cycles, remember that everyone had declared the sitcom dead in the early '80s (even Cheers suffered in its first few years), until The Cosby Show came along and reinvented the genre (or maybe just filled a desperate void). Can you see that happening again? Will we be so sick of the glut of criminal-procedural dramas that we'll return to the comfort of the 22-minute laugh track again? Or has that gone for good? TV in the '60s, for example, was composed of totally escapist sitcoms that served as distractions from the unrest of war, racism and protests in the real world. Maybe we've dealt with our demons as a society so we don't need to escape with "simple" TV. Then again, maybe I am reading too much into it. Maybe Joey's just a plain stinker from any angle. What's your take on this? — John

Matt Roush: The failure of Joey shouldn't be regarded as a referendum on the state of TV comedy. It was lousy and only kept getting worse. It was a sad misstep for a beloved character who needed more funny people to bounce off than he got by moving from Manhattan to Hollywood. But really, harking back to Growing Pains and Who's the Boss? as templates of success? All that proves is that there has always been an appetite for harmless mediocrity in TV comedy, and that will continue. The failure of Joey also had to do with expectations. No one expects much of According to Jim. If you want to relax with a show like that, you'll get what you expect, nothing more. The real concern among those who care about comedy on TV is how difficult it is for the networks at the moment to support innovation in the form. It's often said that given today's climate, Seinfeld would never have been given a chance to grow and flourish — same with Cheers. That's the scary part of this discussion. But I'm not worried about the conventional, safe sitcom. They're not going anywhere.

________________________________________

Question: Has McLeod's Daughters been dropped by WE, or will it be returning at some point? — Cora T.

Matt Roush: Lots of questions about this series. I finally tracked down a spokesperson for WE, who confirmed that the show will not continue on that network beyond the recently wrapped third season. It continues in production in Australia, though, so maybe another cable network will acquire future seasons. But I've heard nothing.

________________________________________

Question: Do you think NBC will ever move ER from Thursday nights? I've wondered lately how many viewers (like myself) are watching out of habit. — Ryan

Matt Roush: Only habit can explain ER's continued existence. It sure doesn't have much to do with quality. But it is still part of many viewers' Thursday-night ritual, and as long as NBC can still get a solid demographic following (at least for the first-run episodes) on this tough night, it's going to stay put. The minute ER moves from Thursdays, you can start preparing the Time of Death announcement. (Witness West Wing, banished from Wednesdays just as it started getting watchable again.)

________________________________________

Question: What is supposed to be the point of reality TV? I mean, you have people competing in cooking, skating, decorating, dancing, dating. To me, it is all about bringing out the worst traits in people. Like Unanimous, which I only managed to watch 10 minutes of before turning it off. Where does it end? When they run out of things for people to compete in? Will reality TV ever go away? — Nancy

Matt Roush: Unanimous really is the lowest of the low. There's no excuse or justification for that one. But for many others, whether exotic adventures like Survivor and Amazing Race, or competitions like America's Next Top Model, Project Runway, Dancing with the Stars, The Apprentice and, of course, the blockbuster American Idol, what we're really talking about here is a modern twist (with heightened soap-opera elements) on the old-fashioned game show. Some of these are to my taste, many aren't. (I have no use for the "celeb-reality" genre, for instance, and they don't pay me enough to sit through Real Housewives of Orange County or most cable dreck.) But there's nothing inherently objectionable about the spectacle of watching everyday people be challenged in remarkable ways in hopes of winning a grand prize, whether it's money or fame. As with most things on TV, some are simply done better than others. And then shows like Unanimous come along and make you despair of the entire industry, if not the human race.

________________________________________

Question: I'm not usually a fickle fan, unless I truly feel a drop of quality (calling Desperate Housewives!). OK, so I just wrote in about 24 and still have reservations about the president being the big bad guy, but what a suspenseful episode Monday was! And usually I have confidence in the big twists of series like Battlestar Galactica. Which is why I don't get the lack of faith in Gilmore Girls. Everywhere this fall I've heard gripes about Lorelai and Rory fighting. But I came to realize that this was needed so Rory could see how her mom reacts to how her grandparents can be. And now it's griping about Luke and Lorelai, and how Lorelai should say something. Ummm, if you had a huge fight with a loved one, wouldn't you be a little scared and cautious, too? I think what the writers are doing is completely realistic and compelling. What do you think? Am I blind to this season's flaws, or is there just too much nitpicking? — Josh

Matt Roush: There may be a surplus of nitpicking (there usually is), and I'm usually very resistant about taking a knee-jerk response to a show hitting a bad stretch, but lately, I feel Gilmore Girls' constant critics are on to something. The April (instant surprise daughter) twist turned out to be an off-putting head-scratcher, and Luke keeping her a secret even more so. The Lorelai-Rory feud had dramatic and thematic integrity on its side, but it was so darned unpleasant to endure, and went on a wee bit too long for a show whose primary impulse is to entertain and move, not annoy. Same goes for the contrivances keeping Lorelai and Luke from just getting married already. What should be a joyous period has now become an uncomfortably unenjoyable series of setbacks and obstacles. I don't mind drama seeping into this of all shows from time to time, but this isn't satisfying — it's mostly irritating. There has always been a fine line where this show is concerned between the chatter and babble being stimulating or strident. Lately, the show has felt more of the latter.

http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/askmatt/

fredfa

04-17-06, 03:26 AM

While many of us wait impatiently for the roadblocks to be lifted for telco entry into the video market, there are some downsides, as LA Times Political columinist Michael Hiltzik describes very well.

Commentary
The Case for Local Control of TV Deals

Michael Hiltzik Los Angeles Times Columnist April 17, 2006

I have a simple rule of thumb for determining whether my cable TV service is overpriced: Is it a monopoly? Then it's overpriced.

And let's face it: Virtually every cable TV operation in the country is a monopoly.

In principle, therefore, we should welcome the efforts of the phone companies Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc. to offer cable-style video services to the home in competition with the Comcasts and Time Warner Cables of the world. The record shows that when a genuine rival enters a cable TV market, subscription rates plummet. (Satellite TV doesn't have as marked an effect, because dish TV has its own inadequacies and can't provide broadband Internet service as conveniently as cable or DSL.)

But the question raised by a bill in the state Assembly is whether it's necessary to wipe out all local regulation of cable services in order to achieve the nirvana of video competition. AB 2987, sponsored by Democratic Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez and Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys), chairman of the Utilities and Commerce Committee, would do just that.

The bill would replace our current regime of local regulation with a statewide system endowed with scarcely a dime's worth of enforcement authority. Local officials have reacted predictably to this threat to their only leverage against the big companies — leverage that has allowed them to demand benefits such as public access channels and free video and Internet connections for government buildings, schools and libraries, as well as enforceable guarantees of service to underserved neighborhoods and communities.

"This bill is not good public policy for California," says Lori Panzino-Tillery, division chief of the franchise program for San Bernardino County and president of the National Assn. of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors. "It would harm technology to schools, it doesn't provide for advanced services for those who don't have it and it doesn't enhance broadband deployment."

Levine says it's wrong to regard his bill as deregulation. "We're not removing regulation," he says, "we're regulating differently."

Still, from the companies' standpoint, one undoubtedly gratifying feature of the bill is the ease of obtaining a statewide franchise. The procedure would require a video provider merely to file an application with the state Department of Corporations essentially bearing its name and address and identifying the boundary lines and socioeconomic characteristics of the region it wishes to serve. It must also pledge to observe local laws, to avoid redlining underprivileged neighborhoods and to provide a certain number of public-access hours. But the bill doesn't require the provision of separate public-access channels, known as PEG, or "public, educational and government," channels. Once the application is complete, the department would be required to award the franchise within 14 days.

No public hearings. No vote by elected officials. What if the company later violates its pledges? Tough. The Department of Corporations has no authority to revoke the franchise. The only path of enforcement is litigation by a municipality, a district attorney or the attorney general. (As if they don't have enough to do besides wrangling in court with nationwide phone and cable giants for a few years.) The phone companies would be awarded the free ride immediately; cable providers as early as 2008 or whenever their existing local franchise agreements expire.

AT&T and Verizon, which are vocal in the bill's praise, complain that reaching franchise agreements with more than 500 cities and counties in California is an arduous process that only delays the rollout of advanced technologies and the marvels of competition to downtrodden consumers. Both companies say the local franchise system is a relic of the past, when cable meant a one-way coaxial pipeline carrying TV channels into the home, unlike today's interactive digital fiber optics with high-speed Internet service and video on demand. But they haven't made the case that the old system is unable to cope with the new world, only that they'd rather do without it.

Tim McCallion, region president of Verizon California, told me that two years of negotiations with 30 municipalities have yielded his company only five agreements thus far. "There are always a lot of bureaucratic reasons and rationales for slowing the process down," he says. Ken McNeely, president of AT&T California, illustrates the obstacles thrown up by local officials by observing that Oakland has been negotiating its franchise agreement with Comcast for three years and San Jose for six.

As blanket condemnations of municipal regulation, these arguments fall under the category of spin. Local officials say the phone companies try to manhandle them by swanking into City Hall with take-it-or-leave-it contracts and dragging their feet in negotiating when told that won't do. "I have cities that have said they've sat at the table for only four hours over a six-month period," says Panzino-Tillery.

As for Oakland and San Jose, Comcast is a full partner in those delays. In Oakland, it's balking at a city law facilitating union organizing of its workforce; in San Jose, the sticking point is the city's demand for additional public access channels. Both demands are arguably public benefices; Comcast just doesn't want to pay the price. While the negotiations drag on, it has continued to serve its customers unimpeded, collecting its customary profit.

We shouldn't forget that this state's row over TV regulation is merely a skirmish in an epochal war. The cable providers and phone companies are invading each other's turfs with bundled TV, Internet and phone deals, and at every turn each side gripes that the other is favored by incumbency and outdated regulatory procedures. Rather than confronting these claims head-on, the Federal Communications Commission and state regulators have made themselves scarce.

Will the entire country gain evenly from deregulated telecommunications? Doubtful. Affluent suburban neighborhoods will get the best service first; low-income, rural and inner-city communities, which need advanced telecommunications as much as anybody, will get the dregs eventually, if ever.

In rural San Bernardino County, Panzino-Tillery observes, there are communities that haven't yet been touched by cable TV, much less broadband Internet. "There are people out there who don't have this stuff," she says, "and the way federal and state legislation is going, they never will be."

The cable and phone companies keep talking about their desire to face each other on a level playing field, but who's keeping it level for the consumer?

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-fi-golden17apr17,0,786371,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

fredfa

04-17-06, 04:02 AM

A Critical View:
This About Brian

By John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable at bcbeat.com

What About Brian is kind of like a combination of The O.C., Thirtysomething, and Once & Again, with a pinch of Relativity and a spoonful of Sex and the City thrown in. Which in this case means it isn't sure exactly what it is.

ABC provided the show with a sneak preview in a dynamite time period Sunday night, taking Grey's 10 p.m. slot after Housewives, so the drama will probably do a big number.

Brian is one of those Peter Horton-like free spirit, jean shirt-wearing hunks with an old car and not much luck, but a drop-dead smile and a soulful soul that brims over with soulfulness in a puppydogish kind of way.

It being Easter, I found myself casting Brian star Matthew Davis as Jesus in a remake of King of Kings, though then I started thinking of the Python'sLife of Brian, which blew the whole beatific, Jeffrey Hunterish mood.

The first episode was kind of like profiling the hip and funky people at a beer commercial barbecue if they actually had lives after the 30-second spot wrapped.

I kind of liked the show, but I like all those relationship dramas that aren't aimed at me and wind up on Lifetime.

I think I will watch it again. Marjorie, for one, is sure easy on the eyes in a "what's her name from Full House" sort of way.

http://www.bcbeat.com/

fredfa

04-17-06, 10:48 AM

TV Sports
ESPN, NFL Network upping ante for draft

By Michael McCarthy USA Today

When a 7-month-old cable network named ESPN asked late NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle for his permission to televise the draft in 1980, Rozelle said sure but added, "Why would you want to do that?"

Don't look now, but ESPN and the fledgling NFL Network are increasingly acting like competitors, rather than partners, on NFL coverage.

The 2006 NFL draft April 29 and 30 will have two all-sports TV networks offering live, gavel-to-gavel coverage for the first time. ESPN will televise the draft for the 27th consecutive year, with 17 hours of live coverage featuring draft guru Mel Kiper Jr., Sunday NFL Countdown's Chris Berman, Tom Jackson, Chris Mortensen, Michael Irvin and Steve Young and reporter Suzy Kolber.

The NFL Network will have its own set at the draft's headquarters for the first time. The league's cable channel, now in 36 million homes, has its own draft picker to counter Kiper: Mike Maycock. Former ESPN anchor Rich Eisen will anchor 16 hours of live coverage, backed by, among others, former coaches Butch Davis and Dan Reeves and reporter Kara Henderson.

ESPN will pay the NFL an average of $1.1 billion a year to carry Monday Night Football over the next eight seasons. But ESPN and the NFL Network are starting to warily circle each other, even though ESPN is in nearly three times as many households as the NFL Network is in and ESPN is on the basic programming tier of cable systems while the NFL Network generally is on a digital tier that costs extra. They're talking the kind of smack you usually hear from entertainment suits.

"Mel Kiper Jr. may have better hair — but Mike Maycock has better information," NFL Network spokesman Seth Palansky says. ESPN has beefed up its coverage of events such as the draft and the release of the NFL schedule as a direct response to the NFL Network's aggressive coverage, he says. Are they rivals? "How others perceive us is up to them. We'd love to have the success ESPN has had," Palansky says.

ESPN spokesman Bill Hofheimer acknowledges a "friendly competition" between the two networks. Yes, ESPN is introducing new wrinkles such as Kiper and Jackson's daily "On the Clock" segment on SportsCenter, analyzing needs of all 32 teams. Plus, during its live draft coverage, a new draft ticker will run continuously during commercials breaks.

But those innovations are due to the "insatiable" desire of fans for year-round NFL information, not growing competition from the NFL Network, Hofheimer says. "ESPN is the only place you're going to see Mel Kiper Jr., Chris Mortensen and our collection of experts," Hofheimer says.

Stay tuned.

Want to draft a quarterback? For every first-round NFL draft pick who becomes a star, there's an epic bust. During Sunday's SportsCenter, ESPN's Bob Ley and Trey Wingo showed how taking a quarterback in the first round has become very risky business.

Backed by some telling video of a young Brett Favre tossing interceptions as an Atlanta Falcon, Wingo noted quarterbacks can go bust for a variety of reasons: lack of maturity, the wrong offensive system, the wrong coach.

Denver Broncos coach Mike Shanahan warned "more mistakes are made there than (with) any other position."

Ernie Accorsi, general manager of the New York Giants, quoted the league's ultimate wise man, Vince Lombardi, on the perils of drafting quarterbacks. When general managers make draft mistakes, their teams lose games. When they make a mistake on a quarterback, they lose their jobs, Lombardi said.

It didn't happen one night: It was fun to see the stars of figure skating back on TV during ABC's telecast of the Marshalls U.S. Figure Skating International Showcase on Saturday.

ABC's Peggy Fleming put on her Mr. Blackwell fashion critic hat and picked best and worst costumes of the year. Fleming gave the best nod to Sasha Cohen for her tasteful Romeo & Juliet costume worn during the U.S. national championships. "It was a look of perfection — just like her style," Fleming said.

The worst? The Chinese figure skating pair Zhang Dan and Zhang Hao in costumes that looked like a cross between Club Med and cowboys. "I think their inspiration came from Gilligan's Island, not Jungle Book," Fleming said.

The best moment during the show: Cohen skating beautifully to God Bless America. After it was over, Fleming simply said, "God bless her."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/mccarthy/2006-04-16-mccarthy-nfl_x.htm

fredfa

04-17-06, 01:17 PM

Sunday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-17-06, 01:19 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
America dozes off as it watches 'Brian'

New drama drops 15 percent in its second half

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 17, 2006

ABC had an insta-hit last year when it premiered “Grey’s Anatomy” after “Desperate Housewives” last spring. It got very different results when it used the same strategy with “What About Brian” last night.

The show averaged a 5.6 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 after receiving lukewarm reviews from critics. It didn’t help that its “Housewives” lead-in was down significantly from the show’s season average.

“Brian” fell 15 percent from a 6.0 to a 5.1 from its first to its second half hour, which does not bode well for when the show moves to 10 p.m. tonight with a much weaker lead-in, “Supernanny.”

“Brian” also dipped against minimal competition, airing opposite NBC’s “Crossing Jordan” and part two of CBS’s low-rated movie “Covert One: The Hades Factor.” Tonight it faces CBS juggernaut “CSI: Miami.”

“Brian” actually held more of its lead-in audience than “Grey’s” did last season, 73 percent compared to 67 percent. But its premiere was off 22 percent from the 7.2 “Grey’s” posted in its first outing.

And among total viewers, “Brian” lost 35 percent of its lead-in, averaging 12.8 million to “Housewives’” 19.7 million.

Part of that can be blamed on “Housewives.” Last night the show posted a 7.7 among 18-49s, down 28 percent from the 10.7 it earned on the night “Grey’s” premiered last season. “Housewives” was also down about 20 percent from its season average.

ABC still led the night among 18-49s comfortably, averaging a 5.1 rating and posting a 14 share. NBC was second at 2.7/8, Fox third at 2.4/7, CBS fourth at 2.1/6, Univision fifth at 1.7/3 and WB sixth at 0.9/3.

ABC led each hour of the night, starting with a 2.3 rating at 7 p.m. for “America’s Funniest Home Videos.” CBS was second with a 1.8 for “60 Minutes,” NBC third with a 1.5 for “Dateline” and Fox fourth with a 1.4 for “Malcolm in the Middle” (1.3) and a repeat of “King of the Hill” (1.5). WB and Univision tied for fifth at 0.9, WB for an hour of “Reba” repeats and Univision for “Hora Pico” (0.8) and “Chiquitibum” (1.0).

At 8 p.m. ABC led with a 4.6 for “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” followed by a 3.2 for CBS for “Cold Case.” Fox was third with a 2.8 for a repeat of “The Simpsons” (2.8) and a new “The War at Home” (2.7), NBC fourth with a 2.2 for “The West Wing,” Univision fifth with a 1.5 for the first hour of “Bailando por un Sueño” and WB sixth with a 1.3 for “Charmed.”

ABC led again at 9 p.m. with the 7.7 for “Housewives,” the night’s top-rated show in the demo. NBC was second with a 3.3 for “Law & Order: Criminal Intent,” Fox third with a 3.0 for a repeat of “Family Guy” (3.3) and another episode of “War” (2.8) and Univision fourth with a 2.0 for “Bailando.” CBS was fifth with a 1.8 for the first hour of “Hades Factor” and WB sixth with a 0.5 for a repeat of “Pepper Dennis.”

At 10 p.m. ABC completed the nightly sweep with its 5.6 for “Brian.” NBC was second that hour with a 3.7 for “Jordan,” Univision third with another 2.0 for “Bailando” and CBS fourth with a 1.6 for the conclusion of “Hades Factor.”

Among households, ABC led the night with a 7.8 average rating and a 14 share. NBC was second at 6.3/11, CBS third at 5.9/10, Fox fourth at 3.0/5, Univision fifth at 1.7/3 and WB sixth at 1.4/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_4149.asp

bgooch

04-18-06, 04:19 AM

Time Warner Eyes ‘Clips’ Service
By Matt Stump 4/17/2006 6:06:00 AM

Atlanta -- Time Warner Cable plans to add a “Quick Clips” short-form video feature to its video-on-demand offering, hoping to cash in on the increasing amount of content being created by programmers for broadband Web sites.

The MSO plans to launch the service May 1, with video clips from CNBC shows, according to executive vice president of product management Peter Stern in an interview at the National Show here last week.

He said Time Warner is in discussions with four to five other programmers about bringing short-form video and content created for their Web sites to its VOD platform.

CNBC owner NBC Universal hasn’t determined what content to provide, NBC U Cable senior vice president J.B. Perrette said, adding that the programmer is intrigued by the concept.

More and more cable programmers are adding video content to their Web sites, and several have created separate broadband channels on the Web, such as MTV: Music Television’s “Overdrive” service and Comedy Central’s “Motherload” from MTV Networks; “Trio Plus” from NBC U’s Bravo; and Scripps Networks programming on HGTV.com (www.hgtv.com) and Food.com (www.foodnetwork.com).

Programmers also have created broadband-content packages sold directly to cable and telephone companies for their high-speed-Internet services, such as “ESPN360” and “Disney Blast.”

Only Verizon Communications Inc. and some smaller cable companies are carrying the ESPN360 and Disney content, save for a Disney Blast deal with Comcast Corp.

Programmers have found that cable companies did not want to pay extra for carrying those services, but Stern said Time Warner Cable is open to that concept, adding, “We’ll consider subscription services.”

Stern said Time Warner, the second-largest U.S. cable firm, plans to distribute Quick Clips content to VOD servers through its national fiber network. Content would be on the MSO’s servers within 15 minutes of entering the network, Stern said, which is important for the timely news clips CNBC likely would provide.

He added that Time Warner’s new “Navigator” guide, which it will roll out later this year, will link a cable programmer’s linear channel to its Quick Clips and VOD programming.

In the past, cable subscribers would tune to a separate channel to get the on-demand lineup of, say, Food Network on Time Warner, Stern said.

With the new guide, viewers will be able to press the “Enhanced TV” button on the remote control while watching a network’s scheduled programming and see links for “Start Over”; Quick Clips; the HD feed of that network, if it exists; the network’s on-demand lineup; and “Look Back,” eventually, all while staying on the “linear” channel, Stern said.

For more on Time Warner’s Quick Clips, please see Matt Stump’s story on page 10 of Monday’s issue of Multichannel News.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6325095

fredfa

04-18-06, 10:00 AM

TV Sports
Bonds Put in Spotlight, Not on Spot

By Richard Sandomir The New York Times April 18, 2006

Barry BondsS isn't breaking news in his ESPN vanity series, "Bonds on Bonds," which may be the best thing for a network partly divided by a debate over whether he is being paid by ESPN, through an outside producer, to give access that he normally would not give.

"SportsCenter," ESPN's news program, used two clips from the first episode (one about the hate mail Bonds has received and one that showed him crying) but none from the second. The third episode will be aired tonight at 7.

"We're not looking to put material on 'SportsCenter,' but we're not looking to ignore something that's newsworthy," Vince Doria, ESPN's news director, said yesterday in a telephone interview. "Intrinsically, it's hard for me to say it's good that no news has been broken, because if something advances the steroid story, I'd like to think it would be worth getting it out and pursuing it."

ESPN believes that "Bonds on Bonds" is an entertainment series that is separate from its news operation and on the other side of a corporate wall. But that wall is no thicker than Sheetrock. Here is Bonds the newsmaker, stuck on 708 home runs, starring in an entertainment series that will generally follow the news on "SportsCenter," which is covering him without paying him.

The news side at ESPN insists that it sees nothing of the episodes until they are televised. But ESPN Original Entertainment has a production official on site with Tollin/Robbins Productions, and Joan Lynch, the executive producer of E.O.E., is heavily involved in overseeing each program. "I talk to the producers all week," Lynch said in a telephone interview.

When the news broke last week in The San Francisco Chronicle and on CNN that a federal grand jury is believed to be investigating Bonds for perjury stemming from his testimony about steroids in 2003, Lynch called the producers with suggestions about pursuing the story and questions for Bonds.

"It's very difficult for Barry to talk about the steroid allegations because legally he was told that he cannot say much," Lynch said. "But in Episode 3, there is a moment when he's asked about the grand jury perjury investigation and he responds in a way that takes you aback." She added, "It's not particularly newsworthy, but you say, 'That's what I wanted to know from him.' " That remains to be seen — when we see it.

The issue of who is running "Bonds on Bonds" concerns the producer Mike Tollin, who insists that Bonds cannot exert editorial control. Instead, he said, Bonds has the "right to review" the programs, much as ESPN, the Giants and Major League Baseball do. Ultimately, Tollin said, he himself has the final say.

Lynch said that ESPN had even weightier rights to review the program than Bonds, but that she and Tollin have had no major disagreements. Bonds "has been hands-off on content," Tollin said from Madrid, N.M., where he is producing a film. "He offers input," he said.

Bonds has asked for three shots to be changed, none related to steroids or his legal troubles, and Tollin has changed one, of the player's chef.

Tollin insisted that Bonds was too busy to watch the programs in advance. "He sits for interviews, plays the games and we edit the show," he said.

Tollin said that if Bonds suddenly had objections that became "untenable," the series could quickly be stopped. So far, no one is leaving.

Bonds has not added any substance to the steroid story, but Tollin said that Bonds did not object to the inclusion of negative fan and news media comments or a shot of Bonds picking up a syringe during Episode 1.

But George Solomon, ESPN's ombudsman, said Sunday on CNN's "Reliable Sources" that Bonds "in a sense has control" by how he responds to questions. "It is a pretty fairly controlled piece by Bonds," he said.

The Q&A dynamic informs every interview, but "Bonds on Bonds" shows the subject being responsive to many questions, just not the ones with legal ramifications. Tollin said Bonds's "feelings" about the perjury issue would be addressed tonight, "but as you can imagine, they are nonlegal and personal."

Tollin showed the temerity to ask Bonds, who is still without a home run this season, if he now had "warning-track power." (Bonds laughed.)

Still, it is difficult to say what is making viewers watch a guy who is offering no confessions and not hitting any home runs. But Episode 2 found 540,000 households watching, up by 60 percent from the premiere.

"There's a growing fascination with what's wrong with Barry," Tollin said.

But, Lynch said, "once he starts hitting home runs, we'll be happier."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/18/sports/baseball/18sandomir.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-18-06, 10:37 AM

A Critical View:
‘Alias’ nation: What spy series viewers need to know before final mission ends

By Amy Amatangelo for the Boston Herald Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Sydney Bristow (Jennifer Garner) returns to her butt-kicking ways as ABC’s “Alias” begins its final story arc, beginning tomorrow at 8 p.m. on WCVB (Ch. 5).

Loyal fans have been with Syd through the heart-stopping good (Sydney wakes up with two years of her life missing) and the tediously bad (Vaughn marries the nefarious Lauren). This season, to deal with Garner’s real-life pregnancy (damn that Ben Affleck), the series brought in such new characters as Syd’s naive protege Rachel Gibson (Rachel Nichols) and sexy agent Thomas Grace (Balthazar Getty). The additions were the equivalent of an aging family sitcom adding a baby to the mix.

The final episodes promise to be an extended version of “Sydney Bristow: This Is Your Life.” Her best guy pal, Will (Bradley Cooper), faux Francie (Merrin Dungey), evil nemesis Anna Espinosa (Gina Torres), sinister Sark (David Anders), spy mom Irina Derevko (Lena Olin) and loyal friend Agent Weiss (Greg Grunberg) are all slated to return.

When viewers last saw Syd in December, she was pregnant and stranded on a barge in the middle of an ocean while her father stumbled upon a baby room courtesy of Prophet Five.

The show has a lot of ground to cover in its closing episodes. ABC declined to make tomorrow’s two-hour installment available for review, but here are the questions the beloved cult series needs to answer before Sydney’s final costume change:

• What’s the deal with the Rambaldi prophecy?

This is the crux of the series’ convoluted mythology. Even the most die-hard viewer has probably given up trying to figure it out. An explanation would be appreciated.

• Is Vaughn (Michael Vartan) really dead?

You saw his body riddled with bullets. You watched him expire in the hospital. There was even a teary funeral. But on a show like “Alias,” this means nothing. Viewers deserve to see television’s most tortured, star-crossed couple reunited.

• Is Sloane (Ron Rifkin) evil or just drawn that way?

Sydney’s archrival has spent almost five seasons ricocheting between good and bad. Is he a benevolent mentor or a sinister mastermind? Does he have some sort of Rambaldi-inspired healing powers? What was the deal with all that water he was always drinking, anyway?

• Did Sydney’s mom do it all for love?

Has Sydney’s mother been trying to protect her or is she out for her own wicked good?

• Is Sark related to anyone?

Sydney discovered a half-sister, courtesy of her mom’s affair with Sloane. Could Sark have a personal reason to be involved in Sydney’s business? Could he be Vaughn’s half-brother?

Anything is possible on “Alias.” Count on this caper show for a few final twists before it leaves the airwaves.

http://theedge.bostonherald.com/tvNews/view.bg?articleid=135546&format=text

fredfa

04-18-06, 10:42 AM

The 2006-2007 Season
NBC at the upfront: On a big rebound

By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 18, 2006

NBC is ending a stinker of a season in which it will finish fourth for the second straight year among adults 18-49. But looking to next fall the network may have more promise than any other broadcaster, and it will certainly be the most-improved network in 2006-’07.

NBC will replace three hours of programming with “Sunday Night Football,” allowing it to scrape flops like “Teachers” and “Surface” from the schedule with a guarantee of gaining better ratings. And it also has the most-buzzed-about new show, “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip,” from “West Wing” creator Aaron Sorkin and starring “Friends’” Matthew Perry.

The network has two crucial problems it must address. First it has to strengthen Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday nights, which have been real busts this year.

And second it must launch at least one new hit drama. The network has had more drama busts than any other network the past two years, with only “Medium” getting a second year. This year ratings for all eight of NBC's returning dramas have declined. Meanwhile, ABC, Fox and CBS all launched at least one new hit drama.

NBC is counting on “Studio 60” to be that hit drama.

There will be lots of changes at NBC, but with lots of potential for improvement. With “Sunday Night Football,” NBC’s season average could rise some 0.3 rating points next year, media buyers predict. At the same time, ABC could dip by just as much in losing "Monday Night Football."

“Unlike 10 years ago, the network races are so close that no network is firmly entrenched in either first or fourth place," says a development report from Magna Global U.S. issued earlier this month. "Even NBC, with all its problems last season and this, is just one or two new successes away from recapturing the lead among some key demos.”

Season-to-date numbers

NBC ranks fourth in all key demographics. It is down more than any other network among adults 18-49, falling 8 percent, from a 3.6 rating this time last year to a 3.3. It’s averaging a 2.6 among 18-34s, down 13 percent from last season’s 3.0, and a 4.0 among 25-54s, down 5 percent from last year’s 4.2.

Safely returning

“Law & Order,” “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit,” “ER,” “Deal or No Deal,” “My Name is Earl,” “The Office”.

“Earl” and “Deal” are the year’s two highest-rated new shows among 18-49s. But ratings are down for every returning shows in that demo, which is alarming.

“SVU” is averaging a solid 5.0, and “ER” remains a top-20 show. “Office” is not quite a hit but has made big improvements over last season, retaining more than 80 percent of “Earl’s” lead-in on Thursdays.

On the bubble

“Law & Order: Criminal Intent,” “Scrubs,” “Crossing Jordan,” “Four Kings,” “E-Ring,” “Surface,” “Las Vegas”.

“Vegas” and “Jordan” are expected to return. But none of the network’s new dramas will make it, and programs like “Scrubs” and “CI” are in greater danger than they would have been last year, because “SNF” sucks up several hours that would have gone to non-sports programming.

If the network decides on a radical overhaul, all these shows could be bounced, as could the waning “Apprentice” after this coming fall’s season six, which is already shooting.

“An argument could be made for up to 12 hours of new programming,” says a pre-upfront report issued last week by MediaVest. “When NBC’s schedule is announced it’s unlikely any night will come back intact unless the 2006 development roster is very poor.”

In development

“Sunset” is getting strong buzz and could be a 9 p.m. anchor on Wednesday, where “L&O” could use the help. “Windfall,” a summer drama with Luke Perry, may return this fall if it performs well.

The network has already committed to 13 episodes of “The Black Donnellys,” from “Crash” writer Paul Haggis, and “Kidnapped,” which follows one family’s ordeal when their son is taken. Media buyers said both looked promising during NBC’s pre-upfront presentation last month.

Other pilots getting buzz include “Friday Night Lights,” based on the movie; surreal drama “Heroes,” about people who believe they’re superheroes; and Andy Richter’s “Andy Barker, PI.”

Tina Fey’s comedy, which takes place behind the scenes at a network show, seems unlikely to make the schedule since drama “Sunset” has a similar premise.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4157.asp

fredfa

04-18-06, 10:56 AM

TV Review
ABC's 'Less' is really less

By David Bianculli New York Daily News TV Critic Tuesday, April 18th, 2006

** (Out of Four)

"Less Than Perfect" returns to ABC tonight at 9:30 PM ET/PT - which is kind of a shock because I thought it was long-dead.

The last time we saw the Sara Rue sitcom was a year ago this month. It had been around for three years at that point, but didn't look like it was getting much love, or much of a vote of confidence, from the network.

Instead of presenting episodes through the traditional end of the season in May, ABC presented the 2005 season finale in April. Then, nothing. No reappearance in the fall. No resurrection in January at the start of midseason. Then it suddenly pops up, with episodes branded with a 2005 production date and missing one of its key players.

Eric Roberts, who played vain TV anchorman Will Butler to Rue's perky assistant Claude Casey, is gone. Taking his place in the anchor chair is Patrick Warburton as Jeb Denton, the station executive who's hired himself as the new on-air replacement.

He's also promoted Lydia (Andrea Parker), Claude's blond, beautiful, abrasive nemesis, as the new local news producer. This isn't too surprising, since the season finale a year ago ended with Jeb and Lydia marrying in an impulsive ceremony.

But as the new season begins, Claude is taken aback by all the changes. She's returned from vacationing in Italy to find her boss fired, her job eliminated, and her workplace enemy, Lydia, offering her a job as her assistant.

"Have you forgotten what our relationship was like over the last few years?" Claude asks her.

I don't know about her, but I had. And in case you have, too, here's a primer for the rest of the "Less Than Perfect" relationships: Sherri Shepherd and Andy Dick play Ramona and Owen, Claude's office buddies, and Will Sasso (who, like Warburton, joined the show in its second season) plays Carl, another buddy, who runs the company lunch room. There's also Zachary Levi as Kipp, who's as nasty and shallow as Lydia.

The first three new episodes are rather flat. Rue, as always, has a comic twinkle that makes her a very likable TV personality, and there's a good scene in the third episode where Rue's Claude and Sasso's Carl decide to share a test kiss.

For now, but surely not for long, "Less Than Perfect" is back. The comedy is a little less crisp than it used to be - but if it lasts longer than a week this time around, it will have been treated better by ABC than "Emily's Reasons Why Not."

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/story/409598p-346663c.html

fredfa

04-18-06, 12:37 PM

Monday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-18-06, 02:28 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Culinary celebs: NBC cooker crumbles

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 18, 2006

NBC hoped that the same five-nights-straight approach it used to launch “Deal or No Deal” so successfully four months ago would work again for another program, “Celebrity Cooking Showdown.” But after one episode, it looks like “Cooking” is no “Deal.”

“Cooking” premiered with a 2.9 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 at 9 p.m. last night, finishing a disappointing fourth in the timeslot behind ABC, CBS and Fox. The show lost 34 percent of its lead-in’s rating, a 4.4 for “Deal” at 8 p.m.

“Cooking” was also off 26 percent from the 3.9 overnight 18-49 rating the Howie Mandel-hosted game show premiered with back in December, also on a Monday night.

“Deal” has built to a 5.3 average on Monday nights, and it grew steadily over its debut week. It’s certainly possible that “Cooking” could see a similar jump, but that seems unlikely. The show airs again tonight at 8 p.m., where it faces Fox juggernaut “American Idol,” which has flattened most everything NBC tried in the timeslot this year and could kill even the minimal momentum from last night.

Elsewhere, ABC’s new drama “What About Brian” premiered in its regular Monday 10 p.m. slot after a special preview Sunday night. Predictably the show was down, as its lead-in was way off from Sunday.

Last night’s airing posted a 3.2 among 18-49s, down 43 percent from the 5.6 Sunday night’s “Desperate Housewives”-boosted episode earned. “Housewives” averaged a 7.7, while “Brian’s” lead-in last night, “Supernanny,” averaged just a 3.6. “Brian” did improve what “Miracle Workers” had been averaging in the timeslot.
Meanwhile, Fox took the night among 18-49s with a 4.5 average rating and a 12 share. NBC and CBS tied for second at 3.7/10, with ABC fourth at 3.1/8, WB fifth at 1.7/5, Univision sixth at 1.7/4 and UPN seventh at 1.4/4.

NBC opened the night in the lead with the 4.4 rating at 8 p.m. for “Deal.” Fox was second with a 3.5 for “Prison Break,” with ABC and CBS tied for third at 2.4, ABC for a repeat of “Wife Swap” and CBS for repeats of “The King of Queens” and “How I Met Your Mother.” WB was fifth that hour with a 2.0 for “7th Heaven,” Univision sixth with a 1.5 for “Barrera de Amor” and UPN seventh with a 1.2 for “One on One” (1.0) and “All of Us” (1.3).

Fox took the lead at 9 p.m. with a 5.5 for “24,” the night’s top-rated show among 18-49s. CBS was second with a 3.7 average for a repeat of “Two and a Half Men” (3.7) and a new episode of “The New Adventures of Old Christine” (3.7), ABC third with a 3.6 for “Supernanny” and NBC fourth with its 2.9 for “Cooking.” Univision moved to fifth with a 2.0 for “Alborada,” with UPN sixth with a 1.7 for “Girlfriends” (1.7) and “Half and Half” (1.6), and WB seventh with a 1.5 for “Everwood.”

CBS’s took the lead at 10 p.m. with a 4.9 for a repeat of “CSI: Miami.” NBC was second with a 3.8 for “Medium,” ABC third with a 3.2 for “Brian” and Univision fourth with a 1.5 for “Cristina.”

Among households, CBS led the night with a 7.8 average rating and a 12 share. NBC was second at 7.2/11, Fox third at 6.6/10, ABC fourth at 5.0/8, WB fifth at 3.0/5, Univision sixth at 2.2/3 and UPN seventh at 2.1/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4159.asp

fredfa

04-18-06, 02:34 PM

The 2006-2007 Season
ALLY SCORES BIG WITH FAMILY DRAMA

The New York Post

April 18, 2006 – “Ally McBeal" star Calista Flockhart is returning to series TV with a guaranteed pay day of at least $800,000 for less than six weeks' work.

Flockhart will play an Ann Coulter-like radio-talk-show host in the proposed ABC series "Brothers and Sisters," set for next fall.

According to the show-biz Web site TMZ, she got $200,000 just for taking the role and $100,000 an episode for a promised six episodes.

In the series, Flockhart has to leave her radio job to help run the family business with her brothers and sisters after the death of her father.

Rachel Griffiths, the mercurial Brenda from "Six Feet Under," also stars.

Flockhart, who now lives with boyfriend Harrison Ford, has reportedly turned down several big-money offers in the past to come back to TV.

She reportedly went for this show because of the writer, "Alias" vet Jon Robin Baitz.

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/62587.htm

fredfa

04-18-06, 03:15 PM

Last week’s complete network average prime-time results (with demographic averages) are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS the first post in this thread.

bgooch

04-18-06, 06:17 PM

Eisner, Time Warner Back IPTV Startup

By Keith Regan
www.EcommerceTimes.com
Part of the ECT News Network
04/18/06 11:47 AM PT

"The market is still very much in its beginning days," Will Richmond, president of research firm Broadband Directions, told the E-Commerce Times. The recently crossed threshold of 50 percent broadband penetration has helped bring more venture funding and attention to the market, he added.

Giving Internet-based television another boost, former Walt Disney (NYSE: DIS) Latest News about Walt Disney CEO Michael Eisner and media giant Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) Latest News about Time Warner have both invested in a startup that aims to build a delivery platform for IPTV.

Eisner will also take a seat on the board of directors of Veoh Networks, which has raised US$12.5 million in a second round of venture financing. He will be joined there by venture capital legend Todd Dagres from Spark Capital, a venture firm that took part in the funding round.

A Plan for Everyone

Eisner invested through his Tornante Company. How much he contributed to the round was not disclosed.

San Diego-based Veoh Networks is building a system for delivering broadcast-quality entertainment and informational content via the Internet Get Linux or Windows Managed Hosting Services with Industry Leading Fanatical Support., using distribution technology the firm says will allow for unlimited capacity. Veoh envisions marketing its platform to everyone from independent video producers and hobbyists to large studios.

"Cable and satellite fundamentally changed the way television was distributed by creating the capacity for greater choice in programming. Veoh revolutionizes television again by leveraging the Internet to expand broadcast capacity to the point that every single user, whether an individual or a media company, can create their own 'channel,' and every 'channel' can be supported by its own business model," Eisner said. "In the past, distributing television programming required an enormous broadcast infrastructure."

Currently, Veoh is available in beta form and features mainly peer-submitted videos, including live-action short films, game shows and animated programs. Many can be viewed without watching advertising, although that is likely to change over time.
Video to Go

The democratization of video distribution is one of the holy grails of the evolving Internet, with the ability to create hyper-personalized content channels leading to greater opportunities for targeted marketing.

Veoh's "network" will include a Web-based catalog of video, previews and a community component. Users will be able to watch their downloaded video in full-screen quality on PCs Smart Buys from CDW. The Technology You Need When You Need It., TVs or handheld devices such as iPods and PlayStation Portables.

"Video delivery over the Internet is not a new concept, but the ability to deliver long-form, high definition programming and provide interactivity and community is an important differentiator," said Rachel Lam, group managing director of Time Warner Investments, the venture wing of Time Warner, whose holdings include Web portal AOL, movie studios and TV networks.

"Veoh's unique combination of technologies creates a strategic content distribution platform as well as the opportunity to greatly enhance the consumer's experience with Internet-delivered video," Lam said.

Veoh wants to extend the Web's ability to let anyone publish content via a blog, for instance, to high-quality video.

The firm is far from alone in its efforts to build a distribution platform for IPTV. Across the country in Cambridge, Mass., another startup, Brightcove, is developing its own streamlined video publishing platform. In a sign that investors may be hedging their bets somewhat, that company counts AOL among its investors; the portal sank $16 million into Brightcove last fall.

Established companies are also in on the IPTV movement, with Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) Latest News about Microsoft recently signing a deal to have its IPTV software operating system and related technology used by Deutsche Telekom (NYSE: DT) Latest News about Deutsche Telekom. Video search specialist Blinkx last year launched a service to let users publish video to the Web, as has Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) Latest News about Google.
Matter of Time

Plenty of challenges remain, including potential roadblocks put up by the owners of the largest broadband networks, such as cable companies and telecoms, which may want consumers to purchase video directly from them -- and which may have the right to refuse to allow certain content onto their networks. Attempts by lawmakers to pass legislation requiring network neutrality have failed so far.

Using viral and homemade video is seen by many as a way for Veoh and others to prove their technology and also to build demand for more online video among consumers.

"The market is still very much in its beginning days," Will Richmond, president of research firm Broadband Directions, told the E-Commerce Times. The recently crossed threshold of 50 percent broadband penetration has helped bring more venture funding and attention to the market, he added.

"We're still in the stage where different business models and technological approaches are being tested out," Richmond said.

http://www.technewsworld.com/rsstory/50023.html

fredfa

04-18-06, 06:27 PM

Last week’s top 10 prime-time program ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS -- the first post in this thread.

SnakeEyes

04-19-06, 01:00 AM

ouch not good news from GallifryOne (http://www.gallifreyone.com/news.php#newsitemEEuVupEZEyIofJqKRq)
Ratings for Dalek, the sixth episode of the new series broadcast on the Sci Fi Channel in the US, have come in, and are sadly not welcome news. The telecast averaged a 1.17 household rating with an average viewing audience of 1.3 million viewers, making it the lowest rated original Doctor Who broadcast of the season to date. However, it is important to note that this was a holiday weekend, which could explain the sudden drop in viewers from the previous week.

keenan

04-19-06, 05:24 AM

From The Hollywood Reporter, April 19, 2006

Scott Brazil dies; 'Shield' EP, director

By Andrew Wallenstein

Scott Brazil, an Emmy-winning TV director and producer whose credits ranged from "Hill Street Blues" to "The Shield," died Monday night. He was 50.

Brazil died at Sherman Oaks Hospital from respiratory failure stemming from complications of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Lyme disease. But even as his condition worsened, the prolific and hard-working director managed his duties with the help of a motorized wheelchair as an executive producer and showrunner on FX's "Shield."

"He came into the office as late as (last) Thursday and was talking to the writers, doing casting and prepping our next episode," said Shawn Ryan, creator and executive producer of "Shield." "We knew his body was letting him down, but his mind never deteriorated."

Brazil collected a pair of Emmys for outstanding drama series in the early 1980s as part of the team of producers responsible for NBC's "Blues." He directed episodes of many primetime series including "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "JAG," "CSI: Miami" and "Nip/Tuck."

Brazil also had been executive producer and showrunner on all five seasons of "Shield," as well as its primary director. He helmed 11 of the 65 episodes produced of the series, including several season openers and finales.

Shooting on the set of "Shield" continued on schedule Tuesday in tribute to Brazil. "Everyone, I think, felt more comfortable staying together and working rather than sitting at home trying to deal with this," said Ryan, who expects to suspend production Friday for a memorial service.

Brazil also had been active on the development front recently, teaming with James DeMonaco ("The Negotiator") on a series being developed at Spike TV.

Brazil was a graduate of USC, where he earned a bachelor of science degree from the Annenberg School of Journalism. He was a member of the Directors Guild of America and the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences.

Brazil is survived by his wife, Marie; daughter Lindsay; son Mark; his parents, David and Barbara Brazil; and his brother, Griff Brazil.

A memorial service is set for 11 a.m. Friday at ATAS' Leonard H. Goldenson Theatre in North Hollywood.

fredfa

04-19-06, 09:58 AM

Weekly Nielsen Ratings Notes
Moses climbs the mountain

By Gary Levin, USA Today

• Parting shot. ABC's critically lambasted remake of The Ten Commandments scored a surprise Nielsen hit: Monday's opener averaged 13.9 million viewers, and Tuesday's conclusion fetched 12 million. On Saturday, the perennial airing of Cecil B. DeMille's 1956 version averaged 8.9 million, up from last spring's 6.9 million.

• Fallout. Monday's Commandments sank CBS to low ratings: The network's entire comedy lineup —The King of Queens, How I Met Your Mother, Two and a Half Men and The New Adventures of Old Christine —set series lows, and CSI: Miami (17.2 million), the night's top show, had its smallest audience since May 2003.

• Uncommanding Chief. The return of ABC's Commander in Chief after an 11-week break didn't impress: The show averaged a series-low 8.2 million viewers in its new Thursday slot. Many other shows were well below average that night as viewing levels declined.

• Cruise in neutral. Diane Sawyer's interview with Mission: Impossible 3 star Tom Cruise in a special Friday edition of ABC's Primetime averaged just 7 million viewers, finishing behind a Close to Home repeat on CBS.

• Idol breaker. American Idol's expanded show Wednesday (22.6 million) was its lowest-rated results show since March 2005 but easily won the night. The reality series Unan1mous (12.2 million) hit its lowest mark yet.

• What about him? The premiere of ABC drama What About Brian Sunday averaged 12.5 million viewers, a steep falloff from its Desperate Housewives lead-in (20 million) and well short of Grey's Anatomy's typical audience. Housewives tied a series low, and on Wednesday, Lost set a new one (15.7 million). Fox's House, with 21.2 million Tuesday, beat both to rank fourth for the week.

• Less sweet. The third-season premiere of MTV's My Super Sweet 16 averaged 2.2 million viewers Wednesday, down from 3.6 million for the second-season opener last August. Other underwhelming premieres: TLC's Shalom in the Home (747,000 viewers) and A&E's God or the Girl (489,000).

http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-04-18-nielsen-analysis_x.htm

fredfa

04-19-06, 10:04 AM

The TV Column
The Week’s Winners and Losers

By Lisa de Moraes The Washington Post Staff Writer

Holy Week -- CBS won it in the prime-time ratings, thanks mostly to the titillating crime drama swill Americans adore and the FCC loathes. But the week was not without its diviner fare.

Here's a look at the week's chosen and banished:

WINNERS

Moses . Big week for Moses, who did boffo numbers across six hours of prime time on ABC's lineup. Monday, Part 1 of his new two-part "Ten Commandments" clocked nearly 14 million viewers, winning its time slot among kids and teens. "10C:1" clocked nearly 5 million more viewers than ABC had the same night last year, and 43 percent more younger viewers, even though last year's lineup had included "The Bachelor" and "Supernanny."
"10C:1" is the second-highest-rated flick of the season among the 18-49ers advertisers covet, trailing only Part 1 of CBS's "Category 7: The End of the World" (smell a trend?). The next night, "10C:2" scored ABC's largest non-sports audience in its block since Barbara Walters's December special "Heaven, Where Is It?" (trend smells stronger).
Capping Moses' week, ABC's 25th broadcast of his 1956 theatrical movie snagged 9 million viewers on Saturday night. That's 2 million more viewers -- including 50 percent more teens and 33 percent more 18-49ers -- than last year's broadcast, also shown on the day before Easter because ABC may pull "Desperate Housewives" for Oscar but never for Moses.

Muhammad . Part 2 of the "South Park" two-parter "Cartoon Wars," in which Comedy Central banned Trey Parker and Matt Stone's use of an image of Muhammad, logged an impressive 4 million viewers on Wednesday -- outstripping the 3.5 million who tuned in to the much-ballyhooed season debut, in which Trey and Matt lampooned Comedy Central's banning of the rerun of their show's Scientology episode. Four episodes in, "South Park" is averaging about a million more viewers than last season.

LOSERS

Tom Cruise . About 7 million viewers tuned in Friday to watch ABC News's Lady Di toss softballs at the then-expectant dad ("What is different about this child?" "Boy or girl?" "Name chosen?" and "Tell me about your dad") after Cruise took her on a whirlwind flight in his WWII fighter plane. But the previous week, in the same time period, a rerun of "America's Funniest Home Videos" attracted nearly 9 million.

God . The first two hours of A&E's reality series "God or the Girl," about young men deciding whether to pursue lives as priests, attracted about 470,000 viewers. On the previous four weeks in the same Sunday time slot, A&E averaged nearly 900,000.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/18/AR2006041801736_2.html

fredfa

04-19-06, 10:32 AM

TV Notebook
For ABC's 'Alias,' one final grand turn

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 19, 2006

"Alias" is the type of show that might never have survived five seasons if ABC hadn't been in such bad shape when it premiered. Never a ratings powerhouse, or even really a hit, it was beloved by critics and a small but devoted group of fans who championed the J.J. Abrams series every year when it was on the bubble heading into the upfront.

This year ABC made the decision early, with some help from Abrams and series star Jennifer Garner, who agreed that the fifth season of the show, which had gone into a steep ratings decline after moving to Thursdays last fall, would be its last. It returns to the air tonight for its final eight episodes after a four-month hiatus.

Say what you will about the past few seasons, which have left fans staunchly divided as to their quality. "Alias" will leave quite a legacy. It, along with Fox's "24" and the WB/UPN's "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," was one of the first truly clever action TV shows that combined wit and weapons with edge-of-your-seat mystery. It paved the way for "Lost" and "Battlestar Galactica," and it even spawned one of the tabloids' greatest stories, Garner and her many loves.

The show that made Garner into a star will get an appropriately grandiose sendoff. In a two-hour return tonight at 8 p.m., a parade of long-lost guest stars from seasons past begin to filter back and fans may finally find out if Agent Vaughn, or whatever his name is, is really dead.

Though it probably won't draw huge ratings, it may do better than ABC has been doing in the 8 p.m. slot with "Freddie" and "George Lopez," which combined for a 2.7 rating in adults 18-49. Airing on Thursdays against much tougher competition earlier this season, "Alias" averaged a 2.3 in the demo, ranking No. 110 on broadcast.

On tonight’s return, pregnant and distressed Sydney gives dad Jack a call, forcing him to orchestrate a search and rescue mission with Weiss. Meanwhile, Devlin’s suspicious that APO has been infiltrated.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4190.asp

AAF

04-19-06, 12:07 PM

Ratings for Dalek, the sixth episode of the new series broadcast on the Sci Fi Channel in the US, have come in, and are sadly not welcome news. The telecast averaged a 1.17 household rating with an average viewing audience of 1.3 million viewers, making it the lowest rated original Doctor Who broadcast of the season to date. However, it is important to note that this was a holiday weekend, which could explain the sudden drop in viewers from the previous week.

Doesn't help when you can download the episodes and get better picture quality to boot!

Besides....season 2 kicked off on the 15th and Rose was looking mighty fine! Let's hear it for companion eye candy!

fredfa

04-19-06, 12:50 PM

Tuesday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-19-06, 12:53 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
NBC's culinary celebs: Fried to a crisp

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 19, 2006

Roasted. Fried. Flambéed. Any way you describe it, NBC’s “Celebrity Cooking Showdown” got destroyed by Fox’s “American Idol” and CBS’s “NCIS” last night.

The show posted a pulseless 1.1 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 in the 8 p.m. timeslot last night, its second night on the air.

Last night’s average was down 62 percent from the already disappointing 2.9 rating “Cooking” earned in its Monday 9 p.m. premiere. Pending final ratings being released later this afternoon, that should be among the lowest-rated original programs to air on any Big Four network this season.

“Idol” usually flattens anything that airs against it save “NCIS”—last night “Idol” earned an 11.0 among 18-49s and “NCIS” a respectable 3.6.

But NBC has especially struggled in the timeslot, with “Fear Factor,” “Joey” and “Most Outrageous Moments” all flopping.

“Cooking” finished sixth in its timeslot among 18-49s, behind WB’s “Gilmore Girls” and Univision’s “Barrera de Amor,” and just ahead of UPN’s “America’s Next Top Model” repeat at 1.0.

The only worse news for NBC is the fact that it’s committed to airing “Cooking” at 8 p.m. for the rest of the week.

Meanwhile, in other ratings last night, the fourth-season premiere of “Less Than Perfect” at 9:30 p.m. posted a 1.9 rating among 18-49s on ABC. That’s what the disappointing “Sons & Daughters” averaged over five weeks in the slot, and half of the 3.8 ABC earned last week for “Ten Commandments.”

And Fox’s “House” had another strong week, posting a 9.1 18-49 rating and averaging 23.3 million total viewers, according to Nielsen overnights. If that number holds, it would make it the most-watched episode of “House” ever.

On the strength of “Idol” and “House,” Fox trampled the competition last night, averaging a 10.0 rating and a 26 share. CBS was a distant second at 3.7/10, NBC third at 2.3/6, ABC fourth at 2.1/5, Univision fifth at 1.6/4, WB sixth at 1.5/4 and UPN seventh at 1.0/3.

At 8 p.m. Fox was first with its 11.0 rating for “Idol.” CBS was second with a 3.6 for “NCIS,” WB third with a 1.8 for “Gilmore Girls” and ABC fourth with a 1.5 for a repeat of “According to Jim” (1.6) and a new “Hope & Faith” (1.5). Univision was fifth that hour with a 1.3 for “Barrera de Amor,” NBC sixth with its 1.1 for “Cooking” and UPN seventh with a 1.0 for its repeat of “Top Model.”

Fox led again at 9 p.m. with its 9.1 for “House.” CBS remained in second with a 4.3 for “The Unit,” with NBC third with a 2.6 average for “Scrubs” (2.9) and “Teachers” (2.2). That left Univision fourth with a 2.2 for “Alborada,” ABC fifth with a 1.9 for “Hope & Faith” (2.0) and “Less Than Perfect” (1.9), WB sixth with a 1.1 for “Pepper Dennis” and UPN seventh with a 1.0 for “Veronica Mars.”

At 10 p.m. CBS and NBC tied for the lead at 3.3, CBS for a repeat of “Criminal Minds” and NBC for a “Law & Order: SVU” rerun. ABC was third with a 2.7 for “Boston Legal” and Univision fourth with a 1.4 for “Ver para Creer.”

Fox also took the night among households easily, averaging a 15.1 rating and a 23 share. CBS was second at 8.9/14, ABC third at 4.4/7, NBC fourth at 3.9/6, WB fifth at 2.2/3, Univision sixth at 2.1/3 and UPN seventh at 1.5/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4191.asp

fredfa

04-19-06, 12:56 PM

The 2005-2006 Season
To win the season, ABC needs a kick

By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 19, 2006, 01:15

With under six weeks to go in the season, Fox has pulled within 0.1 rating points of longtime leader ABC among adults 18-49. The question now is not whether Fox passes ABC but rather whether ABC can catch back up as the two head into May sweeps.

Fox could slip into a tie as soon as next week, based on Nielsen numbers as analyzed by Media Life. It currently sits at No. 2 with a 4.0 rating, just behind ABC’s 4.1. Among viewers 18-49, Fox trails by only 110,000, with an average 5.17 million.

Last week, the week ended April 16, Fox was well ahead of ABC for the seven-day period, averaging a 4.0 rating to the latter’s 3.6. This week ABC’s average will dip because “Lost” is a repeat, meaning Fox could finally pull even next week and perhaps jump ahead soon after. It will then be going into the final episodes of “American Idol,” with several super-sized episodes ahead.

Against that momentum, ABC will then have to catch up. It could do it.

Media buyers expect things to stay close. Though some predict a Fox win, other agencies say that things will be very tight entering May sweeps between ABC, Fox and third-place CBS, which currently has a 3.8 average.

CBS ran lots of repeats in January and March, meaning it has more fresh content remaining than the other two networks over the next few weeks. Yet with “CSI” and “Survivor” both declining, even all-original content probably couldn’t boost it past Fox and ABC.

ABC’s biggest hopes rest on three factors: huge numbers for “Grey’s Anatomy,” which has five original episodes left, big ratings for its May sweeps specials and the traditional mid-April dip for “Idol.”

Of those three, “Grey’s” may be the most crucial. It’s been the hottest scripted program on television since its post-Super Bowl airing in February, and ABC smartly scheduled a three-hour finale, the first hour airing on Sunday, May 14, and the final two hours airing on Monday, May 15.

The show has averaged better than a 9.0 since the Super Bowl. Three hours of such a show would give ABC a nice bump to end the year.

ABC’s sweeps stunts also include supersizing the season finales of “Desperate Housewives,” “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition” and “Lost” from one hour to two, which will provide extra ratings punch.

It has a movie on the bird flu epidemic also scheduled for May, as well as the two-hour series finale of “Alias,” which may draw some former fans out of nostalgia.

Finally, ABC must hope that “Idol” continues its recent falloff, however slight. The Tuesday edition averaged a 12.0 last week, down 10 percent from its season-long 13.3 average, while the Wednesday edition was off 26 percent to a 9.2, from its 12.2 average.

For sure, the show will get a boost for its finale, but it does often lose steam nearing the end of the season after viewers’ favorites have been booted.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4187.asp

SnakeEyes

04-19-06, 01:28 PM

Doesn't help when you can download the episodes and get better picture quality to boot!

Besides....season 2 kicked off on the 15th and Rose was looking mighty fine! Let's here it for companion eye candy!

I honestly don't think download of shows when broadcast in the UK is that much a dent in the ratings given how Nielsen works. In addition, Doctor Who did have a nice bump back up to premiere night ratings the previous week.

fredfa

04-19-06, 02:38 PM

A lot of shows were off their numbers for the Easter weekend, but, in fairness, I think the Doctor Who ratings are worrisome.

dturturro

04-19-06, 03:40 PM

It hurts not having a lead in. It's not exactly Sci-Friday any more.

fredfa

04-19-06, 04:15 PM

It seems sad, but by the time local TV stations get finished selling or renting their digital channels, the “old days” of HD Lite might look very, very good indeed.

The Business of TV
Motor Trend Launching Multicast Channel

Allison Romano Broadcasting & Cable 4/19/2006

Magazine publisher Primedia is taking its popular Motor Trend automotive magazine into broadcast television, creating a new TV service designed for broadcast stations digital platform. Primedia and Multicast Networks Group, a content and distribution company for digital broadcasting, are preparing Motor Trend TV to launch in early 2007 with auto-themed programming, such as car makeover shows, movies and new product reviews.

Stations would carry Motor Trend TV on secondary digital channels, much like NBC affiliates currently offer NBC WeatherPlus. The programming will be free to stations, and affiliates will receive local commercial inventory and have the option of inserting locally produced auto-related programming. “The channel will speak to auto enthusiasts and car loves,” says Jacqueline Blum, president of Primedia Enterprises. Programming will be targeted at men and women, she added.

Primedia began exploring starting Motor Trend TV last year, after producing several programs for cable. Blum says the company considered a cable channel or video-on-demand, but found the spaces already over-crowded. Broadcast multicast, she says, “was an interesting and unique way to address getting a network into the broadcast spectrum.”

Multicast Network Group is assisting Primedia with the programming and distribution. So far, it has not signed deals with any stations, but COO Jon Finley says Motor Trend TV is a strong product for secondary digital channels. “Most broadcasters have already made the investment or are in the process,” he says. “Now, it is about finding a business model. There are few additional costs for stations and Motor Trend TV will provide incremental revenue streams.”

Primedia and MNG plan to offer advertisers opportunity to buy cross-platform packages with Motor Trend’s magazine, Web site and new TV programming. On Motor Trend TV, advertisers will have the ability to sponsor shows and air longer-form spots. Says Findley: “At a time when advertisers are looking for solutions, we clearly want to go beyond the 30-second spots.”

CPanther95

04-19-06, 04:52 PM

If they're dumb enough to lease (their bandwidth) themselves out of existence, then they got what they deserved.

fredfa

04-19-06, 06:31 PM

The strange thing is that within a very few years there will be all kinds of alternative ways (and likely with far higher quality) to deliver those extra channels to our homes.
It seems to me the stations would be far better off making sure the PQ they deliver, OTA, is the very best possible.
Although, to be honest, I am sure compression techniques will also vastly improve in the near future.

fredfa

04-19-06, 06:33 PM

Sports On TV
NBA in Early Talks for TV Rights With Turner, ABC/ESPN

By John Consoli MediaWeek.com APRIL 19, 2006 -

The NBA has begun preliminary discussions on a new TV telecast deal with rightsholders, Turner and ABC/ESPN.

The current agreement, under which ABC/ESPN pays $400 million per year and Turner pays $366 million per year, ends after the 2007-08 season.

NBA Commissioner David Stern said today that while other networks have expressed interest, his goal is to make every effort to renew with his current network partners, both of who have exclusive negotiating windows. Stern added that whatever new agreements are put into effect will not only involve television, but also digital partnerships.

Stern said the NBA is also planning to ramp up "the production elements" on the league-owned NBA TV network. He said going forward NBA TV will probably not add many more games than the 96 NBA it is currently carrying per season, but it will expand the quality and scope of its shoulder programming. "We will be making a considerable investment in NBA TV," Stern said, adding that the goal is to televise everything on the network in high definition.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002383133

fredfa

04-19-06, 06:36 PM

An Appreciation
Scott Brazil a common thread on some classic shows

By Howard Burns The Hollywood Reporter's editorial director April 19, 2006

The other night I strove for greatness. Nothing less would do. The house was empty; the big screen all mine.

First I chose an episode from the recently concluded season of "The Shield." It's the one where Forest Whitaker's cunning Jon Kavanaugh character finally meets up with Michael Chiklis' rogue cop Vic Mackey in a tense final scene. Great television, pure and simple.

When that was over, I unwrapped the DVD set of the first season of "Hill Street Blues." The only place to start was at the beginning, the pilot episode "Hill Street Station." Watching Hill and Renko gunned down was no less startling on this night than it was when I first saw it 25 years ago.

"The Shield," arguably the best police show of its era. "Hill Street Blues," arguably the best of its era. Was there a thread?

Two gritty, no-holds-barred cop shows with rich, often dark personas portrayed by flat-out wonderful actors. You bet there was a thread.

Midmorning on Tuesday came the news that Scott Brazil had died. He was 50. He was another thread.

"It's all about the characters." That's what Brazil told The Hollywood Reporter in an interview last year. The director knew this quite well -- he learned it from a master, and it was always at the heart of his work.

Brazil had been an executive producer of "The Shield" since its debut in 2002. In tandem with series creator and fellow exec producer Shawn Ryan, Brazil delivered a show worthy of its place among television's best -- right alongside "Hill Street."

That "Hill Street" and "The Shield" are linked is no coincidence. Brazil also was a producer on "Hill Street," and as that show entered the annals of television history he would eventually join the ranks of Dick Wolf, David E. Kelley, David Milch and others who would first work under the tutelage of Steven Bochco before going on to become successful producer-directors in their own right.

All one has to do is inspect Brazil's credits to appreciate just how often he was associated with success. In addition to his duties on "The Shield," Brazil in recent years directed episodes of many of television's favorites: "Grey's Anatomy," "Nip/Tuck," "CSI: Miami," "JAG," "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Nash Bridges," to name a few.

But as all too many in this town can attest, television is an inexact science. Good work often goes unnoticed until it's too late. Some of Brazil's best work was done on the short-lived series "Gideon's Crossing," on which he served as co-executive producer with Paul Attanasio. The medical drama that starred Andre Braugher was pulled by ABC after one season, but would go on to get an Emmy nomination and win a Golden Globe after its demise.

Brazil's body of work affords all makers of scripted television the opportunity to again consider the lessons learned during an illustrious, yet all-too-short career. In particular, the mantra of mentor Bochco: "It's all about the characters."

"If your whole focus as a director on this show is the camera, it's not the right show for you," Brazil said of "The Shield" in a 2002 interview with DGA Magazine. "Your focus needs to be actors, you need to love actors, and you need to love the words. These actors love the characters they play. And, I have to tell you, they're the happiest campers on television."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002346111

CPanther95

04-19-06, 06:37 PM

Although, to be honest, I am sure compression techniques will also vastly improve in the near future.

True, but do you see them curtailing this expansion of channels so that improved compression will allow better PQ - or do you see them continually adding channels (or leasing off bandwidth) while only maintaining "adequate" PQ?

I know what I think. ;)

keenan

04-19-06, 06:42 PM

An Appreciation
Scott Brazil a common thread on some classic shows

Quality TV is certainly worse off due to his passing.

fredfa

04-19-06, 08:01 PM

True, but do you see them curtailing this expansion of channels so that improved compression will allow better PQ - or do you see them continually adding channels (or leasing off bandwidth) while only maintaining "adequate" PQ?

I know what I think. ;)

And I think we agree completely.

fredfa

04-19-06, 08:02 PM

Quality TV is certainly worse off due to his passing.

It surely is, Jim.
And thanks for posting the original obit.

keenan

04-20-06, 12:33 AM

From Multichannel News,

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6326509.html?display=Breaking+News&referral=SUPP&nid=2226
Multichannel News: The Cable Industry Book-of-Record

OLN Nears Name Change
By Steve Donohue 4/19/2006 4:42:00 PM

Take your pick: Among the brands Comcast Corp.’s OLN trademarked recently for its upcoming name change are Victory Channel, Sports Country Channel, Sports Nation Channel, Victory Network, Sports Country Network, Sports Nation Network, Victory TV, Sports Country TV and Sports Nation TV, as well as other combos.

Comcast changed the network’s name from Outdoor Life Network to OLN late last year.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(personally, I think they all sound silly..)

fredfa

04-20-06, 01:19 AM

They all sound pretty lame, but better, I guess, than OLN.

fredfa

04-20-06, 02:39 AM

TV Notebook
Cable might ask: Where's the love?

`Sex and the City' and `The Sopranos' seemed to signal a change in TV's destiny. Today's dips are different news.

By Scott Collins Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 19, 2006

Remember back a few years ago, when it sometimes looked like HBO and its cable brethren would forever dominate Sundays with edgy series such as "The Sopranos," leaving just scraps to broadcast rivals? Well, this season has pretty much exploded that myth.

On Sunday, "Sopranos" averaged 7.9 million total viewers, its lowest figure for an original episode in more than five years, according to figures released Tuesday by Nielsen Media Research. And that was no fluke. In this, its sixth season, HBO's mob drama is averaging 8.8 million total viewers, a drop of 10% compared with the fifth season. True, these numbers are still huge by cable standards, but "Sopranos" is a long way from the fourth season opener in September 2002, which logged a record 13.4 million viewers.

And Tony Soprano and his crew aren't the only ones feeling the pain on premium cable. "Big Love," HBO's heavily promoted polygamy drama, looks destined to join a list of provocative, well-produced dramas — including "Carnivàle" and "Rome" — that can't quite reproduce "Sopranos' " early pop-cultural impact. Through six airings after "Sopranos," "Big Love" is averaging 3.9 million viewers — an impressive number for basic cable, perhaps, but far less attention than HBO had grown used to. Worse, many subscribers obviously aren't sticking around once "Sopranos" ends.

But HBO executives can count their blessings that they don't suffer from Showtime's problems. "Huff," the quirky drama with Hank Azaria, received an enormous print ad campaign designed to build awareness for the second season. But the show is clearly going nowhere. "Huff" is averaging 280,000 total viewers in three airings — considerably less than what Bravo or VH1 typically expects for an inexpensive reality offering.

What's the problem? At Showtime, the troubles are nothing new; the network has been perspiring in the shadow of its better-known competitor for years. HBO — which downplays ratings because, like Showtime, it does not sell advertising — is a different story. With "Sex and the City" and "Sopranos," the network briefly made it look easy to find series that seemed to encapsulate the culture at a certain moment. It seemed that HBO chief Chris Albrecht and his team had discovered some kind of magic bullet. The reality, of course, is that such gold strikes are so rare that many writer-producers (and executives) spend their entire careers in a futile grasp for them. Is it possible that maybe everything does, in the end, even out?

It's natural, in the meantime, to wonder where all those Sunday viewers have gone. The best guess is that many have migrated to ABC, which despite some cooling in the "Desperate Housewives" phenomenon has seen its Sunday ratings in the crucial adults aged 18 to 49 demographic soar 23% compared with last season. Much of that is due to this season's show of the moment, "Grey's Anatomy."

And so the TV cycles continue.

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et-channel19apr19,0,1313013,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

pwrmetal

04-20-06, 08:20 AM

Re: Doctor Who's low rating for Dalek.

I'm not worried at all. Good Friday definitely was the mitigating factor in my eyes. Tons of people were travelling that day or already out of town and I think it definitely affects viewing numbers. Hell cable ratings are always down for Labor Day, and ususally people are home by then.

We'll see how it does for The Long Game and beyond. I expect it will be up this week.

It's also silly to be worried about the #'s when we don't even know what sci-fi wants/expects the show to do.

fredfa

04-20-06, 10:11 AM

8 More DirecTV Local HD Markets Are Up

(DirecTV Press Release)

DIRECTV Activates HD Local Channel Service in Eight Additional Markets
Minneapolis, Sacramento, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Nashville, Kansas City, Columbus, Ohio and Birmingham to Begin Receiving Local HD Programming Today, Wednesday, April 19.

WHAT: DIRECTV, Inc., the nation's leading digital television service provider, announced today that it has begun offering local HD channels via satellite to customers in the Minneapolis, Sacramento, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Nashville, Kansas City, Columbus, Ohio and Birmingham DMAs.

DIRECTV's roll out of local HD channels in eight more markets is part of a nationwide expansion of HD programming that will culminate in 2007, when DIRECTV will have the ability to deliver more than 1,500 local HD channels and more than 150 national HD channels, establishing DIRECTV as a leading provider of HD programming. DIRECTV customers today have access to more than 900 hours of HD programming each week, as well as hundreds of hours of special event, movie and sports coverage.
DIRECTV now offers local HD broadcast channels in 20 cities with plans to launch in an additional 16 cities by mid-year, offering access to DIRECTV-delivered local HD channels in more than 58 percent of U.S. television households.

WHEN: Beginning Wednesday, April 19, 2006

HOW: Customers who subscribe to a programming package that includes local channels will receive both the standard and HD signals at no extra monthly charge. Customers can receive local HD channels by purchasing a new H20 HD receiver and satellite dish. DIRECTV is offering a $200 mail-in rebate to new and existing non-HD customers who purchase a DIRECTV HD receiver (limit one rebate per customer).

123HDTV

04-20-06, 12:51 PM

From Multichannel News,

Take your pick: Among the brands Comcast Corp.’s OLN trademarked recently for its upcoming name change are Victory Channel, Sports Country Channel, Sports Nation Channel, Victory Network, Sports Country Network, Sports Nation Network, Victory TV, Sports Country TV and Sports Nation TV, as well as other combos.

Comcast changed the network’s name from Outdoor Life Network to OLN late last year.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(personally, I think they all sound silly..)

Wasn't the name of the Twins failed sports network Victory Sports? Nothing like thinking about branding yourself with a failed sports network name.
:cool:

fredfa

04-20-06, 01:29 PM

Wednesday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-20-06, 01:32 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Swamped: 'Invasion' sinks in the mire

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 20, 2006

ABC’s “Invasion” is trying to make the case that it should be renewed for a second season. It certainly didn’t make much of one last night, when it returned from a month-long hiatus.

The supernatural drama posted a 2.5 overnight rating among viewers 18-49, down 22 percent from the 3.2 it had averaged over its past four original episodes. It was also down 22 percent from the 3.2 “The Evidence” averaged in the Wednesday 10 p.m. slot during the four weeks it subbed in.

One major reason for “Invasion’s” slip was the lack of usual powerhouse lead-in “Lost,” which did not air last night. Instead the second half of a two-hour “Alias” aired at 9 p.m., giving “Invasion” a much weaker than usual lead-in. “Alias” peaked at a 3.1 at 9:30, less than half of what “Lost” usually averages in that slot.

And though ABC advertised “Invasion’s” comeback for more than a week, fans could have been confused as to whether the show was coming back at all, after buddy copper “Evidence” took over the slot March 22.

Still, the show wasn’t able to improve upon the minimal lead-in it did have. Its 2.5 rating was off 19 percent from “Alias’” 3.1 at 9:30. And that was against minimal competition at 10 p.m., including a rerun of NBC’s “Law & Order.”

Of course more will become clear once “Invasion” airs after an original “Lost” next week, but for a show that has been in steady decline since the fall, a weak return makes it more likely it won’t be back this fall.
Meanwhile, an “American Idol” results show propelled Fox to first place for the night among 18-49s, averaging a 6.0 rating and a 17 share. CBS was second at 3.8/11, ABC third at 2.7/7, NBC fourth at 1.8/5, UPN and Univision tied for fifth at 1.5/4, and WB seventh at 0.9/3.

At 8 p.m. Fox led with a 3.7 for “Bones,” followed by a 3.0 for CBS for “The Amazing Race.” ABC was third with a 2.4 for the first hour of “Alias,” UPN fourth with a 2.2 for “America’s Next Top Model” and NBC fifth with a 1.5 for “Celebrity Cooking Showdown,” which improved slightly on the prior night. That left Univision and WB tied for sixth at 1.2, Univision for “Barrera de Amor” and WB for “One Tree Hill.”

Fox led again at 9 p.m. with an 8.3 average for its “Idol” results show (11.0) and “Unan1mous” (5.6). CBS remained second that hour with a 3.7 for “Criminal Minds,” with ABC third with a 3.0 for “Alias,” Univision fourth with a 1.9 for “Alborada” and NBC fifth with a 1.3 for “Heist.” UPN was sixth that hour with a 0.9 for a repeat of “Veronica Mars” and WB seventh with a 0.7 for “Bedford Diaries.”

At 10 p.m. CBS took the lead with a 4.8 rating for a new episode of “CSI: NY.” ABC and NBC tied for second at 2.5, ABC for “Invasion” and NBC for a “L&O” repeat, with Univision fourth with a 1.4 for “Don Francisco Presenta.”

Fox finished first for the night among households with a 9.3 average rating and a 15 share. CBS was second at 8.2/13, ABC third at 4.9/8, NBC fourth at 3.9/6, UPN fifth at 2.3/4, Univision sixth at 2.0/3 and WB seventh at 1.5/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4219.asp

fredfa

04-20-06, 02:19 PM

TV Notebook
HBO's Big Love Renewed

By Anthony Crupi MediaWeek.com APRIL 20, 2006 -

HBO has picked up its original series Big Love for a second season, with filming set to begin in August.

A solid if unspectacular performer for the premium network, the polygamy drama has averaged nearly 4 million viewers in its Sunday 10:00 p.m. time slot since its March 12 premiere; repeats bring the weekly average up around the 7 million mark.

Although an exact date for Big Love’s return engagement has not been announced, HBO said season two will run sometime in 2007.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/cabletv/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002383523

SVonhof

04-20-06, 02:33 PM

123HDTV

04-20-06, 02:36 PM

123HDTV

04-20-06, 02:41 PM

fredfa

04-20-06, 06:16 PM

TV Notebook
NBC Cans 'Celebrity Cooking'

By Christopher Lisotta TVWeek.com April 20, 2006

NBC's five-night reality experiment "Celebrity Cooking Challenge" has ended after only three days. The network is moving the Thursday and Friday episodes of the culinary competition reality series "Cooking" to NBC.com and replacing them with sitcoms and the more successful reality series, "Deal or No Deal."

On Thursday NBC is scheduling "Will & Grace" and "My Name Is Earl" into the 8 p.m. (ET) block, while on Friday the network will run an episode of "Deal" in the time period.

On Wednesday at 8 p.m. "Cooking" scored a 1.5 preliminary national rating in adults 18 to 49, a number that includes live-plus-same-day viewing, according to Nielsen Media Research. NBC was fifth in the time period in the demo on Wednesday. "Cooking" was also down 46 percent from its 9:02 p.m. debut on Monday.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=9811

keenan

04-20-06, 07:01 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Swamped: 'Invasion' sinks in the mire

This is too bad, IMO, this show is some pretty good TV, I guess most folks don't think so, but that's not the first time "most folks" don't agree with me, Carnivale, Over There, Eyes, Karen Sisco, etc.....

CPanther95

04-20-06, 07:33 PM

Very sloooooow to develop plot, but Invasion picked up the pace (and the depth) about 7-10 episodes in. Hopefully not too late.

Another potential "hiatus victim".

keenan

04-20-06, 07:40 PM

Very sloooooow to develop plot, but Invasion picked up the pace (and the depth) about 7-10 episodes in. Hopefully not too late.

Another potential "hiatus victim".
Exactly, it was very slow in the beginning and that's where it probably lost a lot of viewers(if they were ever there) and I hope it's not too late either. ABC has sure been pushing it lately though so I'm hoping it makes the cut.

trbarry

04-20-06, 07:47 PM

Exactly, it was very slow in the beginning and that's where it probably lost a lot of viewers(if they were ever there) and I hope it's not too late either. ABC has sure been pushing it lately though so I'm hoping it makes the cut.

I was losing interest at the beginning, rating it even behind Threshold. But then the two reversed in my opionion and while I'll not miss Threshold I'll be fairly disappointed if Invasion doesn't return.

- Tom

fredfa

04-20-06, 11:23 PM

TV Notebook
'Stargate SG-1' keeps cruising, even after all these light years

By Melanie McFarland Seattle Post-Intelligencer TV Critic Friday, April 21, 2006

VANCOUVER, B.C. -- It takes about 4 ½ hours to travel by bus and taxi between Seattle and Bridge Studios in Burnaby, where "Stargate SG-1" is produced.

One couldn't help thinking about that while standing in front of the stargate itself, a massive prop tens of feet tall on Stage 5 -- the gate room. Actual 21st-century travel is brutal in comparison to the "Stargate's" fantasy -- instantaneous strolls across the galaxy.

The tradeoff is that the gate goes both ways. And in the series' 10th season, which begins in July, the SG-1 team -- Dr. Daniel Jackson (Michael Shanks), Lt. Col. Samantha Carter (Amanda Tapping), alien ally Teal'c (Christopher Judge) and newcomer Lt. Col. Cameron Mitchell (Ben Browder) will use it to fend off the Ori, an enemy that seems to be unstoppable.

But Tuesday's theme was not disaster. It was about celebration. On that day, Sony and Sci Fi held a press conference marking "Stargate SG-1's" 200th episode, due to air in August. The cast took a break from filming to talk to reporters, sip sparkling cider and eat cake.

The event was a fan's dream: Richard Dean Anderson was present; he returned from semi-retirement to reprise the role, Gen. Jack O'Neill, he played for eight seasons on the series. Also on hand was Claudia Black, who starred in "Farscape" along with Browder and has signed on as a series regular for the 10th season.

Looming behind them was the gigantic ring, filled with action highlights from the series as opposed to the watery membrane that separates Earth-based Stargate Command from the rest of the galaxy. As workplaces go, it's not bad. The cast must enjoy it -- half of them have been reporting here for almost a decade.

Which is a bit funny, considering that most of "SG-1's" seasons ended with the cast thinking they were headed for unemployment.

"There were a lot of times where we felt, 'OK, this is the last year,' " executive producer Robert C. Cooper, said, "...'and we're going to do it justice.' So we would write spectacular closing episodes that we thought would be series finales, and not season finales. And nobody paid attention to that."

At this point, with the invigorating effect of creating spinoff "Stargate Atlantis," Cooper and Brad Wright, his co-executive producer have stopped thinking about the end. Now "SG-1" has reached yet another stage of life with Browder and Black in the mix -- and, perhaps, Anderson returning part-time at some point. (He stressed that was up to the producers and MGM.)

"As long as people want to come to work every day, and it doesn't become a chore, I think this show has a chance to go several more years," remarked Judge, who has been with the series since the beginning. "With the infusion of Ben and Claudia and Beau (Bridges, playing Gen. Hank Landry) it really reinvigorated us and brought a new energy to the show. And it really doesn't feel like 10 years -- it's given us new kids to play with in the sandbox."

Besides, 200 is really just a nice round number on which to hang a party. Exceeding that is important to the executive producers. Episode 202, however, is important to the record books. That's when "SG-1" becomes the longest-running science-fiction series on North American television, finally beating "The X-Files." (But a long way from passing "Doctor Who," which holds the worldwide longevity record.)

It is already the longest-running drama series on cable TV, and every week, the show attracts an average of 10 million viewers worldwide, watching in more than 120 countries. Board games, comic books and theme-park rides have been based on its rich mythology, and its DVDs are brisk sellers.

The series is a boon for the Sci Fi Channel, where it became its highest-rated original after it was first picked up in 2002.

With all that going for it, however, "SG-1" remains relegated to the back of the bus in terms of popularity. Occupying a slot on "best show" lists is a rarity. That glory usually goes to "Battlestar Galactica," which is heading into its third season and already has snagged a Peabody Award.

"Honestly, it can be a little frustrating," Tapping admits, "because our show is so successful. And I think we really came into our own, or people started to recognize the show, in our later seasons, which is sort of odd. Usually by season seven, shows are petering out. We were really ramping it up and gaining new momentum.

"So it's kind of weird to start out floating under the radar, on Showtime, to move to Sci Fi and to start to gain a bigger audience," Tapping continued. "But now we're getting sort of usurped by the 'Battlestar Galacticas' and the 'Losts.' But we're like the little show that could."

"Stargate" began airing on Showtime in 1997. That means it arrived on the scene during an era of "Star Trek" updates, making it look like an attempt at capitalizing on that revival.

Where "Deep Space Nine," "Voyager" and "Enterprise" faltered after a few seasons, the fan base for "SG-1" continued to grow. Creative regeneration year after year deserves part of the credit for that, but so does its status as a cable series.

"We haven't had the pressure of having to deliver the meteoric ratings the way network shows do," Cooper explained.

If "SG-1" had started out on a broadcast network as opposed to Showtime, Wright added, "I think we would have been canceled after six episodes. Honestly."

Sci Fi Channel's decision to pick up "SG-1" for its sixth season seemed risky at first. Usually when a channel picks up a long-running series another network has canceled, it manages to extend its life for a couple of years, tops. But on Sci Fi, "SG-1" became the foundation for the popular Friday night block, home to "Battlestar Galactica" and its spinoff, "Stargate Atlantis."

The writers manage to stay true to the show's mythology while keeping each episode virtually self-contained, enabling new viewers to drop in at any point. Cooper explains it as creating a little science-fiction film every week.

And after almost 10 years, most people have forgotten that James Spader and Kurt Russell were the original Daniel Jackson and Jack O'Neill.

It may take a little longer for mainstream audiences to recognize its greatness. Because regardless of its records, it still isn't getting the kind of wide-ranging respect a successful series with a 200-episode run deserves.

"By the way, neither did the original 'Star Trek' " in its time," Cooper pointed out. "It wasn't until 30 years later that people started looking back at it and realizing it was a milestone. I think we secretly hope that 10, 15, 20 years from now, that 'Stargate' will be considered in the same way."

Perhaps it'll happen in time for the cake cutting on episode 300.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/tv/267484_tv21.html

fredfa

04-20-06, 11:26 PM

Sorry, I missed this story yesterday.
But it is still worth reading.

TV Notebook
ABC's 'Commander in Chief' sinking into lame-duck status

By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle

There's more than one reason why an out-of-the-box hit like "Commander in Chief" eventually became a spectacular failure. Unfortunately, not all the lessons learned from that stunning reversal of fortune can be predicted.

That is precisely why the TV business chops up and rotates (not necessarily in that order) the people who make the decisions, and why television criticism is mostly about failure analysis.

Fans of "Commander in Chief," which stars Geena Davis as this country's first female president (she was the independent vice president to a Republican president who died in the pilot episode), believe almost uniformly that ABC mucked everything up. That's only partly true.

More than 16 million people tuned into the first episode of "Commander in Chief," though it had received mostly average reviews (I liked the first two episodes and was hopeful that creator and writer Rod Lurie could pull a "West Wing" out of his hat). The initial success sent a groan through Hollywood, because it meant that ABC, flush with success coming off the "Desperate Housewives" and "Lost" freshman seasons, was at it again. "Boston Legal" appeared to be revamped and "Grey's Anatomy" was about to rocket into the stratosphere. ABC had, against long odds, continued to mine gold.

"Commander in Chief" had done so well, it prompted that age-old Hollywood byproduct: the jealous smear campaign. Rival networks were clucking that it didn't matter if nearly 17 million people watched the second episode -- they were mostly older women, according to the numbers. But "Commander in Chief" began to lower its demographic, increasing its total audience and generating buzz.

Behind the scenes, however, things were falling apart. Lurie had too much responsibility and didn't delegate, so production fell behind, costing ABC money (the same scenario that led to Aaron Sorkin's ouster from "West Wing" -- must be something about political dramas). Steven Bochco, who had recently signed a deal with Touchstone, a Disney-owned production company (Disney owns ABC as well), was brought into run the show after only two episodes, the first time he was at the helm of something he didn't start.

"Commander in Chief" was hitting a chord with viewers who either wanted the fantasy of a female president dramatized in prime time or liked the fact that, unlike "West Wing," the series was tapping into the home life of Davis' character, Mackenzie Allen, and her family. But Bochco is not big on female sentiment and he brought in new writers and took the show in a more political, less personal, direction. Viewers began to slowly trickle away and then -- look out ahead! -- the series ran into the Death Star ("American Idol") on Tuesday nights in January.

This was a serious unraveling. ABC had crowed that it was "delivering the most watched Tuesday drama debut on any network in the last five years." But as things started going sideways, the "American Idol" competition was too much, and nearly 7 million people abandoned ship.

That prompted ABC to pull the series Jan. 24 -- and somewhere in this mothballing period, Bochco bailed as well. That he wanted away from the series to work on something else was pretty easy to interpret. "Commander in Chief" didn't reappear until Thursday -- a new night and time (10 p.m.), with marginal promotion and a whole lot of lost momentum. Result: 8.2 million viewers and a series that is essentially dead.

Is this ABC's fault? In the sense that it didn't better control the damage, yes. Maybe it should have told Lurie from the start that writing, directing and running a series was too much work, because once ABC canned Lurie, that was the beginning of the end. The series suffered under Bochco, maybe from the change in direction or maybe from viewer fatigue (a female president went from neat trick to just-another-drama pretty quickly).

But don't blame ABC for this. Taking a break after that rough start made sense. This may be difficult for die-hard fans to digest, but after the second episode, "Commander in Chief" suffered a steep creative decline. It never rebounded (unlike "West Wing," which made a valiant attempt to re-create the Sorkin days, though it ultimately fell short). ABC, in fact, did what any good network would do with a series in chaos and lackluster episodes approaching: It minimized the damage to the rest of the schedule.

And wisely so, given Thursday's awful episode. "Commander in Chief" went, in rapid succession masked by a very long off-air delay, from good to mediocre to nearly unwatchable. If the series gets 8 million viewers this week, it will be a shock.

Now, ABC might miraculously reverse course and decide there's something worth saving here. But chances are, it won't. The viewers have spoken and it's not as if ABC, or anyone else, lacks for good drama pilots.

Any series suffering a 50 percent decline in viewership is dead. All that's left now is the official confirmation and that should come to those who matter in the next couple of weeks, if it hasn't already. Everybody else -- meaning the show's fans -- will find out in May, when the networks announce their fall schedules to advertisers and the press at the upfronts in New York.

From instant hit to forgotten miss. Television -- just when you think you have command of it, you don't.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/04/19/DDG9EIAGN41.DTL&type=printable

DoubleDAZ

04-21-06, 12:01 AM

My problem with CIC, unlike The West Wing, is that none of the characters gave me any reason to care what happened to them. I was leery of Geena Davis in this role from the beginning, but I was totally willing to give her a shot. There were times when she was pretty good, but most times she came off simply as a woman playing a President and not much more. I think they totally wasted Donald Sutherland's immense talents allowing him to be nothing more than a Republican hack vs a true adversary. Every clash was too simplistic and predictable.

What totally ruined it for me though was Geena preparing breakfast late one morning. I can't see a First Lady having the time (or inclination) to prepare a meal, much less a President. That didn't ring true and was just the latest example of a warped sense of reality, even for TV. I think they might have done better making this a political comedy vs a drama. A little bit of MASH with a political bent would have done wonders for this cast. :)

fredfa

04-21-06, 12:54 AM

You should be in development for ABC, Dave. Good points.

fredfa

04-21-06, 01:22 AM

The Business of TV
Television Stations Are Urged to Break a Few Rules

By Stuart Elllott The New York Times

The expression "think outside the box" has been overused enough to become jargon. But for a few hours yesterday it was appropriate, as local television stations were urged to diversify beyond their boxes, i.e., TV sets, to remain relevant — and profitable — in the new digital age.

"Conventional wisdom, it's an enemy at a time like this," said Beth Comstock, president for digital media and market development at NBC Universal, part of General Electric. "In media today, I don't think there is a single rule that can't — and frankly, probably shouldn't — be broken.

"This isn't just about driving growth," she added. "It's about staying in business."

Her call to action came at the annual marketing conference sponsored by the Television Bureau of Advertising, an organization that promotes broadcast TV as a medium. For the fifth year in a row, the conference was held during the New York International Auto Show at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, reflecting the status of automakers atop the list of America's largest marketers.

For the first time, the conference was devoted to a single topic: the importance of the "multiplatform" — that is, offering content and advertising not only on local broadcast stations but also online, on cellphones and other wireless devices, through video on demand and on video iPods.

The sole topic was intended to underscore that "advertisers and their agencies are increasingly asking for — make that demanding — a multiplatform strategy from all their media partners," said Christopher Rohrs, president of the bureau, in a speech he gave to almost 1,200 attendees to begin the conference.

To address that, Mr. Rohrs said, the bureau has selected a dozen members to serve on a committee devoted to multiple-media platforms, which plans to hold its first meeting today. The committee members include executives from ABC, CBS, Gannett Broadcasting, Meredith Broadcasting, NBC, the New York Times Company Broadcast Media Group and Pappas Telecasting.

There are two principal reasons that TV stations are seeking to broaden their horizons. One is "consumers will increasingly choose what they want to see, when they want to see it, on whatever device they want to see it," said Alan Frank, president and chief executive at the Post-Newsweek Stations division of the Washington Post Company.

The other reason was offered by David Rehr, president and chief executive at the National Association of Broadcasters: "Every new stream of programming is potentially a new source of revenue. Most distribution channels will create more value for our content."

Those prospects were the subject of a panel discussion led by Gordon Borrell, president and chief executive at Borrell Associates, a consulting company specializing in the local online advertising market.

Mr. Borrell discussed a new report from his company showing that local television stations more than doubled their Internet ad revenue last year compared with 2004, to $283 million from $119 million. And, he predicted, the figure would climb to $410 million by the end of 2006.

But ad revenue last year for Web sites operated by local newspapers totaled $2 billion, according to the report, or more than nine times what the Web sites of the local TV stations took in.

Local television "has the power to significantly drive traffic to the Internet" by cross-promoting with the contents of station broadcasts, Mr. Borrell said, "yet it hasn't in many cases."

"You have a tremendous opportunity in front of you," he added. "All media are in flux, and flux is a great time to institute change."

As an example, Mr. Borrell cited the Web site operated by WRAL-TV, the CBS affiliate in Raleigh, N.C., that is owned by the Capitol Broadcasting Company. The ad revenue for the site (www.wral.com) exceeds the ad revenue for www.newsobserver.com, the Web site operated by the leading local newspaper, The News and Observer, published by the McClatchy Company.

When it comes to capitalizing on additional methods of delivering content and ads, Mr. Borrell said, "we are where television was in the late 1950's."

That outlook was echoed by the announcement yesterday of the final figures for Internet ad revenue last year, released by the Interactive Advertising Bureau and PricewaterhouseCoopers. The results set a record at $12.5 billion, up 30.2 percent from $9.6 billion in 2004.

"We must be like Google, in a constant beta state," said Christine M. Di Stadio, senior vice president for marketing and new media at the New York Times Broadcast Media Group. Her reference was to the myriad test products and services offered on the Google Web site.

Local stations ought to offer opportunities for social networking on their Web sites, Ms. Di Stadio suggested, to compete with popular services like MySpace; streaming video, to compete with Web sites like YouTube; and mobile marketing.

As an example, Ms. Di Stadio described a "mobile physician finder" she is developing, listing doctors and their telephone numbers. Cellphone users will be able to "click on the phone number and dial, using click-to-call technology," she said.

"Guys, we needed all these screens to come along to make us exciting and vibrant again," Ms. Di Stadio said, laughing.

Brian Wheelis, vice president and group media director on the giant AT&T account at GSD&M in Austin, Tex., part of the Omnicom Group, cautioned the attendees against worrying that they will be competing against themselves.

"If you think about the Web as cannibalizing, you've already given up and you're not ready for it," Mr. Wheelis said. He praised the Web site of KXAN, the NBC affiliate in Austin, owned by LIN TV, which offers blogs, podcasts, streaming video and other new media at www.kxan.com.

Another member of Mr. Borrell's panel, David Buonfiglio, advised local TV stations to take part in the nascent trend known as user-generated or consumer-created content, which is meant to build emotional connections between customers and brands.

Mr. Buonfiglio, vice president for local sales at Internet Broadcasting Systems, cited a contest sponsored by the Web site of WPTZ, an NBC affiliate owned by Hearst-Argyle Television that broadcasts to Burlington, Vt., and Plattsburgh, N.Y. The contest on the site (www.thechamplainchannel.com) "invited viewers to write the next commercial" for a local car dealer, Mr. Buonfiglio said, and drew twice as many entries as had been forecast.

Mr. Buonfiglio also offered some advice in a humorous vein. "You really should go out and tell agencies what you can do," he said. "Get a capabilities presentation. If you don't have capabilities, get some of them first."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/21/business/media/21adco.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-21-06, 03:49 AM

Sports On TV
NFL Network Pursues Gumbel, Collinsworth

By Larry Stewart Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 21, 2006

NFL Network, looking to make a big splash when it begins televising eight late-season games beginning Thanksgiving night, is talking to Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth about becoming the broadcast team.

It would be quite a coup if NFL Network pulls it off.

Gumbel and Collinsworth are under contact to other networks, but that shouldn't prevent them from working for NFL Network.

Another coup for NFL Network is that, besides ESPN, it will also be televising the NFL draft on April 29-30, beginning with a one-hour pre-draft show at 8 a.m. the first day. ESPN's coverage will begin at 9 a.m.

Rich Eisen, formerly of ESPN, will serve as the host of the NFL Network coverage, working alongside draft guru Mike Maylock.

ESPN will have a two-hour daily draft special all next week at 11 a.m., with Reggie Bush scheduled to appear Monday. A Matt Leinart profile, originally scheduled for last week, will be shown on "SportsCenter" editions on Sunday, and "all-access" pieces with Leinart and reporter Shelley Smith will be shown all week.

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-spw-tvcol21apr21,0,4681771,print.story?coll=cl-tv-features

fredfa

04-21-06, 09:16 AM

Technology Note
Channel surfers protest Philips' TV technology

By Grant Robertson Toronto Globe and Mail

Philips Electronics NV, one of the world's biggest manufacturers of television sets, is facing a backlash from irate consumers over technology it has invented that prevents viewers from channel surfing during commercial breaks.

The Netherlands-based company -- maker of Philips brand TV sets -- issued an apologetic statement after angry e-mails and phone calls flooded its North American office Wednesday afternoon and continued through yesterday.

"They have been very vocal," Philips spokesman Andre Manning said of the consumer response. "You can fill in the blanks of what they are saying. They are really upset."

The furor erupted after reports surfaced that Phillips has applied for a U.S. patent on technology that lets broadcasters lock channels during commercial interludes of certain programs. Such a device would prevent channel surfing at a time when the emergence of personal video recorders (PVRs) and other technology is giving consumers increasing power to ignore commercials at the push of a button.

But Philips is scrambling to quell the backlash, pointing out its patent is actually meant to help viewers, not hold them captive. The device, inserted into TV sets, also allows networks to offer live shows without commercials, depending on what the viewer prefers. Industry speculation has suggested the broadcasters could sell the commercial-free option for a small fee.

"Philips never had the intention to force viewers to watch ads against their will and does not use this technology in any current Philips products," the company said in a statement. "Nor do we have any plans to do so."

Philips has been experimenting with advertising in recent months. Last fall it sponsored an entire episode of 60 Minutes, buying all of the show's commercial space. In exchange for being the sole advertiser on the show, Philips gave half of the ad time back, allowing the show to run longer. Though the proposed Philips patent may never become a commercial reality, the idea has some industry watchers baffled.

"Who's going to buy this?" said Hugh Dow, president of Toronto media buyer M2 Universal, which negotiates commercial time with networks. "I suppose the networks or the broadcasters might be interested. But I can't imagine there would be too much consumer interest."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060421.IBPHILIPS21/TPStory/TPBusiness

fredfa

04-21-06, 10:24 AM

The TV Column
A Sitcom About Sticky Fingers, With Mick Jagger?

By Lisa de Moraes The Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, April 21, 2006; C07

Mick Jagger may be the subject of a new ABC comedy about a New York City janitor who recruits his pals to help him execute a scheme to rob a celebrity.

Jagger would play the celebrity. If the project is ordered to series, he would make periodic brief appearances.

During development season, this project, from "Ed" creators Rob Burnett and Jon Beckerman, was pitched to networks as "I Want to Rob Jeff Goldblum." Goldblum was never officially attached to the project and he is starring in his own NBC drama pilot, the trade papers report.

So after ABC greenlighted production of a pilot, the creators decided to trade up -- to Jagger.

Jagger's name is not expected to be in the show's name, the trades reported. And he would appear only rarely, but he is mentioned numerous times in the scenes that already have been filmed, the trades said, citing DVDs of the pilot that have been making the rounds in Hollywood -- without Jagger's scenes, which haven't yet been shot.

Jagger appeared on ABC as recently as February, when the Rolling Stones performed during halftime at the Super Bowl.

Coincidentally, ABC is working on a pilot for a sitcom called "Him and Us" about an aging rock icon and his entourage.

It's executive-produced by Elton John.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NBC's five-night experiment in prime-time speed cooking, "Celebrity Cooking Showdown," has shriveled like an overtoasted marshmallow.

Curdled like badly blended hollandaise.

Collapsed like an underdone souffle.

In the competition, celebs and posers including Patti LaBelle, Tom Arnold, Big Kenny, Cindy Margolis and Ashley Parker Angel cooked up a storm in front of a hysterical studio audience with help from celeb chefs such as Wolfgang Puck.

Last night, viewers were going to select a winner from among three finalists and the results were to have been announced tonight.

But early in the afternoon, the network made the decision to pull last night's episode as well as tonight's, and move them over to NBC.com.

" 'Celebrity Cooking Showdown.' The last two nights, exclusively online!" NBC's Web site said.

This after ruminating for a bit on Wednesday night's numbers. Those numbers, as NBC had noted earlier in the day, while better than Tuesday night's when "CCS" turned to liquid jello against the might of "American Idol," were still as stinky as last week's tuna tartare.

Specifically, "CCS" opened with more than 8 million viewers on Monday, following "Deal or No Deal"; plunged to around 3 million on Tuesday; and crawled back up to about 5 million Wednesday. Among the 18-to-49-year-olds NBC targets, however, Wednesday's show finished fifth in its time slot.

With the online production, viewers would vote for their fave online and the winner would be announced online.

But at some point NBC changed course again and announced that last night's online presentation of Episode 4 would be repeated Saturday night at 8 on NBC -- in what may be the first time a broadcast network has repurposed a webcast. But on Saturday, viewers can't vote, because voting closes at 3 a.m. today and the finale will have been taped already. At 9 p.m. tomorrow, NBC will broadcast the finale, in which the winner is announced.

This is the second time recently that NBC has scrambled to handle a tanking reality series. In the fall of 2004, NBC yanked the third edition of "Last Comic Standing" before airing the final episode. That episode, in which the winner was announced, wound up running on Comedy Central, but NBC revealed who the winner was before then.

In place of last night's "CCS," NBC aired sitcom reruns. Tonight, in place of the "CCS" finale, it has scheduled a repeat of the April 12 episode of Howie Mandel's guess-which-briefcase-holds-$1 million game "Deal or No Deal," featuring the Miss USA Pageant competitors as the Briefcase Hostesses. Right after that, NBC broadcasts the Miss USA Pageant.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/20/AR2006042002115_pf.html

fredfa

04-21-06, 10:45 AM

Sports Media and Business
NBC, OLN, N.H.L. Try to Melt the Ice

By Richard Sandomir The New York Times April 21, 2006

It is a constant issue in hockey: Where are the viewers — and will there ever be more in the future? They haven't rushed to NBC or OLN, now in their first seasons of National Hockey League deals. At times, more people have watched Arena Football League games on NBC than the N.H.L., which isn't a good sign, except if you root for the Philadelphia Soul.

Each network heads into the first N.H.L. playoffs since the 2004-5 season-killing lockout on less than a roll.

NBC's 1.0 rating (about 1.1 million households) is down a bit from ABC's two years ago. But OLN's 0.2 (118,175 homes) is off 60 percent from ESPN's in the 2003-4 season; OLN's viewership is down even more sharply because it is available to nearly 30 million fewer subscribers than ESPN. OLN's first-round broadcasts, which start tonight, are blacked out in the teams' home markets.

"People aren't in the habit of watching the N.H.L. on OLN," said Gavin Harvey, the president of OLN. "They're used to going to ESPN or to the regional sports networks."

At the Fox Sports Net confederation of regional networks, hockey ratings for 19 teams have fallen by an average 10 percent. While Sidney Crosby's sensational rookie season fueled a near doubling of Pittsburgh Penguins ratings, the Detroit Red Wings' ratings tumbled by nearly 33 percent.

Harvey is upbeat about the enhanced public profile that the N.H.L., a major sports league still in outpatient rehabilitation from the lockout, has added to its diet of hunting, fishing, cycling and bull riding.

"It's a piece of the puzzle we lacked," he said during an interview Tuesday at the OLN studio in Stamford, Conn. "Everything changed with the N.H.L." He added: "We believe in hockey more now than ever. What we do is get fans fully immersed in their sport."

That belief is visible in improved production for its games, a flashy studio set (the first one used was a design flop) as well as in the doubling of ratings and male demographics for hockey games, compared with what they replaced.

But those improvements came at a steep price: OLN is paying the league $65 million this year, the most it has spent for programming, and will pay $70 million next season. And if its number of subscribers passes 80 million (from 63.4 million), OLN must pay $15 million more.

Whether OLN, and its wealthy owner, Comcast, stand behind that kind of return on investment will be determined if they exercise an option to renew their N.H.L. contract for a third season at $72.5 million.

NBC's revenue-sharing arrangement insulates it from second thoughts about spending too much or getting uncertain value from its investment.

Sam Flood, who produces NBC's hockey and Nascar coverage, is a hockey enthusiast who believes his network can help increase the sport's ratings and "break through even a little bit." The last network to perpetuate growth in recent years was Fox, but that boomlet could not be sustained.

"I always think there are more viewers," said Flood, the son of a high school hockey coach and a former defenseman at Williams College. He likened the passion of hockey fans to Nascar's and the N.H.L.'s status as a less-than-national sport to Nascar's when it was a regional endeavor.

"People said Nascar was cars going in circles, but as viewers saw the TV experience, that changed," he said. "It can be that dynamic in hockey."

One of Flood's close-to-the-ice innovations has been placing a reporter, notably Pierre McGuire, between the teams' benches, to offer strategy, chart plays and comment on what he hears from players, coaches and referees.

"I was jacked to do that," said McGuire, an old friend of Flood's who coached for the producer's father in a summer league. "I didn't think we'd get that kind of access." McGuire recalled an NBC game when he Telestrated a badly executed play in full view of the player in question. "He watched it, the coach saw it, and told the player: 'Pay attention. He's got it right.' "

McGuire, a former Ottawa assistant coach, is becoming ubiquitous. In addition to reporting for NBC, he is a color analyst for TSN in Canada, studio commentator for OLN and a hockey columnist for Sports Illustrated.

"The emotion of our game has to be portrayed," he said. "It'll take time for people to catch up."

NOTES An NFL Network spokesman called premature a Business Week report yesterday saying it had picked Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth to call its eight Thursday and Saturday National Football League games. Both men would need waivers from HBO, which holds a cable exclusive on them. Collinsworth would need to work out an accommodation with NBC, where he will be the Sunday evening N.F.L. studio analyst; calling three Saturday night games might be more than NBC would let him do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/21/sports/hockey/21sandomir.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-21-06, 11:00 AM

TV Ratings
Milestone: Cable widens lead in 18-49s

By Kevin Downey MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 21, 2006, 01:20

With just weeks to go before the upfront market breaks, the broadcast networks are facing yet more bad news: Their long dominance among adults 18-49 is all but over.

For the first time, ad-supported cable can claim a larger share of the coveted 18-49 audience in primetime for the broadcast season through late March.

Further, broadcast's prospects for reclaiming that lead in the last weeks of the season appear slight, all but ensuring cable's first season win ever in the demographic.

Much of cable rising share can be attributed to its own growth, as it commands increasing amounts of viewers' attention. But it also reflects the broadcast networks' faltering on key nights. NBC's 25 percent dip and CBS’s 7 percent decline on Thursdays this year, for example, have opened things up for cable on a night that was long the most powerful of the week for broadcast.

Cable’s share of the 18-49 audience is up to 42 percent for the period Sept. 19 through March 26, from 41 percent during the same timeframe last year. The six broadcast networks’ share dipped to 40 percent from 42 percent, according to an analysis of Nielsen Media Research data released last week by media buying agency MediaVest.

As a point of comparison, the networks claimed 46 percent of the 18-49 audience four years ago, when cable’s share was only 37 percent.

To make matters worse, the broadcast networks aren’t likely to ever reclaim dominance in primetime, predicts John Spiropoulos, vice president and group research director at MediaVest.

“The number of cable networks out there that continue to grow is driving this,” he says. “This is not necessarily due to anything other than the fact that people are exercising their options in terms of expanding their viewing pool for the programs they are looking for.”

Cable’s share of the primetime audience has been steadily climbing for years. In fact, it has ranked No. 1 in households since the 2003-04 season.

In the past, cable’s growth largely reflected its growing penetration. As more subscribers signed on, ratings went up. But today, with cable and satellite penetration leveling off at about 85 percent, ratings are increasing simply because viewers in the 18-49 demographic increasingly prefer cable programs to network shows.

“Every year, more of the audience shifts from broadcast to cable, but recently cable has been picking up steam because of original programming, as opposed to the 1990s when it was due to coverage gains,” says Spiropoulos. “For cable to continue this kind of growth, it will become more dependent on the amount of money it invests in original programming.”

As a result, he says, the cable networks are touting a slew of original productions in this year’s upfront presentations.

Cable’s lead in the 18-49 demographic this season has been exacerbated by the broadcast networks’ troubles, notably on Saturday and Thursday nights.

On Saturdays, the broadcast networks have essentially stopped programming in favor of putting costly productions on ad-rich weeknights. The broadcast networks’ aggregated rating on Saturdays so far this season is only a 7.2, compared to cable’s 16.1 rating.

Cable doesn’t yet have the lead on Thursday night, but its rating is growing as the broadcast networks are losing viewers. Cable’s 18-49 rating this season is a 14.4, up 6 percent, while the broadcast networks have a 17.6 rating, down 7 percent.

This trend began a few years back when NBC’s ratings tumbled after “Friends” went off the air. Now, CBS is having problems on the night, says Spiropoulos.

“Cable’s growth is not only on Saturday night, but it’s also on Monday and Thursday. Thursday is key,” he says. “That night is important for cable if they want to combat the broadcast networks. And in recent weeks, we’ve seen some pretty significant weakness with CBS’s lineup on that night.”

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4218.asp

fredfa

04-21-06, 01:00 PM

Thursday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-21-06, 02:46 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Swan flop: 'Commander in Chief' sinks

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 21, 2006

It’s looking more and more like Geena Davis will be a one-term president.

ABC’s “Commander in Chief” posted just a 2.1 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 last night, a series low and off 42 percent from the 3.6 final rating the show had averaged this season.

The show was also down 13 percent from the 2.4 overnight rating it posted last week, and down slightly from the last original episode to air before that, a 2.2 on Tuesday, Jan. 23.

Further, “Commander” dipped to an alarmingly low 1.9 rating among 18-49s during its second half hour last night. The low ratings can’t be blamed on strong competition. NBC’s “ER” was a repeat last night, and it still outdrew “Commander” with a 2.5 rating.

And CBS’s “Without a Trace” averaged a lower-than-usual 5.0 without an original “CSI” lead-in.

“Commander” got yanked off the air in January after an attempted makeover focused more on crisis in the White House by new showrunner Steven Bochco resulted in plummeting ratings. Under creator Rod Lurie, who was dismissed by ABC last fall reportedly for delivering scripts late, the show was the most-watched new program on any network during the first two months of the season.

Dee Johnson became the program’s third show-runner when Bochco left earlier this spring. She returned the focus more to the problems faced by Davis’ McKenzie Allen, the country’s first female president.

“Commander” was squarely on the bubble when it left its old Tuesday 9 p.m. timeslot for Thursdays. Now a renewal seems highly unlikely, with the show sinking each week.

Meanwhile, CBS took the night among 18-49s with a 5.3 average rating and a 15 share. NBC finished second at 2.6/7, ABC third at 2.4/7, Fox fourth at 2.2/7, WB fifth at 1.8/5, Univision sixth at 1.7/5 and UPN seventh at 1.1/3.

CBS led each hour of the night, starting with a 5.4 rating at 8 p.m. for “Survivor.” NBC was second with a 2.0 for repeats of “Will & Grace” and “My Name is Earl,” with Fox and the WB tied for third at 1.9, Fox for an hour of “That ‘70s Show” repeats and WB for “Smallville.” ABC was fifth with a 1.8 for its first hour of “American Inventor,” UPN sixth with a 1.3 for “Everybody Hates Chris” (1.4) and “Love, Inc.” (1.2), and Univision seventh with a 1.2 for “Barrera de Amor.”

At 9 p.m. CBS led with another 5.4, this time for a repeat of “CSI.” ABC and NBC tied for second at 3.2, ABC for another hour of “Inventor” and NBC for repeats of “Earl” and “The Office,” with Fox fourth with a 2.5 for “The O.C.” and Univision fifth with a 2.3 for “Alborada.” WB dropped to sixth with a 1.7 for “Supernatural” and UPN was seventh with a 0.9 average for an hour of “Eve.”

CBS completed the sweep at 10 p.m. with a 5.0 for a new episode of “Without a Trace.” NBC was second with a 2.5 for a repeat of “ER,” ABC third with its 2.1 for “Commander” and Univision fourth with a 1.7 for “Aqui y Ahora.”

Among households, CBS also led, averaging an 11.1 rating and a 19 share. ABC was second at 4.9/8, NBC third at 4.0/7, Fox fourth at 3.2/5, WB fifth at 2.4/4, Univision sixth at 2.2/4 and UPN seventh at 1.8/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4247.asp

keenan

04-21-06, 04:46 PM

From Multichannel News,

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6327117.html?display=Breaking+News
Deal, Bass Readying Retrans Battle - 4/21/2006 4:27:00 PM - Multichannel News - CA6327117

Deal, Bass Readying Retrans Battle

By Ted Hearn 4/21/2006-4:27:00 PM

A pair of House lawmakers is looking to strengthen the bargaining positions of cable and satellite companies engaged in contentious carriage negotiations with local TV stations -- a process formally called retransmission consent that has been a feature of the video-programming landscape since 1992.

On Wednesday, Reps. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) and Charles Bass (R-N.H.) are planning to offer an amendment that is expected to have the support of small cable operators and EchoStar Communications Corp., but also the strong opposition of the corporate parents of ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox.

About 800 independent network affiliates are also expected to oppose the Deal-Bass amendment, claiming, like the networks, that the market is working as it should.

A draft of the Deal-Bass amendment was obtained by Multichannel News from an industry source. Deal and Bass aides did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Cable operators, particularly small firms, believe TV stations have been abusing retransmission consent -- either by seeking cash for signals that consumers can view free-of-charge or by tying access to carriage of numerous cable networks that their paying customers may not want to watch, in some cases because the price is too high and in others because the content is indecent.

In recent years, Deal has been championing small operators’ cause.

“We’re assaulting the Bastille and we’re starting to see a crack,” American Cable Association president Matt Polka said, adding that he was hopeful that the Deal-Bass amendment will be included by the GOP-controlled Energy and Commerce Committee in a telecommunications bill designed to expedite phone-company entry into cable markets.

“We think it’s very important that this bill deal with programming issues," EchoStar vice president of law and regulation Linda Kinney said, "because this is about entry into the video marketplace and programming is very important."

Congress enacted retransmission consent in 1992, allowing TV stations to demand payment for their signals for the first time in history. Led by The Walt Disney Co. in a process encouraged by cable operators, many TV-station owners launched new cable networks and accepted payment for those services in lieu of cash for their TV signals. Disney, for example, used retransmission consent to distribute ESPN2.

On Monday, the ACA is hosting a Capitol Hill luncheon on various retransmission-consent issues. Invitations were sent to all aides working for members of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Co-hosts include the Consumers Union, Cox Communications Inc., EchoStar, Advance/Newhouse Communications, Cequel III, Insight Communications Co. Inc., Hallmark Channel and Oxygen Media Inc.

Following is a summary of the key provisions in the Deal-Bass amendment, confirmed by Polka and another cable-industry source:

• After 90 days of private bargaining, any cable or satellite provider may seek arbitration to settle a carriage dispute. The TV station, which could not pull its signal while in arbitration, must be affiliated with at least one cable network.

• The Federal Communications Commission is to publish annually a report on programming costs, based on data furnished by distributors that the agency is to publish only in “aggregated form” in order to ensure confidentiality.

•A small cable operator -- defined by the FCC as one having 400,000 or fewer subscribers -- may join forces with other small operators when negotiating with TV stations or with any video-programming provider.

• The FCC is required to re-examine its definition of a small operator, presumably with instructions to raise the 400,000-subscriber cap.

fredfa

04-21-06, 08:17 PM

Congress and TV
Amendment Threatens Retransmission Consent

By Doug Halonen TVWeek.com April 21, 2006

Industry lobbyists in Washington late Friday were circulating the summary of a legislative amendment by Reps. Nathan Deal, R-Ga., and Charlie Bass, R-N.H., that could deal a major blow to retransmission consent-the law that clears the way for broadcasters to seek payment from cable TV and satellite television operators for carrying their signals.

The amendment, which is expected to be offered when the House Energy and Commerce Committee votes on video franchising reform legislation next week, would essentially provide for arbitration if the parties fail to agree on a deal within 90 days. A network official said it was unclear whether Rep. Deal had the votes for a measure that would also require broadcast and cable TV networks to file pricing information for their programming at the Federal Communications Commission.

In response, Dennis Wharton, a spokesman for the National Association of Broadcasters, said, "We will strenuously oppose the Deal amendment."

The blow-by-blow description of the amendment being circulated follows:

Section 1: Arbitration

• Allows a cable operator or multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD), after 90 days of failed retransmission consent negotiation, to opt for baseball-style arbitration, as defined in the FCC's News-Hughes arbitration conditions.

• Only those broadcast stations which are owned or controlled by a company which also owns and controls non-broadcast programming can be brought to arbitration.

• Under this agreement, both the cable operator or MVPD and the broadcaster submit their final offer for the primary broadcast signal, which they believe reflects the fair market value.

• The arbitrator then chooses one of the two agreements which most closely approximates the fair market value of the programming carriage rights.

• The arbitrator is directed to consider the inflationary impact of any final offer on the price of a basic cable tier.

Section 2: Transparency

• Provides for every cable operator and MVPD to provide to the FCC any change in rates, terms and conditions for the right to receive and retransmit video programming.

• Using this data the FCC is to annually publish statistical reports including:

• A price index of the range of rates charged to cable operators and MVPDs by programmers and broadcasters.

• Programming price averages.

• The percentage of programming increases.

• Programming rates charged by region and company size.

• The FCC is directed to protect the data and only publish it in aggregated form so as not to violate any private contract.

Section 3: Pool Bargaining

• Allows any cable operator or MVPD which meets the FCC's definition of a small cable company to combine with any other small cable operator or MVPD to pool together to negotiate carriage with a programmer or broadcaster.

Section 4: Definition of a Small Cable Company

• Requires the FCC to reexamine the definition of a small cable company. The FCC last reexamined such definition in 1992.

• Provides for the FCC, in its reexamination, to consider whether any company effectively operates as a small cable company in a single DMA.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=9819

fredfa

04-21-06, 09:29 PM

TV Notebook
EchoStar returning OLN in time for NHL playoffs

The Hollywood Reporter April 22, 2006

NEW YORK -- More than six months after EchoStar Communications dropped Comcast-owned cable channel OLN from the Dish Network, the two companies are close to reaching a carriage agreement just in time for the Stanley Cup playoffs.

OLN and Comcast declined comment Friday but an agreement was expected to be announced soon.

Further details weren't available and it wasn't clear what tier OLN would be on. OLN was yanked off Dish on Oct. 20 after OLN replaced NHL games with other programming on Dish and Cablevision.

The Comcast-owned channel was upset because OLN was available on Cablevision and Dish tiers that were available to less than 40% of subscribers.

Dish's tier was the America's Top 180 package. OLN has since settled with Cablevision.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/brief_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002384385

fredfa

04-22-06, 12:47 AM

The 2005-2006 TV Season
Ask Matt

(from the Ask (TV Critic) Matt (Roush) column at TVGuide.com
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: There has been a lot of talk about the supposed drop in quality of Desperate Housewives this season. I still find it highly enjoyable to watch, and I would argue that a breakout first season is very difficult to match, although some shows do pull it off. (Lost comes to mind.) My question, though, is about the presence of mystery or suspense on the show. The Mary Alice story line was part of what made the first season great, with its mix of drama and comedy. However, the part I have least enjoyed about the show this season is the mystery involving Alfre Woodard's character (and what a shame that such a superb actress has been so underused). Do you think Desperate Housewives needs to have a mystery as part of its show, or can it get back to the appeal of the first season based on the lives of the five main women alone? — Amy

Matt Roush: Excellent question. One also posed by Jenny, who put it this way: "I am a very inconsistent (at best) viewer of Desperate Housewives, but from what I have seen this season, the good scenes have been the ones that centered on the everyday (albeit sometimes unconventional) lives of the main characters. The mystery has just fallen flat. I have already read speculation and discussion about next season's mystery. My question is: Why does there have to be a mystery every season? The original mystery was compelling and served to involve us in the lives of the main characters. It seems to me that this show (uneven as it is) could be better if they didn't insert a contrived mystery just for the sake of having it. (I recognize that the mystery every season has worked well for Veronica Mars, but I would contend that VM has better writers and actors, and the premise of a private detective's daughter who solves mysteries fits better with season-long mysteries than the lives of women on a suburban street.)"

My take: There's no question that the worst part of this very uneven second season has been the story line involving Alfre Woodard and her troubled son. But that shouldn't rule out the possibility of the show's writers exploring new intrigue (if not an actual "mystery") for next season. At its best, Desperate Housewives should be a heightened send-up/satire of suburban soap opera, which by its nature should include melodramatic intrigues. (Think "poor Val" losing her twins on Knots Landing, for instance.) The problem this season has been that the comedy elements have been so hit-and-miss, and there has been no satisfying element of danger or melodrama to compensate for that, so the whole experience has been rather hollow. I don't mean to suggest that Desperate Housewives should go all Dynasty camp or Melrose Place ludicrous, but a balance of whimsy and darkness, though hard to achieve, could be just the ticket to bring this show back to critical respectability.

________________________________________

Question: What has happened to E-Ring? Is it coming back? There are many of us who love the show, and we've been searching TV Guide frantically each week looking for it. Thanks. — Steve

Matt Roush: I'm still fielding a ton of questions about this show, but there's still no news. NBC has put the show on indefinite hiatus, with no indication that the remaining episodes will be scheduled anytime soon, especially during the next critical sweeps month. (There's a chance E-Ring could return in the summer, but beyond that, not so much of a chance.) Helpful hint to regular readers: If you're curious what's up with a show you haven't seen or heard about in a while, plug the title into TVGuide.com's search area. Listings will come up, along with links to previously published news and commentary items.

________________________________________

Question: I love your column and the rational insight you provide. I have been blown away by Gregory Itzin's performance on 24 — we've seen him swing from an indecisive wuss to an I, Claudius-type schemer. His portrayal and mannerisms also remind me of an obsessed Jimmy Stewart, like in Vertigo. Do you think he has a shot at being nominated for an Emmy for best supporting actor? Though I'd love to see Terry O'Quinn win this year, I wouldn't mind seeing credit given where it is due. — Bobby

Matt Roush: You and me both. (And loved the I, Claudius reference. They don't make TV like that anymore, though I was jazzed that HBO just made it official that Season 2 of Rome is under way.) The deterrent to Gregory Itzin landing his well-deserved nomination is the strength of the drama field in general, as well as 24's inability up to now to land any acting nominations in the supporting categories, though many have deserved them. Given the media attention Itzin is now enjoying (again, deservedly), he has a shot. It doesn't hurt that he is known throughout Hollywood, being such a steadily employed and reliable character actor for years. This kind of career breakthrough is exactly what the Emmys should be rewarding, but it's not going to be easy to break through with so many ensemble dramas competing for slots.

________________________________________

Question: I think I know what the nominees for best-comedy Emmys are. Desperate Housewives, Everybody Hates Chris, The Office, My Name Is Earl, Arrested Development and Scrubs. That's six, so which one would you kick to the curb? And do you think my list is appropriate? I'm just amazed at how many good comedies there are on air right now! Nobody can look at these shows and claim that the sitcom is dead. — Lisa

Matt Roush: Missing from this list are potential HBO spoilers in Curb Your Enthusiasm and Entourage. I would bet that Housewives will make the cut, though undeservedly. I'd rather see Entourage than The Office, which I think has improved but not enough to make the top five. (I know that's a rather lonely opinion.) Earl absolutely deserves to make the cut, and Arrested for old time's sake. And Scrubs for sure, though I wouldn't be surprised if it were unseated should something new join the list. And Chris, I think, is going to fall under the radar. It's a cute, likable show, but I'm not sure it's up to par with the others. My prediction for this category (in order of preference): Earl, Scrubs, Arrested, Curb (or maybe Entourage), and Housewives, with the possibility that The Office will make the list, killing another's chances. (I would also be curious if one of CBS' Monday comedies, perhaps Two and a Half Men, would take over Everybody Loves Raymond's old slot. But I kind of doubt it.)

________________________________________

Question: There are few shows that go off the air before they've become stale. Though some shows end their runs when the time is right, it seems like most of them wait until their best years are long behind them. However, one of the few shows that managed to end on an absolutely perfect note was The Office. Of course, there were only two six-episode series of the show, so you could argue that they never really had a chance to go downhill, but it would have been easy to make Tim and Dawn's eventual union in the Christmas Special awkward, or even corny. Instead, the show managed to have a happy ending while still retaining its wonderfully dark, cringe-inducing humor. They even managed to give us a possible love interest for David, something I'm sure most of us would have thought impossible, and made their interaction believable, sweet and naturalistic. And, of course, David finally told Chris Finch what everyone (viewers included) had always wanted to tell him. — Matthew L.

Matt Roush: Of course, you're talking here of the British Office, not the NBC version. And while I'm not sure, this e-mail may have been a response to the earlier topic of how so few drama series go off the air at their creative peaks. (I am revisiting that topic this Friday with responses in my new Dispatches blog. Please check it out.) The genius of many British series is in their brevity. The original and peerless Office never got a chance to exhaust its possibilities. It's unimaginable that an American series would ever call it quits so soon. Just look at the separation anxiety I've been fielding in recent weeks from West Wing fans who are unwilling to let it go. Which they really need to do. Speaking of which:

________________________________________

Question: I watched the "Requiem" episode (centering around Leo's funeral) of The West Wing last weekend, because I was a fan of that show back during its first seasons and because you and other reviewers have said that it had finally gotten back to good form in its final days. It was like getting back in touch with an old friend. But why wasn't Sam (Rob Lowe) at the service? The previews show him returning next week, so Rob Lowe is obviously willing to return to the show. Why didn't they get him back for the funeral episode? That would have been perfect, giving us old-school fans a last glimpse of the original gang back together (albeit with Toby on the outside now). — Ashley

Matt Roush: I can't say why, but I figure that the show's producers were busy enough just figuring out how to do this salute to Leo (and John Spencer) right. Finding a way to shoehorn the return of Sam (and Rob Lowe) into the episode might have been too much of a distraction, though I agree it would have made sense. Most of the response I got to this episode was positive, though several complained that they wished they could have seen Bartlet's public oration to his political partner and mentor. No argument here.

On another West Wing matter, Nicky writes: "Do you think that if NBC would have kept The West Wing in its original Wednesday time slot their ratings would have improved this year and the show wouldn't have been canceled? I still think that even the worst episode of The West Wing is better than anything on TV right now."

Answer: Given the competition on Wednesdays and NBC's inability to produce a decent lead-in, West Wing might still have suffered if left on that night, but I'm betting these last strong episodes would have done better and gotten more attention from viewers and the media if they'd aired in the show's longtime original time period. The move to Sundays was a disaster. Even so, I would hope that NBC and Warner Bros. would have done the right thing and let this be the valedictory season. I'm unyielding in my belief that this is the right time to let this show end.

And finally, this from Darren W.: "I'm a huge fan of The West Wing and I'm really not one of those smut Nazis or anything, but one thing I've always enjoyed about the show over the years was its relative cleanliness compared to other shows. Now it's ending and all of a sudden every episode has sex as a recurring theme, with people jumping into bed with each other left and right. Do you think this is just a desperate bid to get viewers for the final few episodes, or have the writers just decided everyone has to get lucky before the series ends? I, for one, am disappointed they took a show that had decent family appeal and smutted it up right at the end."

My answer: Smut? In the "Requiem" episode, at least, the comic relief came in the inability of C.J. and Danny, and Josh and Donna, to hook up, because they're trying so hard not to flaunt these relationships. And really, I think you're being too hard on the show and on these characters. Viewers have been waiting years for these characters to wake up to their attraction and to act on it, so I feel this is just an effort to give these long-in-gestation couples some closure for our own behalf. None of this can be considered a ratings stunt because that's a hopeless cause this season anyway. I don't know anyone who isn't happy for these couples to have finally taken it to the next level.

________________________________________

Question: You always say it is like an "event" when shows like The Sopranos and 24 are on the air, and while I agree with you that both of those shows fit that bill, I also feel that South Park is very eventlike when it comes back with new episodes. And while I feel that no show better deserves the Peabody Award than this brilliant satire, I am not quite understanding their sudden attack on Family Guy. I suppose it is only natural, since these two shows are by far the best comedies out there and since South Park always goes after what is popular, but do you feel that these anti-Family Guy episodes might show a little jealousy, considering that Family Guy is the new hot show that doesn't pull punches and goes wherever it wants to in order to get a laugh? Just wondering what your thoughts are on this little event, because I know you are a fan of both of these shows, especially South Park. — Mike P.

Matt Roush: I thought the two-part "Cartoon Wars" episode was hilarious, a high point for what so far has been a killer season (the opener involving the departure of Chef, the "smug alert" satire of hybrid vehicles, etc). Not only was this a devastating critique and commentary on the hysteria over Muslim protests at cartoons using the image of Mohammed, but it was a pointed dig at Family Guy's cheap-shock method of using sacred cows for punch lines that, when you think of it, tend to lack actual punch. I shrieked when Cartman shrieked, "Don't you ever, ever compare me to Family Guy! When I make jokes, they are relevant to a story." Even the Muslim leader, in his jihad-like warnings to America not to show the episode involving the image of Mohammed: "Seriously, Family Guy isn't even that well written. The jokes are all interchangeable and usually irrelevant to the plot." And that's before we discovered that the Family Guy writing staff was actually made up of manatees in a fish tank, plucking random "idea balls" and putting them into a "joke combine." I don't know if it's sour grapes, though I tend to doubt it. Family Guy isn't likely to qualify for a Peabody anytime soon. The point South Park is making is that there is a huge difference between actual satire and tasteless gag-writing. (And I'll admit I laugh at some of Family Guy's gags, though guiltily. And I don't watch it as regularly as I do South Park.) But the bigger point was to skewer network and media hypocrisy when it comes to picking which targets are allowed to be made fun of. As Kyle said, in one of his "gay speeches" (Cartman's words): "Either it's all OK or none of it is."

At its recent best, South Park is fearlessly profound. I don't imagine you'll ever hear me say that about Family Guy. Which may, however, explain why a Family Guy fan was quoted in the South Park episode saying, "I know it's just joke after joke, but I like that. At least it doesn't get all preachy and up its own [body part] with messages, you know?"

I know.

________________________________________

Question: You have said that most new shows get a review based on the first three or four episodes. What about shows that are bad at first, but for some miraculous reason start getting better? Take Conviction as an example. The first few episodes were horrible, but if you keep watching, you start to look forward to the peek into each character's life. In my opinion, the show is really starting to come together. What if that show starts to become popular? At what point do you start watching it again and giving it reviews? What if it never becomes popular, but is, as they call it, "the best show you're not watching?" When do these shows get a second chance? — Dustin

Matt Roush: If Conviction gets renewed for a second season, which would surprise me, I will force myself to watch a few of the late-season episodes to see if in fact it has improved. But I hated the characters and more than half of the cast. So the idea of getting peeks into their lives amidst the routine cases they're trying (I do at least read the story lines, if not watch the episodes) is not an incentive for me to watch. Almost any series is capable of a good episode from time to time, but Conviction can't improve enough to make it worth my time. The only way it will get a second chance with me critically is if NBC forces the issue. This may not be a satisfying answer, but it's an honest one.

________________________________________

Question: The Dead Zone: canceled or on hiatus? I had read somewhere that they were supposed to have a split season, but I never saw any new episodes in 2006. — Joe

Matt Roush: USA Network will launch the fifth season of Dead Zone on June 11, with a full season of 11 episodes. There has been much speculation that the show won't be renewed beyond that, but USA tells me that they still have a "holding deal" (I never understand these terms) with Anthony Michael Hall continuing through August, which is also when the network's deal with the show's production company expires. So it's possible that during the summer, USA could decide to continue the show beyond this next season. But it still sounds more dead than alive to me.

________________________________________

Question: Love your column. While I am saddened by the apparent cancellation of Sons & Daughters, I am hardly surprised. The first time I saw it, I said pessimistically to myself, "This is an Arrested Development rip-off," but as the shows went on, I had the same thought, only in a more positive light. I normally love David Cross, but his character on AD always seemed a little forced to me, whereas Jerry Lambert (Don on S&D), playing seemingly the same role as Cross, was pure comedic gold. I think he was the most underrated character on the show, with every line superbly understated, and every selfish act completely hilarious as opposed to grating. The cancellation's timing is the only thing that really bothers me. Anyone who saw the fate of AD surely could've predicted the eventual outcome for S&D, but why would ABC hype it so much and bring it in for mid-season, just to show only a handful of episodes and then suddenly cancel it? Why even put it on the air? Did ABC think that America would become intelligent overnight and suddenly embrace a show like this? Is there any way they might "burn off" any remaining episodes, à la Joey or AD on a Friday or during summer? Please tell me we'll see at least one more episode somewhere down the road, and that I won't have to be content with watching American Idol, America's Next Top Model and According to Jim while I wait for the next short-lived smart comedy. Thanks. — Woody

Matt Roush: First off, good call on singling out Jerry Lambert. I loved most of the cast, but he was always spot-on and I hope he gets another chance to emerge soon in a great comedy. Because you're right: Sons & Daughters never really had a chance. But still, I'm amazed that ABC allowed it to air 12 of the 13 episodes that were produced. (There was an odd episode left over, because of the show's back-to-back scheduling. Don't know if ABC will ever show it, but we can always hope for a complete DVD somewhere down the line.) It's hard to know how to analyze ABC's treatment of the show. On one hand, I'm glad they put it on the air while knowing it would be a tough sell. But they didn't know what to do with it, clearly, and they had no strong comedy night on which to support it because ABC's comedies are quite obviously in the toilet these days. I guess ABC hoped that critical acclaim (which Sons mostly got, but not entirely) might have helped it eke out an Arrested Development-like existence on the ratings margins. But it just wasn't to be. So let's be glad for the 13 episodes that were made (the same number, come to think of it, as the original Office, if you count the Christmas Special) and hope the next time a network takes a risk like this, the outcome will be happier.

http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/askmatt/

fredfa

04-22-06, 10:29 AM

Digital Delivery
With analog exiting, stations launch wave of channels

By Allison Romano Broadcasting & Cable 4/24/2006

On weekday mornings in Salt Lake City, music station KZHT(FM)'s raucous drive-time show, The Morning Zoo, is simulcast on The Hive, a new digital broadcast TV station operated by Clear Channel Television's ABC affiliate, KTVX. On a recent Monday, the three hosts reenacted scenes from The Sopranos—billed as The Zoopranos—in high-pitched voices that the DJs called “The Sopranos on helium.”

“No disrespect, Tony, but you've been in a coma,” said one DJ, portraying a Sopranos mobster in a soprano voice.

Funny? Maybe not, but The Morning Zoo and the TV station it lives on are critically serious to the future of Clear Channel, the nation's 17th-largest station group. The Hive is one of the latest attempts by a station to make use of the massive digital spectrum that will be made available to the nation's broadcasters when they give their current analog spectrum back to the U.S. government (currently slated for 2009).

Clear Channel, like many broadcasters, hopes that a hyper-local news and entertainment channel will be an ideal digital broadcast complement to its current affiliate. The Hive, named for Utah's Beehive State moniker, launched quietly a year ago and, in late March, picked up digital cable carriage on Comcast Cable, the market's biggest operator. The Morning Zoo is followed by blocks of locally themed programming, including high school sports, reruns of KTVX news, and viewer-contributed content, such as concerts and short documentaries.

News, weather fill digital void

With their traditional business under siege, local broadcasters regard these new digital channels as a way to grow, independent of networks and syndicators. Competition for audiences has never been so fierce. Viewers are increasingly turning to the Internet, video-on-demand (VOD) and wireless technology for entertainment. At the same time, network programming—long one of a station's biggest selling points and a huge promotional platform—is now a commodity, as the broadcast networks funnel hit shows and sports to the Internet and iTunes.

“Like the networks, we have to try new things with our programming,” says Clear Channel Television President Don Perry. “We need to capitalize on our local relationships.”

To date, stations have been multicasting local weather and news channels on their digital broadcast space with a vengeance. The most widely distributed channel is NBC's Weather Plus, with local versions in 90 markets covering 75% of the country. To compete, rival ABC and CBS stations in dozens of markets have built their own local news and weather channels.

Broadcasting multiple digital channels is possible now that 80% of approximately 2,000 U.S. TV stations have upgraded to digital technology. The increased digital spectrum offers local broadcasters the best opportunity to launch new businesses. Along with much-hyped high-definition broadcasting, stations can broadcast multiple channels, transmit data or even support a new TV-delivery service, such as USDTV, a fledgling multichannel TV service available in a handful of cities and marketed as a low-cost alternative to cable and satellite.

Now stations are unveiling a variety of channels beyond news and weather forecasts. Several groups, including Clear Channel and NBC Universal, are developing local entertainment channels. The Tube, a music-video network, has deals with three major station groups, while Sinclair Broadcast Group and Equity Broadcasting are launching stations stocked with classic TV shows. Publisher Primedia and Multicast Networks Groups, a multicast content provider and distributor, last week unveiled Motor Trend TV, a 24/7 digital channel featuring auto-themed programs. It launches in early 2007. Even broadcast networks are digital fodder. When The CW and My Network TV debut this fall, the services will air on digital affiliates in many small and midsize markets.

“A lot of time and a lot of angst have been spent on the technical issues of digital broadcasting,” says Dick Haynes, senior VP of research for TV consulting firm Frank N. Magid Associates. “Now stations are asking, 'What are we going to do with it?'”

In a new study made available exclusively to B&C, Magid evaluates several emerging formats—including information/entertainment hybrids like The Hive—to help stations maximize their digital spectrum. Among the promising ideas, Magid says, are family programming, music videos and local entertainment.

While the majority of stations have upgraded to digital, however, less than half of them are broadcasting new services, instead sticking to a simulcast of their analog station and an HD feed. Haynes' advice to local stations: “Look at the local things in your market that are not being served very well.”

“News and weather are things our clients already deliver in spades,” says Magid VP of Corporate Development Bill Hague. “Beyond that, rather than just throwing something up, we're trying to figure out what works with consumers.”

In its research, Magid tested consumer interest in dozens of programming ideas for digital channels. Local weather and news—TV stations' best-known products—were the most popular. After that, several ideas popped: family-friendly programming, morning traffic, music videos, local entertainment and events, and employment information.

The appeal of some ideas varies by market and demographic. In Texas, for example, where high school football is all the rage, Magid might advise a station to create an entire channel devoted to games and coaching shows. In traffic-jammed cities, such as Atlanta or Los Angeles, a morning wheel of local traffic cameras might be extremely popular. In a city such as New York or San Francisco, both experiencing major influxes of new young residents, an employment channel could work well.

As station owners search for ideas, though, some executives say they are hamstrung by government regulations. Under current rules, cable and satellite operators are required to carry only one digital broadcast feed from stations, typically a simulcast of the main analog station. Without a new “must-carry” law forcing cable and satellite companies to carry these digital channels, stations must negotiate for carriage like any other cable network or use their retransmission consent as leverage.

In a recent NAB survey, 85% of stations said they would create new local programming for a secondary channel. However, according to the same poll, only half of stations are currently broadcasting multiple services. The main reason: 80% said they were “extremely unlikely” to launch new channels without a must-carry provision.

While digital stations are available over-the-air, only about 15 million TV sets have the digital tuners necessary to pick up the signal. If such a channel gets cable carriage on a digital tier, penetration could jump to about one-third of a market, depending on cable's overall local penetration. After 2009, the government will likely subsidize the cost of tuners for the remaining households that are without them and are not hooked up to cable or satellite.

Operators shouldn't be allowed to pick and choose which digital channels they want, says Gannett Broadcasting President Roger Ogden, in large part because the new digital channels take up the same—or less—space than the old analog channels. “It shouldn't be the operators' call,” Ogden says. “They shouldn't be the gatekeepers.”

National Association of Broadcasters President David Rehr also says cable operators shouldn't be able to strip out digital channels they don't want. Without multicasting, he says, “the American people will have less choice in local programming.”

Magid says new digital stations could be programmed like traditional affiliates, with a variety of shows, rather than being specifically themed like niche cable networks are. By “narrowcasting,” the firm says, stations can aggregate a larger audience and appeal to more advertisers. A channel could air local news and kids programming in the morning, while afternoons could be devoted to local entertainment or sports.

In New York, for example, WNBC's new channel, dubbed 4.4 for its digital location, offers an evolving mix of local news, information and entertainment. The programs run on a wheel and repeat often, so viewers can catch them at several points during the day. Its current lineup features locally produced shows, such as travelogue Jane's New York and movie-review program Reel Talk, repeats of local news, and extended coverage of area events, such as the Tribeca Film Festival. In September, WNBC plans to add content submitted by viewers, such as documentaries, and possibly sports. “We looked at what a station could do in the market if only we had more time,” says WNBC General Manager Frank Comerford. The channel's programs are archived on WNBC's Web site.

To reach even more viewers, Magid is encouraging clients to explore on-demand relationships with local cable operators. The very content that runs on a digital station or the main channel could be supplied to cable companies' VOD tier. A few dozen stations, including several that are CBS-owned-and-operated, offer local news and specials for free on local cable companies' VOD services.

Since most secondary digital channels are less than two years old, the revenue is small, but it is growing. From 2004 to '09, local broadcasters' revenue is expected to grow 3.4% annually, according to BIA Financial Networks. Revenue from new digital channels could raise that by a few percentage points a year, the research firm says. For a mid-market station with $20 million in revenue, that would translate to an additional $600,000 per year. Sinclair says its new classic-TV station, launching next month on WBFF Baltimore, will generate $500,000 in just six months on the air this year.

Owners say most services are profitable soon after launch, thanks to low start-up costs and programming that is created in-house or obtained by bartering for advertising time.

The Tube and Motor Trend TV, for example, are free in exchange for advertising time. Affiliates also receive time for local commercials, such as one minute per hour on The Tube, and have the option to insert locally produced programming. Equity Broadcasting's Retro Television Network is also free in return for overnight hours of infomercials and paid programming. A more costly model will be producing original content for digital or buying syndicated series and movies.

Marching in place

To generate advertiser appeal, digital stations are often positioned as in-depth advertising vehicles. A client could sponsor shows or even entire channels. In Memphis, Tenn., Beal Street, the main drag of music clubs, is the sole advertiser on Raycom-owned NBC affiliate WMC's version of The Tube. (Along with Raycom, Sinclair and Tribune Broadcasting stations plan to launch The Tube this summer.) Beyond traditional spots, WMC General Manager Howard Meagle says the station is developing co-branded programming, such as concert specials.

Similarly, Motor Trend TV will offer advertisers opportunities to sponsor shows or air longer commercials. “We can be flexible with the length and types of advertising,” says Jacqueline Blum, president of Primedia Enterprises. “We don't want it to be a 24-hour commercial, but we'll be creative in how we integrate advertisers.”

Says Sue Johenning, executive VP/director of local broadcast for Initiative Media, “Stations have an opportunity here to create specialized content and provide platforms for consumers and advertisers to interact.”

Stations are also marketing digital channels to new clients, particularly small local businesses. Because of the limited distribution, ad rates on digital stations are lower than a main station, allowing first-time advertisers an affordable entrée into TV.

For now, however, most digital stations are largely a concept sell. The majority are not currently receiving Nielsen ratings. If a digital station is simulcasting the main channel, Nielsen bundles its viewership into the analog station's ratings. For a stand-alone service to obtain full program ratings, it must register 9.5% of households in a market. Then, the station would have to buy a separate Nielsen subscription. While the businesses are young, proponents say they will get ahead by jumping in early.

“We have been marching in place, waiting for this to become a business,” says Paul McTear, CEO of Raycom Media. His company's stations were the first to sign with The Tube last summer. “The response in our markets has been very positive. This is a real business now.”

fredfa

04-22-06, 12:29 PM

Friday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-23-06, 10:07 AM

A Critical View:
A sad day for 'Gilmore Girls' fans

By Maureen Ryan from the Chicago Tribune TV blog

The news that "Gilmore Girls" executive producers Amy Sherman-Palladino and Daniel Palladino will be leaving the show at the end of the season is very bad news for "G.G." fans.

It's worse news for those who had hoped for great, or at least good, things from executives at the new CW network. They’ve already demonstrated questionable management instincts by letting this happen.

One has to wonder, Why bring “Gilmore Girls” over to the new network, which most TV observers expect to happen, without its crucial creative team at the helm? Whatever benefit the CW would have gotten from renewing this much-loved show will be destroyed by the fact that the distinctive vision of its creators will be gone.

The thing is, “Gilmore Girls” is not “CSI: Stars Hollow.” It’s not a procedural, nor is it like any other drama on TV. It doesn’t have predictable characters who speak predictable lines; it’s not a straightforward show with familiar moving parts and story lines.

More than just about any other show on TV, “Gilmore Girls” is the product of the unique creative voice of Sherman-Palladino. Sure, every fan can tell stories about the “Gilmore Girls” episode (or episodes) that made us want to tear our hair out, but when it’s on a roll, “Gilmore Girls” is great, and that greatness usually sprung from the pen of Sherman-Palladino and her husband.

So you can’t just pluck some guy from the writing staff, as the CW executives clearly plan to do, and end up with the same show. It’s just not going to work. I’d love to be wrong about this, but with “Gilmore Girls,” I know I’m not.

Believe it or not, I actually can see the CW’s side of this whole debacle. According to TVGuide.com’s Michael Ausiello, who’s been all over this story like white on rice, the Palladinos wanted a two-year deal in order to continue with “G.G.” CW executives balked, understandably, since stars Alexis Bledel and Lauren Graham only have one year left on their contracts.

But smart TV executives would have made the next season happen, somehow, with the Palladino team at the helm. But then, if these executives were such geniuses, they would have known that the show without Amy Sherman-Palladino at the helm would not be the same show, and not worth continuing.

Sigh. It makes me wonder if next season on the CW, we’re going to see a lot of shows in the vein of “South Beach” and “Pepper Dennis.” I was hoping we’d get the best of both the WB and UPN with the new CW network, but maybe we’ll just get more of the same -- a few good shows and a lot of dumb decisions.

The truth is, I’d rather see the show end than see it linger on without the Palladinos. And though the Palladinos, in a recent Tribune interview, professed to be resigned to the fact that the show might continue on without them, I don't quite believe that.

Despite its rough patches, which I’ve complained about like any other longtime fan, “Gilmore Girls” is, week to week, a swell show with an unmistakable, unique voice.

It’s not fair to keep it going on a respirator. We all deserve better than that.

http://tempo.typepad.com/entertainment_tv/

fredfa

04-23-06, 02:09 PM

Saturday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-23-06, 10:22 PM

TV Notebook:
'Commander' losing Nielsen votes

Skein's move fails to reverse downward trend
By Rick Kissell Variety.com Sun., Apr. 23, 2006

ABC's "Commander in Chief" is looking more and more like a one-term show after last week's seg fell to its lowest-yet approval ratings in the Nielsen polls.

The once-promising rookie drama, which peaked with its second episode last fall, has faded considerably since. Its move to Thursday following an 11-week hiatus has done nothing to reverse the downward momentum.

After a soft but passable Thursday start on April 13 (2.4 rating/7 share in adults 18-49, 8.20 million viewers overall), "Commander in Chief" declined 13% in the key demo last week (2.1/6 in 18-49, 7.69m) and finished deep in third place -- even though its "American Inventor" lead-in rose 14% week to week (3.3 vs. 2.9).

It's not that the competition was that intense, with NBC's "ER" a repeat (2.5/7, 6.20m) and CBS' "Without a Trace" on the low end of its firstrun range (5.0/14, 16.93m), according to Nielsen figures.

Last fall, opposite competition that included Fox's "House," the Geena Davis starrer "Commander" averaged a 4.5 rating/11 share in 18-49 and 16.5 million viewers overall with its first four episodes -- making it the season's No. 1 new drama in the early going.

ABC would very much like to bring back one of its first-year dramas next season, but none has really stuck with auds. "Commander" and Wednesday's "Invasion" rep its best shots.

This week becomes key for "Commander" as well as "Invasion," which returned last week after a month's layoff to nothing-special numbers (2.6/7, 7.11m), although it does seem to have a little buzz building toward its May 17 finale.

A lot depends on how ABC execs feel the shows are progressing creatively. "Commander" has been through a lot in its first term, changing showrunners twice since its bow last September.

The Alphabet will announce its fall sked next month.

One rookie series that is looking good after a move to Thursday is the WB's "Supernatural" (1.9/5 in 18-49, 3.99m) following "Smallville" (1.9/6, 4.41m). Spooky skein, which began the season on Tuesday, retained 100% of its 18-49 lead-in from "Smallville" and 86% in 18-34 (1.9/6 vs. 2.2/8) -- its best Thursday scores to date.

Combo would seem to be a good bet to return in tandem on the new CW sked next fall.

DoubleDAZ

04-23-06, 11:06 PM

Any chance we can mount an effort to get The West Wing renewed instead? :)

Seriously, I thought tonight's episode was excellent and I will miss the fever pitch of episodes like this one. It's funny how some shows can really crank it up after the cancellation notice is received. And to think the election outcome was supposed to be totally different if not for John Spencer's passing. RIP!

fredfa

04-24-06, 01:02 AM

cajieboy

04-24-06, 02:12 AM

vonzoog

04-24-06, 07:50 AM

Interesting thought, Dave.
I am a big WW fan, but my complaint this year is how much of the series has centered on Josh's character.
He is self-centered, angry, and a general pain in the butt. Given his recent behavior, it is hard to believe Santos hasn't fired him.
He is, to my mind, by far the least interesting major character.
And bringing back Rob Lowe just emphasizes that even more.
Nonetheless, I am going to really miss WW when it ends in a few weeks.

I have to agree totally. This whole season centered on the campaign and with Josh in control of it drove me crazy. I loved it whenever the show went to some other topic. I don't think I could survive another year with Josh. Now Lowe coming back, hmmmm..........

Marcus Carr

04-24-06, 09:01 AM

OLN to Become Versus

By Steve Donohue 4/24/2006 6:03:00 AM

From Outdoor Life Network to OLN to … Versus.

The new moniker -- to be introduced on-air to consumers at the end of the service’s coverage of the National Hockey League playoffs in early June -- is the culmination of a two-year evolution at the Comcast Corp.-owned channel, once known principally for hunting and fishing fare, then for Tour de France coverage and bull riding and, more recently, for NHL action.

OLN’s growth path also includes acquiring sailing’s America’s Cup, the Boston Marathon, the Iditarod sled-dog race, World Cup Skiing, Davis Cup tennis, the Arena Football League and even reality series Survivor.

Unifying it all is competition, according to network president Gavin Harvey.

Versus, suggested by a staffer, was one of hundreds of candidates: The network sought trademarks on several, including Sports Country and Victory. The chosen name repeatedly scored well with various focus groups, including blind tests with sports fans, Harvey said.

“Versus works on every level of what we do: man versus man, man versus beast, team versus team, country versus country, from stick-and-ball sports to bull riding to field sports,” he said, adding that it hits “the essence of our network.”

Versus also will be mentioned during Tour de France coverage. Hollywood-based agency Bird Design is currently working on the logo, and an off-air consumer branding campaign will commence at the end of summer.

The new name will officially take root on-air sometime before the start of the 2006-07 NHL season next fall.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6327173.html?display=Breaking+News

CPanther95

04-24-06, 09:05 AM

Better than "Sports Country" which brings to mind Watermelon Seed Spitting and the Cow Patty Toss. :)

Marcus Carr

04-24-06, 09:12 AM

NFL Net Pitches ‘Replay’

By Mike Reynolds 4/24/2006 6:02:00 AMNFL Network is expanding the definition of instant replay.

For the first time in the National Football League’s 86 years, league contests next season will be shown outside of their live windows.

Under the “NFL Replay” banner, NFL Network plans to reair four regular-season weekend games per week, at 5:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. (EST/PST) Tuesdays and Wednesdays.

NFL Replay -- along with a new eight-game, late-season primetime package of live games -- will be showcased at the network’s first upfront presentation to advertisers in New York Wednesday night.

The league’s network will choose from contests that originally ran on CBS, Fox, NBC and ESPN, using rights obtained in the most recent set of TV deals. NFL Network also has the rights to reair playoff games, including the Super Bowl.

Games will be distilled into 90-minute versions, with original announcers and crews and devoid of halftime segments and elements not crucial to the outcome. A “director’s cut” will incorporate exclusive shots and camera angles from NFL Films, sideline sounds and press-conference commentary to provide context.

The service controls the commercial inventory in the replay contests, and it will make two to three minutes per hour available to affiliates. The hope is that NFL Replay fare attracts casual fans and, especially, devotees and fantasy-league players who want an edge in assembling next week’s roster.

Vice president of programming Charles Coplin said factors that will determine what games are selected from the prior weekend include on-field quality, playoff implications, record-setting performances and the availability of viewership across the country.

For more on NFL Replay, please see Mike Reynolds’ story on page eight of Monday’s issue of Multichannel News.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6327170.html?display=Breaking+News

fredfa

04-24-06, 10:35 AM

The a la carte fight
Choosing from the cable menu: Viewers face new decisions

By Mike McDaniel Houston Chronicle

A la carte or status quo? That is the question facing the cable television industry.

Powerful people in Washington, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin, believe a la carte cable would not only trim a subscriber's monthly bill — currently averaging between $48 and $49 in Houston, according to Time Warner — but also allow consumers to decide which channels are allowed in their homes.

McCain, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, plans to introduce a bill this week that would free new cable competitors from local franchising regulations. In the House, U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) has said he will offer legislation allowing consumers to choose the channels they want.

But powerful people in business, including the CEOs of cable carriers and cable networks, believe pick-and-choose would cost consumers more. They also say a la carte cable would starve niche channels, which rely on the current bundling, or tiered, system of carriage to stay in business.

The a la carte issue, as old as cable TV, has become news again because of a February FCC report that refutes claims made in a 2004 FCC study that suggested a la carte would indeed lead to higher cable bills and the shutting down of niche channels.

What happened between 2004 and 2006 to merit the newer report? The chairman of the FCC changed. Out went Michael Powell in January 2005. In came Martin in March 2005. Both are appointees of President Bush, but Powell took more of a pro-business approach while Martin seems more interested in social change.

Martin decided to revisit the 2004 FCC report. He believed there could be a different outcome.

There was. The February report cited several mistakes in the 2004 study. One was a math error that, corrected, shows a subscriber could receive as many as 20 channels, including six broadcast channels, and see their monthly bills decrease by 3 percent to 13 percent.

"The chairman is not advocating a pure a la carte system, per se," said an FCC official speaking on his behalf. "What he's saying is that there are different ways to implement an a la carte pricing option for consumers that would benefit the consumer. He's saying you could do a la carte or tiers. Maybe some consumers would choose the tiers they currently get, simply because it's easier than changing."

Martin also sees a la carte as an answer to viewers who say they receive unwanted and profane programming under the bundling method the cable companies currently employ.

In a preemptive move in this regard, Time Warner and other cable companies recently introduced a "family friendly" tier of 16 G-rated channels.

The tier contained no sports or movie networks, nor such offerings as History Channel or Cartoon Network, because there's no guarantee those channels won't cross the G-rated line. (Indeed, Cartoon Network offers adult programming during late-night hours.)

Cable companies also claim that they have made it possible for digital subscribers to set parental controls and have spent millions in advertising that capability. Still, fewer than 4 percent of their customers make use of it.

Martin said he has "legitimate concerns" about the "family friendly" tiers that were offered. He has the backing of the Parents Television Council and other conservative groups.

"We believe the family tier is a product that's designed to fail," said Dan Isett, PTC's director of corporate and government affairs. "It does nothing to solve the problem, which is that families are not free to decide for themselves what constitutes a family tier."

A la carte opponents largely come from within the cable television industry.

"The overwhelming body of evidence clearly shows that consumers will pay more and get less with a la carte," says George Bodenheimer, co-chair of Disney Media Networks and president of ESPN Inc. and ABC Sports.

"What people are talking about having us do would be tantamount to asking the Houston Chronicle to break the newspaper up and sell it by the section," says Ron McMillan, president of Time Warner Houston. "As a consumer I may say I don't read anything but the sports and business pages, so I just want those two sections, and I don't want to pay full price."

A la carte opponents say a change in the economic model would be fatal to all but the biggest channels.

The History Channel, VH1, National Geographic and Hallmark would have to charge as much as HBO to continue.

And because network revenue would decline, so would the number of original programs.

The FCC's February report suggests that the market should dictate a show's survival.

"If a switch to a la carte eliminated such programming," the report states, "the result would not be a blow to program diversity but rather a restoration of programming to an efficient level, more consistent with consumer value."

Ironically, technology is advancing so quickly that the a la carte plan may be irrelevant before it's even enacted.

"I don't think it's necessary to push a la carte because in various ways it's going to happen as we see many more ways of distributing video," says Michael Rogers.

Rogers, former head of the Washington Post Company's new media division and currently a columnist on MSNBC.com, believes the proliferation of platforms — cell phones, iTunes and especially the Internet — has already made a la carte a nonissue.

But Time Warner's McMillan thinks the same issues will linger because of the cable industry's business structure.

"The next step is something called 'switch digital,' " he says of a plan that joins television and the Internet. "But even then I don't think we're going to be able to set aside the contracts we've got with all of our suppliers and say (to the consumer), 'You're going to be able to buy this a la carte.' You would have to renegotiate all those contracts.

"And if I own Speed Channel (an auto racing network), what do you think I'm going to ask for that programming on an a la carte basis versus a broadcast basis as part of a tier? They're going to ask for more money. The reason: They're going to be taking a bigger risk because that channel won't be grouped with other channels. (The smaller channels) believe, and I concur, this would hurt their ability to draw advertising."

Rogers thinks that even if the cable companies figure out a new way of doing business, all cable channels — not just smaller, niche networks — are in jeopardy.

"Nothing happens as quickly as futurists say it will," he says, "but it's pretty clear a major shakeout is coming in terms of how video gets into the home."

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/ent/tv/3813839

fredfa

04-24-06, 10:52 AM

A Critical View:
Give 'Mother' respect it deserves

By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle Monday, April 24, 2006

Despite having repeatedly mocked "American Idol" in the past, there's never been a suggestion that it's a pox on television. In fact, it's great for television. Because for the 30 million people or so who watch it, 16 million more will watch "NCIS." It speaks of television's strength in numbers.

Although it's easy to celebrate the top-shelf quality of a series like "The Sopranos," or give unflagging critical acclaim to television's ignored (and often doomed) gems like "Arrested Development," "Sons & Daughters" or a host of obscure series on niche cable channels, sometimes it's important to give credit to the mainstream.

For example, if you were to ask critics to list their favorite comedies, no doubt many of those would come from cable, with notable exceptions being "My Name Is Earl" and "The Office" on NBC. Both of those shows -- and the brilliant American version of "The Office" in particular -- are the ones that critics can hang a flag on, point to in times of creative fatigue among TV programmers and proclaim, "Look, it can be done. Try harder."

But here's some support for the good old, standard sitcom. CBS has managed in recent years to better itself in the comedy department by not seeking trendy "single-camera" comedies (like "Scrubs" or "Arrested Development") but very typical, shot-on-a-stage old school efforts like "Everybody Loves Raymond," "Two and a Half Men," and this season's hits, "How I Met Your Mother" and "The New Adventures of Old Christine."

Yes, the network has flopped with others, but those two have worked and, even better, they're funny. An argument can be made that "Christine" is still finding its comedic legs, but Julia Louis-Dreyfus has found a vehicle that actually drives forward and she's got a series that deserves (and will probably find) a wider audience.

But it's "How I Met Your Mother" (8:30 p.m. Mondays) that continues to amaze in terms of: a) It's proof that CBS comedies are hipper; b) It gets funnier and more assured each week; and c) It lacks the respect it deserves.

The truth is, no matter how a nationwide hit sitcom -- like "Friends" for instance -- might divide the cultural elite from the here-we-are-now-entertain-us masses, people still watch it. That's how it becomes a hit. Whether they fess up to it is a different story, such as when critics decide to rate their favorites and litter the top end with obscure gems. Which begs the question: What's so wrong with liking a traditional, well-executed, surprisingly funny sitcom on CBS?

"How I Met Your Mother" certainly deserves a better reputation. As it stands now, a good guess may be that people think, "Oh, yeah, I kind of like that." Or, "It's pretty good." But with "Friends," "Cheers" and "Frasier" off the landscape, and "Will & Grace" ending its run this May, something needs to step into the breach. Look for "Earl" and "The Office" to do that, though it would be nice to see those ratings increase. Another candidate is "Two and a Half Men," which gets the numbers and generally favorable critical acclaim, but lacks the truly funny, consistently great writing that carries a hit through the years.

And this is not to say that "How I Met Your Mother" is ready for a lofty "Friends"-like perch. But if you're willing to cling to the hipness that is "Curb Your Enthusiasm" or "Entourage" or even "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" and, at the same time, allow that something considerably more mainstream and less cool might be funny, then this series is an ideal candidate.

"How I Met Your Mother" started with an interesting concept. A father narrates to his two kids, in the year 2030, how he met their mother. The series then unfolds in flashbacks starting in 2005 (flashbacks -- even for 20 minutes or three months -- play a central theme in the series and are used successfully as a comedic device). The twist in the pilot was that their dad, Ted (Josh Radnor) didn't end up with Robin (Cobie Smulders) as the previous 29 minutes had suggested.

But "How I Met Your Mother" is less about who Ted ends up marrying (which should be either a nice endgame surprise when the series retires or, long before that, tiring), than it is about Ted and his friends at this moment in their lives. Those characters include Ted's best friend Marshall (Jason Segel), Marshall's fiancee Lily (Alyson Hannigan) and Ted's other friend, toxic bachelor Barney (Neil Patrick Harris). Now, much has been written about how Harris, a.k.a. Doogie Howser, has stolen this series outright with his zingers and caustic charm.

This just in: Yes, it's true. Harris is great in this role and he's one of the lucky few actors able to obliterate the memory of a previous part with a new and better character. Of course, now he's Barney, the heartless cynic. But that's better than Doogie. Harris has been a revelation all season and it's pretty clear by now that he's no fluke as a well-honed comic actor. And, in turn, this series is no fluke.

If you watched the pilot or an earlier episode, you should know that "How I Met Your Mother" has evolved and matured (as any good sitcom must) throughout the season. The effect is that these characters, this cast, has truly meshed. Radnor, especially, has become more likable, which is important because it's his personal odyssey we're watching. Radnor's search for a soul mate -- a Sisyphean feat if there ever was one -- is more endurable now because Radnor's subtlety with humor, charm, vulnerability and frustration is more nuanced.

Equally important, Hannigan and Segel are better together, a nice mix of smushy and sarcastic, as young lovers. And Smulders, too, has elevated her game. She's more than just eye candy or the fifth wheel -- as she threatened to become when it was revealed she wasn't going to be the one Ted married, and thus the mother in the title. Smulders helps the cast in the same way that Jennifer Aniston helped "Friends," and that will be a valuable contribution through the seasons.

This is a good group. Just when you think Barney and his Barneyisms are fueling the series entirely, either Radnor or Hannigan rises up, comedically, to add depth. The writers have done a fine job of shifting the emphasis around so that some weeks Segel will be the softer/less-caustic counterpart and then a week later have more edge. It's that attention to detail, creating depth among the characters, which proves this series is on the right track.

"How I Met Your Mother" has moved forward from a show with a neat premise and entertaining writing to become reliably funny, sarcastic and even endearing, from week to week. It's a major achievement in a restricted format (even the laugh track is thankfully low key in comparison with others) and deserves not only more attention, but considerably more respect.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/04/24/DDGVRID9C31.DTL&type=printable

fredfa

04-24-06, 11:03 AM

The 2005-2006 Season: The May Sweep
Season Crown Down to Wire for Nets Again

ABC Leads 18 to 49 Demo Derby on Eve of Sweeps
By Christopher Lisotta TVWeek.com April 24, 2006

Another season, another down-to-the-wire finish.

As the 2005-06 season draws to a close, the top three networks in the adults 18 to 49 demographic are duking it out for the title of No. 1 network in the advertiser-friendly demo.

Like last year, when CBS and Fox were gunning for a season win through the last days of the May sweeps, this season is also coming down to a late-May showdown. May sweeps starts Thursday, April 27, and ends Wednesday, May 24. Besides CBS and Fox, ABC is also very much in this season's adults 18 to 49 mix. That kind of three-way race is music to the ears of ad sales executives.

A competitive ratings race among several networks up until the last day of May sweeps is preferable to advertisers, according to Allison M. Johnson, associate media director of strategic resources for Zenith Media Services.

"The networks are putting forth a great effort to put out their best programming to attract viewers," Ms. Johnson said. "That means compelling programming out there for our clients. It's definitely good for our business."

Fox ultimately edged out CBS to become the top network in the demo for 2004-05. And despite being slightly behind ABC on the eve of May sweeps this season, Fox is poised to once again take the adults 18 to 49 crown thanks largely to its music reality ratings gold mine, "American Idol."

Besides its popularity, the ability to schedule "Idol" almost anywhere gives Fox an edge when it comes to producing a last-minute ratings boost, said Brad Adgate, senior VP of research for Horizon Media.

"They can put it on any night they want," Mr. Adgate said of Fox and "Idol." "There are so many different ways they can leverage that show."

That includes adding a last-minute clip show or extending one of the "Idol's" regularly scheduled Tuesday or Wednesday episodes by a half-hour, moves the network can easily make if it wants to help drive up ratings.

Buoyed by the success of its dramas "Grey's Anatomy," "Desperate Housewives" and "Lost," plus having the added advantage of airing the Super Bowl in February, ABC was the top network for the season in adults 18 to 49 through Sunday, April 16, with a 4.1 rating, according to Nielsen Media Research. Fox was second with a 4.0, followed by CBS (3.8).

The race shifts slightly but stays tight when comparing the networks' nonsports programming average for the season: CBS and Fox are tied for first place with a 3.8, with ABC averaging a 3.7.

While Fox can build toward the "Idol" finale, which ends with an audience-driven crowning of this year's American Idol, ABC and CBS don't have any game-changing events to help give them an extra boost to their ratings beyond the standard end-of-season wrap-ups and cliff-hangers. ABC is making the most of the end of "Alias," and CBS will pump up the final tribal ceremony for the latest installment of "Survivor," but none of the season-ending milestone events networks have planned will come close to attracting an "Idol"-like audience, Mr. Adgate said.

"There is no big finale this year," he said, noting that the final episodes of shows like "Friends" and "Frasier" two years ago and "Everybody Loves Raymond" last season overshadow anything scheduled for this May, which also include the last episodes of "Will & Grace," "Malcolm in the Middle" and "That '70s Show."

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=9822

fredfa

04-24-06, 12:15 PM

Sunday’s prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

04-24-06, 12:18 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
A dark 'Night' for CBS's Sunday movie

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 24, 2006, 21:46

Media people have been wondering of late whether CBS will keep its long-running Sunday movie, after several months of decline. Last night’s latest edition of the movie didn’t make much of a case for its return.

The highly publicized “In from the Night” starring Oscar winner Marcia Gay Harden, averaged a 2.3 overnight rating among viewers 18-49, down 15 percent from the already low 2.7 final rating the network’s Sunday movies have averaged so far this season.

That came despite airing against minimal competition. ABC’s Sunday night giants “Desperate Housewives” at 9 p.m. and “Grey’s Anatomy” at 10 p.m. were clip show recaps, designed to catch viewers up on this season’s action. They each posted a 6.1 among 18-49s, well below their season averages. “Night” placed fourth in its timeslot at 9 p.m. and third at 10 p.m.

MediaVest, in a report issued two weeks ago, speculated that CBS may nix the Sunday night movie in favor of scripted programming. But other media agencies, including Magna Global, think the movie is safe as CBS will have trouble attracting younger viewers to a new launch on Sundays this fall opposite NBC’s new “Sunday Night Football.”

“Night” did slightly better CBS’s “Sunday Movie” season average in households, though it dipped from its first to its second hour.

“Night,” in which Gay Harden played a writer who takes in her abused 16-year-old nephew, also starred Thomas Gibson and Taylor Handley.

Meanwhile, ABC finished first for the night among 18-49s with a 4.6 average rating and a 12 share. Fox was second at 2.8/8, NBC third at 2.6/7, CBS fourth at 2.4/6, Univision fifth at 1.7/4 and WB sixth at 0.9/3.

ABC led each hour last night, starting with a 2.6 rating at 7 p.m. for “America’s Funniest Home Videos.” CBS was second with a 2.1 for “60 Minutes,” Fox third with a 1.6 for “Malcolm in the Middle” (1.3) and “King of the Hill” (1.8) and NBC fourth with a 1.3 for “Dateline.” WB and Univision tied for fifth at 1.0, WB for an hour of “Reba” repeats and Univision for “Hora Pico” (1.0) and “Chiquitibum” (1.1).

At 8 p.m. ABC led again with a 3.5 for a repeat of “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” just edging Fox’s 3.4 for “The Simpsons” (3.5) and “The War at Home” (3.3). CBS was third that hour with a 2.8 for a “Cold Case” rerun, NBC fourth with a 2.3 for “The West Wing,” Univision fifth with a 1.7 for the first hour of “Bailando por un Sueño” and WB sixth with a 1.4 for “Charmed.”

At 9 p.m. ABC was on top with a 6.1 for its “Housewives” clip show, followed by a 3.9 for Fox for “Family Guy” (4.2) and “American Dad” (3.7) and a 3.1 for NBC for “Law & Order: Criminal Intent.” That left CBS fourth with a 2.3 for the first hour of “Night,” Univision fifth with a 2.0 for the second hour of “Bailando” and WB sixth with a 0.6 for a repeat of “Pepper Dennis.”

ABC finished its sweep at 10 p.m. with another 6.1 for a “Grey’s” clip show. NBC was second with a 3.6 for “Crossing Jordan,” CBS third with another 2.3 for “Night” and Univision fourth with a 1.9 for its last hour of “Bailando.”

ABC also took the night among households, averaging a 7.7 rating and a 13 share. CBS was second at 7.5/12, NBC third at 5.9/10, Fox fourth at 3.8/6, Univision fifth at 1.9/3 and WB sixth at 1.4/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4300.asp

fredfa

04-24-06, 12:23 PM

TV Sports
Andrea Kremer Joins NBC

Makes NBC Debut This Weekend Reporting from NFL Draft

Madden: "She's a real bulldog. Andrea gets on a story and really goes after it."

(NBC Press Release)

NEW YORK April 24, 2006 -- Andrea Kremer, who the Los Angeles Times has called "the best TV interviewer in the business of covering the NFL," joins NBC Sports as the sideline and feature reporter for "NBC Sunday Night Football," Dick Ebersol, Chairman, NBC Universal Sports & Olympics and Executive Producer, "NBC Sunday Night Football," announced today. Kremer also will contribute to the "Football Night in America" studio show, in addition to reporting for NBC at the Olympics and periodically reporting on football for the "Today" show.

Kremer will make her NBC debut this weekend, reporting from the 2006 NFL Draft at Radio City Music Hall in New York during NBC's NHL Stanley Cup playoff studio shows Saturday and Sunday.

"She's a real bulldog," said John Madden, analyst for "NBC Sunday Night Football." "I've known Andrea a long time and I've always been impressed. She gets on a story and really goes after it. Andrea has great sources and knows how to work a football field. She's going to add a lot to this team, a group I'm really looking forward to working with."

Kremer said: "With all my years of experience, I now have this exciting and new challenge ahead of me. To be part of this caliber of talent, both on air and behind the camera, is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, one I'm greatly looking forward to."

Kremer joins the most honored NFL broadcast team ever assembled. Al Michaels, who the AP called "TV's best play-by-play announcer," will call "NBC Sunday Night Football" games alongside Madden, the most honored analyst in television history with 14 Emmy Awards. Bob Costas, a 17-time Emmy Award winner, will host NBC's "Football Night in America" studio show alongside co-host Cris Collinsworth, the most honored studio analyst in history with five Emmy Awards, and analyst Jerome Bettis, one of the most popular players in recent NFL history.

"When it comes to covering the National Football League there isn't another reporter more informed or more determined than Andrea Kremer," said Fred Gaudelli, producer, "NBC Sunday Night Football." "Her unique abilities will allow us to expand the breadth of the sideline role."

TV Guide said Kremer is "among TV's best sports correspondents of either sex," and her work is "distinguished by her eagerness to calmly ask tough questions and her refusal to pursue the same old story." She recently received critical acclaim for her exclusive interviews with Tedy Bruschi, Daunte Culpepper and Barret Robbins.

The Emmy Award-winning Kremer was most recently ESPN's Los Angeles-based correspondent, providing in-depth reports for "SportsCenter," "Sunday NFL Countdown" and "Monday Night Countdown," as well as other studio shows, winning Emmy Awards for her work in 2001 and 2005. Kremer was a correspondent on ESPN's Emmy Award-winning "Outside the Lines" series. Kremer frequently conducted long-form interviews with leading sports personalities including Terrell Owens, Randy Moss, Tom Brady, Ray Lewis, Jerry Rice, Michael Jordan, Phil Jackson and John Daly.

Kremer has moderated roundtable discussions with NFL players and coaches and also served as substitute host for ESPN's one-on-one interview program "Up Close." She contributed to ESPN Radio, ESPN.com and ESPNEWS. Kremer joined ESPN in April 1989 as a Chicago-based correspondent, serving in that role until moving to Los Angeles in June 1994. She has contributed to ABC News and Sports, including the network's last three Super Bowls. In 2005, Kremer received a PRISM Award for her story on Dexter Manley that "best exemplifies accurate depiction of drug, alcohol and addiction in a television news magazine segment."

Kremer has worked every Super Bowl since 1985. A versatile reporter, she has covered the NBA Finals and All-Star Game, Major League Baseball's All-Star Game and League Championship Series, college football bowl games, Stanley Cup Playoffs and Finals, NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament, U.S. Olympic basketball trials and the PGA Championship. Kremer's forte is breaking news stories, and she has provided investigative pieces on social issues as they relate to sports, such as sexual assault and domestic violence.

Kremer was cited as "Best Female" sportscaster in P.O.V. Magazine in a September 1997 poll and in 2001 was named one of the "Most Influential" moms in the country by Working Mother Magazine.

Prior to joining ESPN, Kremer worked at NFL Films (1984-89), where she was a producer/director and on-air reporter for the nationally syndicated show "This is the NFL." Kremer received an Emmy nomination in 1986 for writing and editing the critically acclaimed NFL Films special "Autumn Ritual." She also produced several one-hour specials including the "All-Pro Dream Team," "All the Best," and "Gift of Grab." While at NFL Films, Kremer served as a contributing reporter to the Philadelphia Eagles Pre-Game Show on WIP-AM in Philadelphia.

Prior to joining NFL Films, Kremer was sports editor of the Main Line Chronicle in Ardmore, Pa., the state's largest weekly newspaper, from 1982-84. A Philadelphia native, Kremer graduated cum laude with a bachelor of arts degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1980. She is married with one son.

"FOOTBALL NIGHT IN AMERICA" & "NBC SUNDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL"

NBC's "Football Night in America" primetime studio show and the premier primetime game of the week, "NBC Sunday Night Football" will be broadcast in high definition.

NBC's NFL agreement continues through the 2011 season and calls for 16 regular season Sunday night games, each season's "NFL Kickoff" Thursday night primetime game, two postseason Wild Card games and three preseason games in primetime, in addition to Super Bowl XLIII in 2009 in Tampa and XLVI in 2012 and Pro Bowls in the same years.

Under the new NFL agreement, the NFL provides NBC flexible game scheduling over seven of the final eight weeks of the regular season for "NBC Sunday Night Football." Flexible scheduling, offered for the first time by the NFL, ensures marquee matchups when many teams' playoff chances are at stake.

fredfa

04-24-06, 02:15 PM

Book Review
Desperate Networks. By Bill Carter. Doubleday. 336 pages. $26.95.
(Release date May 2, 2006)

Tune in to inside look at desperate TV biz
Some of the best tragedy and comedy on television often seems to take place behind the cameras

By Richard Pachter Miami Herald Posted on Mon, Apr. 24, 2006

Our fascination with celebrities seems endless with movie grosses and opening weekend receipts routinely reported in fine family newspapers such as this one. And the machinations of studio and network executives vie with the comings and goings of Brangelina, Paris and Diddy for column inches and tabloid TV airtime.

Television is a tough way to make a living. Though the surface glamour may be irresistible, the goal is to draw a crowd. The non-subscription broadcast and cable channels make their bucks by selling advertising. If their shows fail to attract audiences, and their ratings (the measurement of the number, age, gender, income and other variables of the viewers) are consistently less than those of programs shown during the same time slot, they must charge advertisers less, since ad buys are predicated on ratings.

The selection of which TV shows to develop, cast, produce and broadcast is an art, a science and a craft. Sometimes it's sheer magic, though often it's dumb luck!

SEASONED WRITER

Bill Carter, who covers the industry for The New York Times, is one of the best-connected reporters in the business. His previous book, The Late Shift, about the departure of Johnny Carson and its subsequent impact on Jay Leno and David Letterman and their networks, was a surprisingly compelling page-turner. (The made-for-cable movie that followed, unfortunately, was an abomination.)

Now Carter hones in on the 2004-2005 season, pivotal for several reasons: NBC had been on top for many years, but its key shows, especially Friends, were either going off the air or losing their allure; and moves by rival networks were beginning to make dents.

It's a great story, but wait, there's more!

Colorful executives, producers and writers such as Leslie Moonves, Jeff Zucker, Marc Cherry, Mark Burnett, Brian Grazer and others are vividly captured by Carter, replete with their equally colorful antics, idiosyncrasies and earthy language. Some of the anecdotes reflect poorly on the participants; the details of Grazer, Moonves and friends' feckless jaunt to Havana and encounter with Fidel Castro provides some boffo laughs at their expense.

INSIGHTS INTO HITS

But the real meat here is the insights into the development process for hit shows such as Lost, CSI, American Idol and Desperate Housewives, each of which could have easily been ruined or scuttled before hitting the air, or in some cases, might have wound up on a different network from the one they landed on.

The Desperate Housewives story is especially revealing, with richly detailed anecdotes on the show's creator, Marc Cherry, whose career as a writer was just about over, after he'd apparently plateaued a decade or so earlier when he'd been a writer on the hit show The Golden Girls. Now, as desperate as anyone who'd tasted success in Hollywood could be, he wrote and rewrote a script inspired by his mother, of all people.

FANTASTIC MICROCOSM

The revelation of her hidden angst and despair, just below the surface, shocked her son and fired his imagination. But though his script, which circulated through the industry's network of creative executives and producers, was widely admired, it was treated as a hot potato and deemed uncommercial, at best. How Cherry's vision was championed by former ABC exec Lloyd Braun and others is one of the highlights of Carter's book.

The tale of Simon Cowell and the birth of American Idol also provides a fantastic microcosm of how the world works in Televisionland.

It's always interesting to observe the production and marketing processes of different industries. Even if you have never seen a single episode of Lost or CSI, Carter's vivid prose enhances your understanding of the television experience.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/14400937.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

kjpjr

04-24-06, 03:10 PM

I think there is another issue in the a la carte cable. I would like to be able to get channels that I cannot get now because for whatever reasons TW refuses to carry them. I am not laying blame but they are just not available. I would like ESPN2HD, ESPNU and the NFL Network, none of which TW offers or plans to offer in the near future according to any information we can get as consumers. I would gladly pay for those channels. I am paying $7 a month for ESPNHD now since it is bundled with some other HD channels that we hardly ever watch unless they might show a sporting event. I am not sure if we had a la carte TW would offer the above named channels but I think a lot of people think that is what would happen with channels that they might consider to be ones they don't get now that they would like to have.
a la carte would not solve this issue I don't think.

fredfa

04-24-06, 06:32 PM

The May Sweep
Formidable Finale Face-Off

By A.J. Frutkin MediaWeek.com APRIL 24, 2006 -

With several Key series performing like gangbusters this season, broadcasters are betting their sweeps ratings more on regular programming than on one-time events. Of course, specials still will play a significant role in this ratings period, but the biggest events in the May Nielsen sweeps are sure to be series themselves.

Not surprisingly, some of the most heated match-ups take place during the final week of sweeps. On Sunday, May 21, ABC airs its two-hour Desperate Housewives finale. At press time, Fox had yet to announce any of its Sunday night lineups, but execs there said they weren’t about to lay down for the Disney-owned net, promising a solid mix of animated and live-action comedies. “It would be a disservice to the Fox audience if we felt we couldn’t put on a show just because another network has something big,” said Preston Beckman, executive vp of strategic program planning for Fox.

From then on, it’s Fox that’s big. On Monday, May 22, 24’s two-hour finale airs from 8-10 p.m., while ABC has scheduled Alias’ two-hour series finale from 9-11 p.m. “Will some Alias viewers who are 24 fans watch 24? Yes,” acknowledged Jeff Bader, senior vp at ABC Entertainment. But with 24 ending at 10 p.m., Bader said he’s confident that Alias fans will come back for the show’s final hour.
On Tuesday, May 23, Fox airs the first part of its American Idol finale, followed by the season finale of House. CBS counter-programs with the 41st Academy of Country Music Awards.

“Country music has a dedicated audience,” said Kelly Kahl, executive vp of program planning and scheduling at CBS. “We know they’ll come to the show no matter what’s up against it.” On Wednesday, May 24, the final night of sweeps, Fox airs the two-hour American Idol finale, while ABC airs its two-hour Lost finale. CBS has yet to reveal its programming plans for the evening, but NBC will air the ’03 movie The Italian Job.

“We’re facing a lot of formidable finales on the other networks this season,” said Mitch Metcalf, executive vp of programming, planning and scheduling for NBC Entertainment. “We just have to put our heads down and do the best we can.” NBC also will air The Apprentice finale in June, which Metcalf said is due primarily to its late debut following the Olympics. He added that the network hopes to use The Apprentice to launch its nonscripted summer series, including Treasure Hunters, which, after premiering Sunday, June 18, moves into The Apprentice’s 9 p.m. time slot on Mondays.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002384276

fredfa

04-24-06, 06:40 PM

The Digital Revolution
AT&T Pleased With Early Results From Video Launch

By Daisy Whitney TVWeek.com April 24, 2006

After the first four months, the feedback from its controlled launch of video services in San Antonio indicates AT&T is on the right path with its strategy and user experience, said Jeff Weber, VP of product and strategy for AT&T, during a briefing at the National Association of Broadcasters convention in Las Vegas.

Consumer feedback the San Antonio launch has given the telco the reassurance it needs to continue its rollout to 20 additional markets later this year, Mr. Weber said. AT&T introduced video service to a limited footprint of employees and non-employees in its headquarters market in December.

"A year ago when we were talking about San Antonio, there were questions of whether it would work," he said. "The general question of 'Can you do this?' is behind us."

Instead of focus groups and lab trials, the telco now surveys users for their response to the service. "Customers like it; they say it's simple, easy to use," he said. In particular, he said users like the instant channel change and the ability to use picture-in-picture capabilities in the program guide. That means when viewers scroll through channel listings, they also see a small window in the guide with the video from each channel listed.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=9830

fredfa

04-24-06, 06:51 PM

TV Notebook
More 'Heaven' in CW future?

By Nellie Andreeva The Hollywood Reporter April 24, 2006

Beginning Monday night, WB Network's hit family drama "7th Heaven" is entering the final stretch of two episodes leading to the series finale May 8.

Or is it?

For the past month, there has been on-and-off speculation that the Spelling TV series might continue on the CW for another season, its 11th.

About a month ago, members of "Heaven's" core cast, including Stephen Collins, Catherine Hicks, Beverley Mitchell and George Stults, were approached about the possibility of returning for another year on the show, sources said.

Although no formal offers were made and there haven't been recent inquiries to the cast or their representatives, sources indicate CW executives are keeping the option to bring back "Heaven" on the table, and no final decision will be made until the future network's four drama pilots come in and are evaluated.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/columns/the_vine_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002384445

fredfa

04-25-06, 12:52 AM

The 2005-2006 TV Season
Ask Matt

(from the Ask (TV Critic) Matt (Roush) column at TVGuide.com
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: I admit to being one of those who, for the last season or two, watched ER solely out of habit. However, I am psyched at the prospect of John Stamos being a regular cast member next season, and I am eagerly awaiting next season. Do you expect that the casting of John will pull the show out of its "funk" and re-entice some of the viewers who think it's jumped the shark? — Al

Matt Roush: It can't hurt. I know I was sorely disappointed when ABC's inexplicable renewal (to little effect) of Jake in Progress kept him off the show during a season that could have really used him. I just hope he doesn't succumb to the same ailment that has befallen so many promising actors (Linda Cardellini, Parminder Nagra, Shane West, Kristen Johnston) who join the cast and are almost immediately sapped of appealing personality traits.

Coming to ER's defense is Phil S., who writes: "I'm tired of people bashing shows just because they've been on the air for a while. If anybody actually sat down and watched ER without this predetermined bias that age = boring, they might find that the show still has a lot of creativity to offer. The last new episode, directed by Laura Innes, is a fine example. How she showed us that the assumed carjacker was actually deaf was nothing short of fine, and the solidification of Luka and Abby is not only realistic but has taken time to build. Perhaps viewers want instant gratification (i.e., reality shows) and ER doesn't provide that. You have to be willing to watch and understand, and to be patient (pun not intended). Matt, stop bashing a show just because it is a senior citizen. It obviously still has a faithful fan base, as its ratings are not hugely behind that of a so-called juggernaut called Lost (which is more flash than substance). Thanks for your time in reading this."

My response: It's too easy to say ER is being criticized because it's last decade's news. If the show were still vitally entertaining, I think we'd all be able to acknowledge that. Instant gratification is one thing, slogging through weeks of ER characters moping around is another. (Just thinking of the Mekhi Phifer/Danny Glover story line is enough to put me in a coma.) ER is still capable of greatness: think the Ray Liotta or Cynthia Nixon episodes from last season. But usually the greatness comes from the guest patient, not the core cast. Give me Grey's Anatomy (though not recap episodes, please) any day or week. It's not that one is newer and fresher, though that's true enough. Grey's is simply better: more entertaining, more smartly written and engagingly acted. And comparing ER to Lost is pointless. One's a workplace franchise drama, one's a groundbreaking, character-driven adventure/fantasy that has no precedent. I'm amazed Lost does as well as it does, especially when networks throw phenoms like American Idol against it. ER is coasting on its reputation and has been for some time.

________________________________________

Question: So the bomb has dropped on what's been, personally, expected for months — that the Palladino wife-and-husband team, Amy and Daniel, are leaving Gilmore Girls. Part of me is sad. She created this brilliant show and the pair have probably written over half the episodes. But part of me is hopeful that someone on the Gilmore writing/producing team will hopefully be able to turn the show around, after this lackluster season, for its supposed last hurrah! What do you think of this whole event? — Alex C.

Matt Roush: My gut reaction is sadness, that it's a shame that Amy Sherman-Palladino and Daniel Palladino won't see this show, which is such a singular vision and which is so entwined with their voices, through to its natural conclusion. (Which I have to think will be a year from now. The fact that they appear to have been holding out for a two-year extension can only be characterized as hubris.) Gilmore Girls has been such an oddball show this season. I love it — the tone, the language, the characters — until they actually try to tell a story, at which point it all falls apart. The mother-daughter estrangement, Luke's surprise daughter, their postponed wedding, the tiresome Rory-Logan relationship — all are pretty poisonous to one's enjoyment of the show. But could any other show-runners have contrived a marvelous sequence like Lane's double wedding (one Buddhist) and multiple receptions? I doubt it. And in the same episode, when Michel made a crack to Lorelai that "I don't want my reflection [meaning Lorelai] to look like Judy Garland — the Mark Herron years," I laughed out loud, marveling that even Frasier and Niles Crane would have been impressed by that arcane, supergay reference. They will be missed, and it's possible Gilmore Girls without the Palladinos will be like West Wing without Aaron Sorkin (at least until recently). But all things considered, this change could also provide Gilmore Girls with a fresh perspective to allow the show to regroup as it approaches the end, which might not be such a bad thing.

Here's this from Ethan, who wrote in praising last week's episode (notably written and directed by Amy Sherman-Palladino): "We need to savor her effortless comedic wit and timing for these last episodes. With the recent news that she and her husband, Dan, are leaving, I'm worried. My question is: What do you think will happen to Gilmore Girls? Can we rule out its ending on a high note, or is there a chance that it can go out on top? This show has everything and I'm worried that once the Palladinos leave, its quality will go."

This is a very valid concern, but for many, its quality of late has been a matter of no small controversy. In some ways, I'm sorry this wasn't the final season, and that Amy and Dan aren't going out with a flourish with Luke and Lorelai getting married and everyone, including fans, living happily ever after. Instead, they're leaving the show and we're left anticipating a new season on a new network with regret and ambivalence.

________________________________________

Question: First of all, great to see Alias back in (in my opinion) top form. I still care about these characters, and I can't wait to see how it all wraps up. Likewise, another great episode of Invasion. The story keeps moving along, with quite a bit revealed each episode — certainly more than I expected when I got into it in the first place. I've been particularly impressed with Evan Peters as Jesse; I've loved the "kids return to school" aspect of the show, and Jesse has really become a centerpiece to all of the aspects of the show. His drunken shooting practice at the end of the episode was wonderfully acted — muted and subtle instead of over-the-top (as it could very easily have been). What I'm really excited about, though, is May 3, which — if my calculations are correct — will be what I've been waiting for for nearly a year: consecutive new episodes of Alias, Lost and Invasion. What a great night of television: three shows with different stories, characters, styles and even color palettes that still truly belong together. I can't think of a better three-hour block of television out there, short-lived as the trio may be. Kudos to ABC for, at the very least, sticking with Invasion throughout the season, and for putting Alias (at last) back in the fray. There should be a good two or three weeks there of an untouchable Wednesday-night lineup (barring scheduling changes). Here's to enjoying it while it lasts! — Nick
Matt Roush: No kidding. ABC may not rule the ratings this night (although Lost is still doing reasonably well), but this is the kind of night genre freaks live for. It was fun to see Alias again, especially with the Family Bristow (Lena Olin, Victor Garber and Jennifer Garner) back in action, presiding over her childbirth midcaper. All that babble about Prophet Five, "the Horizon," "the Cardinal," etc. doesn't interfere with my pleasure, thankfully. I agree that ABC should be commended for letting Alias play itself out (because, really, it is played out) and for letting Invasion go a full season (which is more than Threshold or Surface got on their respective networks). Whatever happens beyond this season, we'll at least get a month of Wednesdays worth remembering. What a blast.

________________________________________

Question: Last Sunday I tuned in to the pilot episode of What About Brian, because the promos made it look cute and because I've always found Barry Watson very likable. I enjoyed that first show but wasn't instantly in love, so I gave it another try Monday night. That pretty much ended the fascination. I am not a prude, and I let quite a lot of things slide on TV, but what turned me off about this show was everyone's obsession with sex. The first installment wasn't that bad, but by the second that's all anyone was concerned about. Who was doing it, who wasn't, how many times they could do it in 24 hours, who they weren't doing it with. It was utterly ridiculous. When it wound up that Brian, who is supposed to be the nice guy on this show, had sex with two different women (roommates with the same name, no less) in the space of a day, I was disgusted. That's the behavior of the guy for whom we're supposed to be rooting? No thank you.

I would enjoy shows classified as "romantic comedies" if there was actually anything romantic about them. I would like to think that television writers and execs give us twentysomethings credit for more than being a bunch of sex-obsessed maniacs, but apparently they don't. How about a show about young singles that's more realistic than this? I have a lot of single friends, and none of them are hopping into the beds of people they don't even know every other day. Do you think that's why these kinds of shows can't stay on the air? Because I know the portrayed behavior and the treatment of my demographic is demeaning, and every time I try a show like this, I never go back to it. Would it kill someone to come up with something more interesting and with more substance than just sex? Frankly, it's been so overdone it's boring anyway, so where's the fresh approach? — Cassie

Matt Roush: The good news is that Brian probably won't be around to annoy you much longer. My calendar shows its mid-season finale to be scheduled for May 8, and on the basis of that dreadfully smarmy second episode, it can't come soon enough for me. And the early ratings aren't strong enough to argue for a renewal, especially with the lukewarm reviews.

Like Cassie, I was mildly disarmed though not blown away by the pilot (ABC didn't send the second episode out for review, or, at least, not to me), but the second episode was a complete turnoff. If the characters were more appealing, I might have been able to withstand the show's leering tone. But they're not, so I've checked out. There's plenty else to watch without this time-waster. But it's a shame, because there should be room on the schedule for a show like this (albeit one that's better executed).

________________________________________

Question: No, no, no! Please tell me ABC can't possibly be thinking about messing with their Sunday-night lineup! I realize that they want to spread the wealth around to other nights, but come on, don't screw up our Sundays! It's the best way to end the weekend, being able to catch Desperate Housewives and Grey's Anatomy before the start of the work week. What will our Monday mornings be like if we can't sit around dissecting our favorite shows? — C.

Matt Roush: If it does come to pass that ABC splits up Housewives and Anatomy, the main motivation will be (presumably, according to the buzz) to strengthen the network on Monday night, which is now newly open after the departure of Monday Night Football.

I would think Housewives will stay where it is. Even with its decline in quality, it's still a huge draw on a competitive night. When Anatomy airs its two-hour finale on Monday, May 15, we'll see how strong a contender it is on that tough night, but I'm betting it will do extremely well. And while Mondays at the watercooler may be diminished, Tuesdays will be juicier if we have Anatomy to dissect the next day. (The real task, of course, is for ABC to find a companion to Housewives that's even remotely as appealing and compatible as Anatomy has been. Failing that, ABC should leave well enough alone.)

________________________________________

Question: I have been enjoying the show Hustle on AMC a great deal, and I was wondering what you thought of it. It seems like the show NBC had hoped Heist might be. It is so smart and fun. It also does the "wink and nod" to the audience better than most shows on TV. I was wondering where Hustle is in its run: Is this the first season? Is it successful for AMC? Will there be another season? Is it coming out on DVD? Thanks! — Kate

Matt Roush: I like Hustle quite a bit, too. (I reviewed it in the magazine's Jan. 30 issue.) Courtesy of AMC, here's the scoop on Hustle, which, being a British series, airs its seasons a little differently than we usually do. AMC has aired 18 episodes to date, which comprises two seasons of the series overseas. A third season is currently airing on BBC1, and these episodes will air on AMC beginning July 1. No word yet on a DVD release, though it seems like a natural. (And for the record, as I've said before, this column is not a good resource regarding DVD releases, or nonreleases, of TV shows. I simply don't have time to research and report that sort of thing.)

________________________________________

Question: In a reply in Ask Matt, you mentioned how a two-hour 24 movie would condense the events of a single day. Why assume that? I'd be horrified if they decided to go that route. Just like the Firefly movie was called Serenity, the 24 movie may be called something entirely different and utilize the characters and background of the show in a completely different kind of story, maybe even one that could span — gasp — days. — David G.

Matt Roush: And what, pray tell, would be the point of such a movie? Which is my argument for not doing it. But Daren wrote in with a similar notion: "I think they could do the opposite with 24 as a feature film. Play the story out over several months or years like most movies do, allowing for an ebb and flow of intensities. I think that would be a great contrast to the format everyone is accustomed to, i.e., red-lined adrenaline for 24 hours straight, where everything is very linear and tightly connected. What do you think?" I think it sounds dreadful. 24 is as much about the ticking clock and about time as it is about Jack's exploits. Do away with one, and I don't get the singular appeal of the other.

Finally, Zach weighs in: "I think a 24 movie would be a bad idea because I'm afraid it would just be another action flick. Week to week, the show delivers nonstop suspense, and through time the characters grow on us and become more than caricatures. The show is an action movie but with fleshed-out characters, more time to deliver the story and a real-time formula that makes it especially gripping. Take away the time to build the characters (at least for newer audiences and the fans who haven't watched it in a few seasons), the larger amount of time to deliver a grand story, and the show's trademark real-time action, and you have gunshots, explosions, maybe a contrived romantic subplot or two, and, of course, some ludicrous terrorist threat that in a 90-minute movie we wouldn't care less about. Can the show possibly pull off a film without falling into the clichéd realm of most action movies? Obviously I'd love to be proven wrong, but I just don't see a 24 movie working."

As I noted in this space a week ago, I know the perils of pooh-poohing something sight unseen, so if it were to happen, I'd hope for the best. But I share Zach's concerns.

________________________________________

Question: Hi, Matt! I am one of those very concerned fans who fears losing great shows such as Everwood, Gilmore Girls, etc., with the WB/UPN merge. I noticed the other day that ABC Family is sporting a show called Beautiful People. What are your thoughts on the possibility of some of these shows being sold to ABC Family? They already rerun some of the WB shows, so why not take on new episodes? I know that it looks like Gilmore Girls will remain, but I can't lose Everwood. I also like One Tree Hill and was a fan of Related. I know you hated it, but week after week it improved and became one of the shows I looked forward to watching. Anyway, I was watching the show Beautiful People and wondered if there might be a place for some of the WB shows on ABC Family. Your thoughts? Also, is there anything a desperate fan can do to save our favorite shows? Do networks really pay attention to petitions? — Christy

Matt Roush: I'm not sure petitions, online or otherwise, will help the CW powers-that-be in making the tough calls as to what will or won't transfer. But jettisoning them to ABC Family, or to cable, probably isn't an option, especially for the long-established shows that would be prohibitively expensive to produce on a basic-cable budget. (For Everwood, which is filmed on location in Utah, to slash its budget drastically in order to survive doesn't sound like a realistic game plan.) As for Related: It wouldn't have made it to a new season even if WB were going to still be in business. It was a flop, critically and in the ratings.

________________________________________

Question: I'm a U.K. fan of Commander in Chief. I've just seen the overnight ratings for the show's return to ABC. I know they weren't as high as they had been in its previous slot, but it was ABC's highest-rated show of the night. Were people seriously expecting the show to get 17 million viewers, like last October, in such a popular time slot? I think it would be a shame for ABC to cancel this show. — James

Matt Roush: Adopting your glass-half-full approach, I agree it's not quite a lost cause yet for Commander in Chief. The turmoil of this first season is unprecedented, as I noted in my review column, but if ABC were to give the show a second chance, with a summer to regroup and retool, this may yet be an asset.

Commander skews older than many ABC shows, as it did from the start, but it also attracts the sort of affluent demographic (shades of West Wing) that can be attractive to advertisers and could help ABC shore up one of its more difficult nights. Such as Thursdays right now, or possibly as a building block on the new Monday next fall (there could be worse lead-ins to a transplanted Grey's Anatomy, I suppose). I'm not writing the show's obit just yet. But I'd just as soon write off the last half of this first season as a loss and start fresh for the sophomore year.

________________________________________

Question: I read that Lost's ratings the week of the Rose-and-Bernard story were the lowest ever (coming in at around 15 million viewers.) I realize that's still high for most shows, but for a megahit like Lost it seems terrible. Do you think the writers will take the hint and make adjustments to the plot next year? I know most people complain about the reruns, but they don't bother me as much as the fact that after almost an entire season, the plot hasn't moved an inch. What's your opinion of the obviously lost plotlines of this year's biggest drama? Will next year change things up? — Brandy

Matt Roush: For me, the Rose-Bernard outing was a near-perfect episode of Lost. Psychologically, emotionally, suspensefully, it had it all. If Lost's numbers aren't what they should be, consider that American Idol is now one of its competitors. I'm not worried by — or, frankly, interested in — any of this.

What would horrify me is if the producers of this unique show began reacting to ratings ups and downs, or to chronically impatient "fans," by rushing this dense, strange story toward some contrived climax. As was made clear in the most recent episode, only two months have passed in the lives of these characters since they landed on the island. Bernard's frustration with the survivors settling in for the long haul instead of looking for a new escape route illuminated that very point. There are still so many stories to tell on this show, stories that can enhance the mysteries of the island without explaining them just yet. I'd like Lost to run for years and years. I don't know why they'd try to fix what ain't broke just yet.

http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/askmatt/

fredfa

04-25-06, 09:47 AM

The 2006-2007 TV Season
A mystery deepens for 'Veronica Mars'

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 25, 2006, 01:00

A few months ago, UPN’s “Veronica Mars” seemed like a lock to be renewed for next season. Though the show's ratings have never been strong, it has critical cachet that the new CW, being formed out of the merging UPN and WB netorks, seemed to want.

That now looks an awful lot less certain, judging by "Mars'" rating slide over recent weeks in a new timeslot. The whisper now is that "Mars" may not be back for a third year if the CW's slate of dramas in development is at all strong.

“Mars” began the season in the Wednesday 9 p.m. slot, averaging a 1.1 rating among its target 18-34 audience. It regularly lost much of lead-in "America's Next Top Model's" audience while facing ABC's "Lost" and Fox's "American Idol."

Then three weeks ago, UPN moved "Mars" to Tuesday at 9 p.m., where it had aired last year. That put it right after the WB's "Gilmore Girls."

The network is not saying so, but the move was very clearly intended to see how the teenage detective drama would performed alongside "Girls." The reason: that would be the ideal lineup for the two on the new CW, in the minds of media people. The two female-skewing shows airing back to back would certainly make sense, and at those times too.

But the move back to Tuesday has not been good for "Mars." In two episodes, it has averaged a 1.0 among 18-34s on Tuesdays. Among 18-49s, the teenage detective drama has finished last in its timeslot in both Tuesday outings.

For sure, “Mars” faces tough competition airing oppposite Fox’s “House” and CBS’s “The Unit,” though the latter skews fairly old. It also gets far less help from its lead-in. “Mars” now leads out of repeats of “America’s Next Top Model” on Tuesday nights rather than originals on Wednesdays.

Even the show's biggest fans think it may die. On a “Mars”-themed AOL message board, one fan writes, “Might not be a third season. Why is the rating lowered? Who hates ‘VM?’” Another answers, “It’s not that ppl don’t like ‘VM,’ it’s that it was scheduled at the same time as ‘Lost,’ and honestly, it has fallen off a bit.”

The CW will announce its new schedule May 18.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4304.asp

fredfa

04-25-06, 12:44 PM

Monday’s prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

04-25-06, 02:27 PM

Last week’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-25-06, 02:33 PM

Last week’s top 10 prime-time program ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS -- the first post in this thread.

fredfa

04-25-06, 02:52 PM

The Business of TV
Hollywood Unions Reach Contracts for Cellphone Shows

Pay-and-benefit deals for ABC's `Lost' are called `a crucial first step into a new frontier.'
By Richard Verrier Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 25, 2006

Hollywood labor leaders on Monday announced what could be a big deal for the very small screen: the first union contracts covering those who make TV shows for cellphones.

The deals provide union pay and benefits to actors, writers and directors for two-minute "mobisodes" of ABC's hit show "Lost" — who will be drawn from the cast and crew of the television show.

Although the agreements cover just one show, union officials and producers expect they will provide blueprints for similar new-media deals.

The contract is a "crucial first step into a new frontier of production and content distribution," said Alan Rosenberg, president of the Screen Actors Guild, one of three unions that negotiated contracts.

The deals also bode well for cable and broadcast networks that hope to avoid labor strife as they experiment with new ways to exploit their shows in a host of new media outlets, including the Internet and cellphones.

The agreements could help lessen labor tensions that have been running high in Hollywood. Writers, actors and directors, for example, recently blasted ABC's decision to pay residuals on TV episode sales to video iPod users under the same payment formula for DVD sales.

Union officials said Monday's agreements had been a high priority for members since Touchstone announced plans last year to develop the "Lost Video Diaries" for Verizon Wireless cellphone customers.

"This is a substantial gain for the talent community," said Patric M. Verrone, president of the Writers Guild of America, West.

The Directors Guild of America also negotiated an agreement to cover directors, unit production managers and assistant directors.

Union officials feared that Touchstone would not provide union benefits for those working on the episodes, which tell short stories inspired by the TV show about jetliner passengers stranded on an island.

But they won support from executive producers Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof, who — with the backing of co-creator J.J. Abrams — insisted that proposed episodes be covered under union contracts to maintain the show's quality.

The cast of "Lost" also declared its support after Screen Actors Guild officials visited the set in Hawaii late last year.

"This can really be a benchmark that [demonstrates] the guilds and the studios can work hand in hand in this new technological era," Cuse said. Mark Pedowitz, president of Touchstone Television, called the agreements groundbreaking.

"We look forward to finding additional ways in which we can work together," he said.

The agreements, which expire in 2007 and 2008, guarantee union health and pension benefits and minimum payments.

Writers, for example, will receive at least $800 per two-minute episode. Actors will receive an escalating minimum wage for an eight-hour day that begins at $425 as of April 1 and increases to $759 by June 30, 2008.

After the episodes are run for 13 weeks, writers and directors will receive a share of residual payments equal to 1.2% of the license fee received by ABC; actors will receive 3.6%.

While common in Europe, cellphone TV is in its infancy in U.S. But interest in working with wireless carriers is growing in Hollywood as networks and studios look for new ways to make money and promote their movies and TV shows.

Verizon Wireless' video service, for example, offers clips of headlines from "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" on Comedy Central, while comedian Jay Leno is featured on Sprint's video service.

Fox has produced more than 100 cellphone shows, including one based on the drama "24." The "Lost" mobisodes will be produced when the series begins shooting in August and should be available — at a price to be determined — to Verizon customers by the fall.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lost25apr25,1,3773652,print.story?coll=la-headlines-business

fredfa

04-25-06, 02:59 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
CBS's 'Christine' settles in her rocker

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 25, 2006, 01:25

When “The New Adventures of Old Christine” premiered earlier this spring, it seemed CBS, on its third try, had finally found the right show to follow “Two and a Half Men.” Christine averaged a promising 5.0 rating in its first two outings in the 9:30 p.m. timeslot, and everyone labeled it the hit that broke the “Seinfeld” curse.

But now, almost two months later, it seems that judgment may have been premature. Over the past month, “Christine” is performing little better than the two shows it succeeded in the timeslot, “Courting Alex” and “Out of Practice,” and it’s well down from its premiere.

Last night “Christine” averaged a 3.8 Nielsen overnight rating, down 7 percent from its season-long 4.1 overnight average and 27 percent off the season-best 5.2 it averaged in its second week. The Julia Louis-Dreyfus show finished third in its timeslot behind Fox’s “24” and NBC’s “Apprentice.”

Granted, lead-in “Two and a Half Men” was also off from its season average at a 4.7 last night. But CBS will have to decide soon whether keeping a show that offers little promise of improving in its most valuable comedy timeslot is worth it.

The show will certainly return next fall. The question is where. Can “Christine,” which fell to a 3.4 rating three weeks ago when “Men” was in repeats, get any better, or could it perhaps get worse? The show seems to have bottomed out, averaging a 3.7 over the past three episodes.

There’s always the chance that stronger timeslot competition next fall could do the show in. Or it could really take off again if ABC’s new Monday lineup is weak. Certainly one bonus is it won’t face “24,” which has dominated the 9 to 10 timeslot since its return, because Fox usually waits until January to premiere that show.

CBS’s dilemma is that the right new show could certainly better “Christine’s” ratings in the slot. Yet as it saw with “Courting” and “Practice,” the wrong show will simply muddle along at a 3.5 or thereabouts.

Meanwhile, Fox finished first among 18-49s on a competitive night, averaging a 4.3 rating and a 12 share. CBS was right behind at 4.2/11, with NBC third at 4.1/11, ABC fourth at 2.8/8, WB fifth at 1.6/4, Univision sixth at 1.5/4 and UPN seventh at 1.3/3.

NBC started the night in the lead with a 4.8 rating at 8 p.m. for “Deal or No Deal.” Fox was second with a 3.6 for “Prison Break,” ABC third with a 2.5 for a repeat of “Wife Swap” and CBS fourth with a 2.3 average for a repeat of “The King of Queens” (2.1) and a new “How I Met Your Mother” (2.5). WB finished fifth with a 1.9 for “7th Heaven,” Univision sixth with a 1.6 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and UPN seventh with a 1.2 average for “One on One” (1.1) and “All of Us” (1.3).

At 9 p.m. Fox took the lead with a 5.1 rating for “24.” CBS moved to second with a 4.3 for “Two and a Half Men” (4.7) and “Old Christine” (3.8), with NBC third with a 4.0 for “The Apprentice” and ABC fourth with a 3.3 for “Supernanny.” That left Univision fifth with a 1.5 for “Barrera de Amor,” WB sixth with a 1.4 for “Everwood” and UPN seventh with a 1.3 average for “Girlfriends” (1.4) and “Half and Half” (1.2).

CBS took first in the 10 p.m. hour with a 6.0 for “CSI: Miami,” the night’s top-rated show among 18-49s. NBC was second that hour with a 3.7 for “Medium,” ABC third with a 2.6 for “What About Brian” and Univision fourth with a 1.5 for “Cristina.”

Among households, CBS led the night with an 8.7 average rating and a 14 share. NBC was second at 7.6/12, Fox third at 6.7/10, ABC fourth at 4.6/7, WB fifth at 2.9/4, Univision sixth at 2.1/3 and UPN seventh at 1.9/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4309.asp

fredfa

04-25-06, 03:03 PM

The 2006-07 TV Season
CBS at the upfront: Fighting wrinkles

By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 25, 2006, 01:20

For years now, CBS has been the steadiest of the Big Four networks, easily leading among households and total viewers while also pushing Fox for No. 1 among adults 18-49 the past two seasons.

But while it will likely have the most stability when its fall schedule is announced at the May 17 upfront, CBS also has the most long-term question marks, with many of its hit shows now on the decline. There are three major issues of concern.

First, the network’s once-dominant Thursday lineup is losing its spark. Its average among adults 18-49 is off 7 percent this year versus last, and in recent weeks it’s been even steeper. CBS has to stem that dip, perhaps by moving some shows around or introducing a new one.

Second, it can’t seem to find a sitcom that can hold “Two and a Half Men’s” lead-in. While Julia Louis-Dreyfus’ “The New Adventures of Old Christine” got off to a promising start, it has fallen in recent weeks to similar levels as the two other shows booted from the 9:30 p.m. Monday timeslot, “Courting Alex” and “Out of Practice.”

CBS can’t afford to lose viewers on a night when Fox and, next season, ABC, have promising lineups.

And finally, it must patch the Tuesday 10 p.m. slot. Four shows have cycled through there this season without any success, including one-time hit “Amazing Race.”

“Of concern for [CBS] are the large declines this spring for reality programs 'Amazing Race' (down 23 percent) and 'Survivor' (down 28 percent),” says a recent midseason report issued by MediaVest. “These programs are key for CBS to attract younger viewers as both have a median age in the mid-40s and are the lowest on the network.”

The network does have the Super Bowl next year, which will help mask many of its minor problems until the 2007-2008 season.

Season-to-date numbers

CBS ranks a comfortable first among households with an 8.2 average, more than a point ahead of No. 2 ABC. It is down 5 percent among adults 18-49, from a 4.0 at this time last year to a third-place 3.8. It’s also down 7 percent among 18-34s, from a 2.9 to a 2.7, just ahead of NBC in third. And among 25-54s, it ranks first with a 4.8, 0.1 ahead of ABC and 0.1 behind where it was last year.

Safely returning

CSI
CSI: Miami
CSI: NY
Ghost Whisperer
Two and a Half Men
Survivor
Criminal Minds
The Unit
How I Met Your Mother

CBS gave 14 series early renewals and has two of the season’s four highest-rated new dramas, “Minds” and “Unit.” “Whisperer,” which many media people chose as a clunker at last year’s upfront, has been strong on Fridays.

But ratings for the “CSI” franchise are down. And “Survivor’s” big falloff could mean that the six-year-old series may be nearing its end. CBS could experiment with a new Thursday 8 p.m. show next spring.
"NCIS" and "Cold Case" are the network's only returning shows that did not decline among 18-49s this year.

On the bubble

King of Queens
Courting Alex
Out of Practice
Yes, Dear
Still Standing
CBS Sunday Movie
Close to Home

Salary squabbles may keep “King of Queens” from returning, with stars Kevin James and Leah Remini demanding big paychecks. That would open another space on Monday, and could mean that either “Practice” or “Alex,” which flopped during a two-week tryout on Wednesday, will be renewed. “Practice” has the edge as it improved during its run.

“Yes” and “Still” are goners. “Home” could be a midseason replacement.

In development

CBS promised more unconventional development this year, made possible by its general stability. But separate drama pilots staring Joe Pantoliano, James Woods and Blair Underwood sound like the same old thing: political intrigue and lawyers. Any of them could work well Tuesday at 10 after "Unit."

Its comedy pilots sound a bit more unconventional. “The Class” reunites a group of third-grade playground-mates, and Paul Reiser has a project about a Cadillac dealer. “You’ve Reached the Elliotts,” which melds comedian Chris Elliott’s real and fantasy life, sounds interesting but may be too offbeat to succeed.

On the reality front, summer's Ricki Lake-hosted “Game Show Marathon” could return at midseason if successful, given the recent rise of “Deal or No Deal.”

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4308.asp

fredfa

04-25-06, 03:07 PM

Sports On TV
EchoStar Returns OLN to DISH Net

By Anthony Crupi MediaWeek.com APRIL 25, 2006 -

EchoStar has reinstated OLN on its DISH Network lineup after a six-month standoff that saw the Comcast-owned network blacked out in 3.4 million satellite households.

In October 2005, two months after OLN acquired the cable rights to carry National Hockey League games, EchoStar dropped OLN, claiming that Comcast had voided the terms of their original agreement by demanding that DISH move OLN from its “America’s Top 180” tier to a more widely available package. OLN specified that NHL games would only be available to carriers who offered the network to at least 40 percent of their respective subscriber bases.

Although terms of the new multi-year agreement weren’t disclosed, OLN is back on DISH Net’s Top 180 tier. Eric Sahl, senior vp of programming, DISH Net, characterized the deal as “fair,” adding that the company “look[s] forward to a long relationship with OLN.”

OLN was switched back on in time for last night’s New York Rangers-New Jersey Devils playoff.

In a press conference last week, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman downplayed concerns about OLN’s carriage––the network reaches 64 million households––noting that the network’s “carriage is increasing in terms of the number of homes and they will continue to increase. They had very little time to get up and running, and I think that they have dramatically improved their coverage of the game in one brief season. ... Over time, we think we are going to see continued improvement on the cable coverage.”

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002385507

fredfa

04-25-06, 03:10 PM

Washington Watch
At NAB, FCC Chief Presses on Indecency

Todd Shields MediaWeek.com APRIL 25, 2006

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin on Tuesday said broadcasters' planned publicity campaign about program-blocking tools likely will fall short of what's needed to address concerns about racy programming.

Martin, responding to a question at the National Association of Broadcasters convention in Las Vegas, said roughly 40 percent of TV sets do not have the V-chip that can be set to block programs according to their content rating. Sports and news carry no rating, Martin noted.

Broadcasters, the cable and motion picture industries and set makers plan a $300 million campaign featuring public service ads that will tell parents how they can control programming on their TVs.

"I'm not sure that's the complete answer" to concerns over indecent programming, Martin told an NAB audience. Later with reporters he repeated his suggestions that broadcasters offer a family-viewing-hour shorn of coarse programming, and that cable operators offer channel-by-channel subscription choice or family-friendly programming tiers.

The FCC has proposed record fines for broadcast indecency in recent years, including a demand last month for $3.6 million in penalties against CBS. Broadcast networks have asked federal courts to overturn recent FCC rulings that found some words to be indecent, but did not propose fines.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002385677

keenan

04-25-06, 03:11 PM

The 2006-2007 TV Season
A mystery deepens for 'Veronica Mars'

This is not good news, VM is quality TV, but of course that's only my opinion and the general TV public doesn't seem to agree with me much lately.

archiguy

04-25-06, 03:24 PM

This is not good news, VM is quality TV, but of course that's only my opinion and the general TV public doesn't seem to agree with me much lately.

You ain't alone Jim. :( If I like a show, it's probably destined to fail. You'd think I'd be able to sell that skill to the networks somehow. ;)

Seems like the smarter the show, the less its chance of success. Occasionally one will sneak through and survive for awhile, but challenging the American television viewer is usually a recipe for an early cancellation.

CPanther95

04-25-06, 03:34 PM

Seems like the smarter the show, the less its chance of success. Occasionally one will sneak through and survive for awhile, but challenging the American television viewer is usually a recipe for an early cancellation.

or at least challenging the "Nielsen" television viewer..... ;)

keenan

04-25-06, 03:39 PM

archiguy

04-25-06, 04:18 PM

Imagine the network we could have with all the great shows that have been canceled, the "Canceled Show Network" provided by some uber-billionaire with money to burn. It would easily fill at least 20 hrs a week. I'd pay premium channel rates for a network like that.

Oh man, wouldn't that be great?! If I had a zillion bucks, I'd call up Joss Whedon and commission a whole season of Firefly. Then, I'd call up Carla Gugino (I have her on speed dial, ya' know) and book a season of Karen Sisco. Then I'd get ahold of Ken Olin and Joey Pants and get 'em back to work on another season of the amazing EZ Streets. I'd double the budget of BSG and put 'em on NBC where they belong. Finally, I'd give the Santos Administration a real electorial victory - another season! Ratings, schmatings! Who cares? I'd pay for 'em all.

Ah, fantasies..... :D

keenan

04-25-06, 05:44 PM

Carnivale, Over There, Eyes and I'm sure there's more...

tkmedia2

04-25-06, 07:06 PM

I dont like season 2 of VM as much as the first. But the last couple of episodes have been pretty great. but the middle episodes were eh?.. seems like they were mostly episode fillers. While the first season had the same type of episodes they also seemed to have enough elements to progress the main story arc a bit further.

tkmedia2

04-25-06, 07:11 PM

Also just started watching some DVR'd epsiodes of "Thief" on FX. I'm 2 episodes in and enjoying it so far. I know it's a short show, but how is the show doing? It dont seem like it's doing too good as I have not heard much press on the show.

keenan

04-25-06, 09:15 PM

I like Thief too, but unless the numbers are there I'm not sure it's going to make it to Season 2. Another one for my Canceled Show Network.. :D

fredfa

04-25-06, 09:16 PM

I'll join archi and cast another Karen Sisco vote.

fredfa

04-25-06, 11:12 PM

TV Notebook
"Lost" star chooses 5 days in jail

Rod Antone Honolulu Star-Bulletin April 25, 2006

A star of the hit TV show “Lost” chose today to spend five days in jail after pleading guilty to driving drunk last year.

Michelle Rodriguez pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of an intoxicant during what was supposed to be the start of her trial at Kaneohe District Court this morning.

Deputy Prosecutor Sean Sanada urged District Judge James Dannenberg to sentence her to the maximum fine of $1,500 and 14 days in jail because she was already on probation for a DUI conviction in Los Angeles when she was arrested on Kalanianaole Highway in Kailua on Dec. 1.

Her blood alcohol level after the Kailua arrest was 0.145, while the state limit is 0.8

Rodriquez’ attorney Steven Barta said in her defense that she has been on steroid treatment ever since she got to Hawaii because she broke out in hives.

Rodriquez said she suffers from allergies to dust and cockroach feces. She said the steroid treatment made her manic.

Dannenberg gave her the choice of 240 hours of community service or five days in jail. Rodriguez chose jail and was to report back to the Kaneohe courthouse this afternoon to be taken into custody. She is set to serve her time at Oahu Community Correctional Center.

She is being credited with one day already served for the day she was arrested.

http://starbulletin.com/breaking/breaking.php?id=4404

fredfa

04-25-06, 11:18 PM

Washington Watch
FCC's Martin Willing to Consider Multicast Carriage Rules
By Doug Halonen TVWeek.com April 25, 2006

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin on Tuesday said he would be willing to consider establishing a rule requiring cable TV operators to carry all programming streams multicast on digital broadcast TV channels-if the initiative wins the support of a majority of the agency's commissioners.

"I think it's in the public's interest to be able to broadcast in multicast and have all these free over-the-air signals carried by the cable industry," Mr. Martin told reporters after speaking at the National Association of Broadcasters convention in Las Vegas.

In February 2005, during the final days of the chairmanship of Michael Powell, the FCC voted 4-1, with Mr. Martin the sole dissenter, to reject multicast cable carriage.

Two of the commissioners who voted against the rule at the time-Democrats Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein-are still at the agency.

But since the 2005 vote, one new commissioner-Republican Deborah Taylor Tate-has joined the FCC, and another-Robert McDowell-has been nominated to a third GOP agency seat, offering the possibility of a 3-2 majority for Mr. Martin on the issue.

During his remarks at a convention breakfast session, Mr. Martin said the 2005 vote against multicast carriage rules, which are vehemently opposed by the cable TV industry, represented a "missed opportunity."

"I think the public could have benefited more from more free programming," Mr. Martin said in a statement after the 2005 vote.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=9843

fredfa

04-25-06, 11:49 PM

TV Notebook
Mick Jagger Joins a New ABC Sitcom

By Bill Carter The New York Times April 26, 2006

Trying to conjure some way to make a new television series stand out, show creators sometimes come up with pie-in-the-sky notions, like getting Jerry Seinfeld to come back and star in a sitcom, or inducing Vince Vaughn to quit movies.

But Mick Jagger?

By far the most unlikely star of a prospective fall situation comedy is that still-active lead singer of the Rolling Stones, who has signed on to an ABC pilot for its fall schedule. Just to increase the degree of unlikelihood, Mr. Jagger shot his scenes for the New York-based pilot in a hotel room in Auckland, New Zealand, last week.

That was the culmination of a saga at least as whimsical as the premise of the show, which, for now, anyway, is titled "Let's Rob Mick Jagger."

The writing team that came up with the idea, Rob Burnett, long David Letterman's executive producer, and his partner, Jon Beckerman, had previously created the NBC comedy-drama "Ed." As Mr. Burnett outlined the tale in a telephone interview, he and Mr. Beckerman "wondered if there was a way do a serialized comedy — something like a comedy version of 'Lost' or '24.' "

Hatched in numerous meetings, the concept centered on a janitor for a prominent New York building, to be played by the character actor Donal Logue. Down on his luck, the janitor sees a celebrity on television wallowing in his wealth during a tour of his new Manhattan penthouse. Enlisting a crew of similar ordinary but frustrated accomplices, the janitor conceives a plot to rob the big shot's apartment, a story line that would unfold over a 24-episode television season.

Mr. Burnett said that the series would track the plotting of the robbers, who would eventually ingratiate themselves with the apartment's glamorous owner. That would entail actually seeing the real-life celebrity interact on occasion with the fictional thieves.

The question was: Who could the celebrity be? "We didn't want it to be too on the nose, like Tom Cruise," Mr. Burnett said. "Not that he would have done it anyway."

The creators decided that they had to have the name before they could pitch the series effectively to network programmers. Finally they came up with it: "Jeff Goldblum seemed silly, just right," Mr. Burnett said. Not that the writers bothered to inform Mr. Goldblum that he had been selected by their imaginations. "He was just the place holder," Mr. Burnett said. Until a network committed to this goofy idea, the creators were not going to write a script to be sent to Mr. Goldblum to test his interest.

They just wanted to pitch his name. If a deal was made, they would write in Mr. Goldblum. If he declined to sign on, Mr. Burnett said, "we'd just rewrite it with another celebrity."

Not at all sure what reaction they would get, Mr. Burnett and Mr. Beckerman journeyed to Los Angeles from New York, accompanied by Mr. Logue, and met with the four major networks.

"We realized that we would know where we stood about one second into the meeting," Mr. Burnett said. "As soon as we said 'Let's Rob Jeff Goldblum,' we'd know. And we did. They all laughed."

Every network made an offer, but Fox and ABC went the extra mile, committing not just to a script, but to also guaranteeing that a pilot would be shot. Mr. Burnett said that he was impressed with Peter Liguori at Fox and Stephen McPherson at ABC, the top program executives at those networks. Eventually they chose ABC.

A script was written and a supporting cast secured, all except the guy with his name in the title. Mr. Goldblum was intrigued, Mr. Burnett said, but he had already committed to a pilot at NBC. With time running short — all the auditioning actors were still talking about knocking over Jeff Goldblum's place — the producers pondered a list of famous names, seeking one that might catch the nation's fancy and their own.

Finally Mr. McPherson threw out a name no one had considered: Mick Jagger. It was far-fetched, but the writing team loved the idea. They were more excited when Mr. Jagger's representatives sent word they enjoyed the script and would run it by the singer.

"We were thrilled, but we still didn't think it was real," Mr. Burnett said. The pilot was shot, with the celebrity's scenes left out, but with the other characters using Mr. Jagger's name as their target.

Finally Mr. Burnett got word that Mr. Jagger, then on tour with the Stones in Japan, had read the script himself and liked it very much. He would be calling Mr. Burnett directly on March 24. "I was a little scared to leave the house," Mr. Burnett said.

Mr. Jagger called at 2 a.m. "He was enthusiastic," Mr. Burnett said. "He asked all the right questions. How was the series going to build? Could the idea sustain? He seemed like a guy who cared a great deal about the quality of work he gets involved with."

The answers satisfied Mr. Jagger. He agreed to join the pilot. The only trouble was he would be halfway around the world for weeks. Mr. McPherson at ABC pressed to get the pilot completed with enough time for ABC to give it full consideration for its fall schedule.

Mr. Burnett and Mr. Beckerman flew to New Zealand on April 17. They first had to find a location that might pass as a Manhattan apartment, then hire a film crew. Finally they had to direct Mr. Jagger in his American sitcom debut.

A luxury hotel in Auckland stood in for the penthouse. The crew was professional. As for Mr. Jagger, he threw himself enthusiastically into the project, Mr. Burnett said. "He did a lot of ad-libbing. Some of the funniest stuff in the pilot came from him. He's just a smart, funny guy."

He is also now a star of an ABC pilot for the fall 2006 television season. Mr. Burnett, not wanting to jinx what has been a charmed project so far, said, "We just hope to be one of the ones they pick up."

If ABC does order the series, Mr. Jagger is expected to appear regularly, though not in every episode. "We'll work around his schedule," Mr. Burnett said. Not much has been worked out as to how successful the band of thieves might be in their heist, and like the serialized shows that inspired this one, a big question remains about how the series will continue after its first season.

Most likely Mr. Jagger's participation will end, one reason the title will almost surely not end up "Let's Rob Mick Jagger." Mr. Burnett said the first season of the prospective series might culminate in a twist that sets up a second season. "They could come up with a different scheme," Mr. Burnett said, referencing the many get-rich schemes of Ralph Kramden in "The Honeymooners."

Or "they could just rob someone else completely different," he said. "How about: 'Let's Rob Tiger Woods' ? "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/26/arts/television/26jagg.html?pagewanted=print

Marcus Carr

04-26-06, 12:59 AM

dr_mal

04-26-06, 01:22 AM

Imagine the network we could have with all the great shows that have been canceled, the "Canceled Show Network" provided by some uber-billionaire with money to burn. It would easily fill at least 20 hrs a week. I'd pay premium channel rates for a network like that.
I'd take another season of "The Agency" - at the very least, to resolve the cliff-hanger we were left with :(

tkmedia2

04-26-06, 01:32 AM

Since Thief is a limited run series with a six episode run, I wonder why they even bother calling it a season of show. I dont know where to look for numbers on the show. But I bet it's not competing with much from the same slot last season on FX.

I cant believe how crappy FX looks PQ wise I checked in 3 different markets. The promo bumpers PQ of FX shows on fox looks so much better.

fredfa

04-26-06, 10:28 AM

Weekly Cable Ratings
Lure of manly men hauling in a catch

By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 26, 2006, 01:05

Fishing shows are usually dull affairs, and low-rated at that, appealing all but entirely to people whose passion is angling in all its forms. You've got to love it to watch them, and then some, as they are long on jig and lure chatter and short on high adventure.

Or so it was until the Discovery Channel came up with "Deadliest Catch," the second-year reality show airing Tuesdays at 9 p.m. It's all about daring and stamina and risk-taking.

The show chronicles Alaska’s crab fisherman enduring freezing temperatures and waves up to 40 feet high as they struggle to land crabs in giant 700-pound pots. If that sounds nearly impossible, and also sort of insane, consider this: While crab fishermen have an injury rate of nearly 100 percent, they can also support their families for an entire year through just a few months of work.

By combining rock music and lively narration with an active show forum, where the show’s subjects often drop by to answer viewer questions, Discovery has produced cable’s highest-rated non-sports show among adults 25-54.

Ratings for the program are up in every demo this season. "Catch" is averaging a 1.6 in 25-54s, up 23 percent over season one’s 1.3. It has averaged a 1.9 household rating, up 19 percent over season one, which aired last summer.

And after four episodes, it ranks behind only USA Network’s "WWE Entertainment" among 25-54s on the basic cable charts.

This season has brought some changes to crab fishing rules, and thus to the show itself.

Last year each fleet scrambled to catch as many crabs as possible in just a few days. This year, in a move to preserve the fishermen’s safety, new rules were implemented that allow the ships to stay out longer in order to reach their quota. Unfortunately for the crabbers, this year has also brought colder temperatures and stiffer winds.

Discovery has marketed the new season aggressively, which it credits with providing much of the ratings boost. New outlets included ads in movie theaters and in men’s magazines, as well as a guerilla campaign in several U.S. fishing ports that involved giving coffee and other "Catch" branded items to fishermen.

And Discovery posted bloopers and behind-the-scenes footage from "Catch" on its newly launched broadband site to also capture fans’ interest. Thus far this month, the "Catch" fan site has received 1.2 million views.

Part of the show’s appeal is its folksiness. Message board posters often share their own fishing stories, or relate details about their latest Alaskan crab meal.

The people on the show also drop by regularly. Narrator Mike Rowe, a fan favorite, came on the message boards last year to discredit a rumor that he would not be working on season two (he is).

Fans often banter about the rock music that accompanies the show. New posters’ most frequent question is who performs the show’s catchy theme song. For the record, it’s Bon Jovi.

And of course the attractiveness of the fishermen is the main draw for some. Writes one poster: "Forget about who narrates and to what music. I just want to see some hot tail skillfully navigating the dangerous, stormy seas with masculine bravado."

Meanwhile, in other cable ratings for the week ended April 23:

Top networks in primetime (18-49s):
USA
TNT
TBS
Spike
ESPN
TBS

Top networks in primetime (total viewers):
USA
TNT
Cartoon Network
Fox News Channel
TBS

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4330.asp

CPanther95

04-26-06, 10:30 AM

Deadliest Catch is fantastic television - and not because of the "lure of manly men". :)

fredfa

04-26-06, 10:32 AM

Weekly Neilsen Notes
'Celebrity' has no heat

By Gary Levin USA TODAY

•Flameout NBC's Celebrity Cooking Showdown, a weeklong "event" meant to replicate Deal or No Deal, was starved for ratings, averaging 4.3 million viewers across five episodes. The last two were pulled from Thursday and Friday lineups and dumped on Saturday.

•Not so perfect. The final-season premiere of ABC comedy Less Than Perfect, back from a one-year absence, averaged 4.5 million viewers Tuesday, a series low.

•Racing to the finish. Fox won Saturday's derby with the NASCAR Nextel Cup race from Phoenix (7.5 million viewers).

•Spy story. Also returning to ABC was Alias, which scored 7.5 million viewers for Wednesday's two-hour episode on its new night. While it ranked third and paled next to Lost in that show's regular time slot, Alias delivered its largest audience since its season premiere in September.

•Bigger Love. HBO's The Sopranos stopped five consecutive weeks of ratings declines, winning 8.5 million viewers Sunday opposite a Desperate Housewives clip show. Big Love (4.2 million) had its largest audience since the series' premiere.

•Love lost. VH1 saved CBS' short-lived Love Monkey but it didn't draw viewers: Just 236,000 tuned in Tuesday, compared with the 5.4 million CBS garnered in the last of three episodes it aired.

•Crime test. In a tryout for a possible new fall slot, a repeat of CBS' Criminal Minds Tuesday (11.2 million) bested a Law & Order: SVU repeat and a new episode of ABC's Boston Legal.

•Brian beaned In its regular time slot, ABC's What About Brian fell to 7.1 million viewers Monday, down from 12.5 million for its premiere the previous night in Grey's Anatomy's time slot.

•Pageantry. NBC's Miss USA Pageant paraded 7.7 million viewers Friday, a third-place finish that was down from last year's 8.1 million. Miss USA easily outshone the more prestigious Miss America pageant, which averaged 3.1 million on CMT in January. MTV's Tiara Girls, a reality show about pageant contestants, premiered Wednesday with 1.8 million viewers

http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-04-25-nielsen-analysis_x.htm

fredfa

04-26-06, 10:39 AM

The TV Column
The Week’s Winners and Losers

By Lisa de Moraes The Washington Post Staff Writer

Armed with a Sing Along With Rod episode of "American Idol," featuring songs loved by your parents, grandparents and great-grandparents, Fox pulled into a tie with ABC for first place this season among the 18- to 49-year-olds advertisers covet. Go figure.

Here's a look at the week's bewitched and bewildered:

WINNERS

"American Idol." Last week's competition, featuring tunes by George Gershwin, Richard Rodgers, Isham Jones, etc., and coaching by 61-year-old rocker Rod Stewart, outstripped its combined five-network competition by nearly 30 percent among 18- to 49-year-olds.

"Unan1mous." Airing immediately after the "American Songbook" voting-results broadcast of "Idol," Fox's underground torture series continued to rank as the No. 1 new series this season in that demographic group craved by advertisers. When we figure out what it all means, we'll get back to you.

"Deal or No Deal." NBC's one bright spot last week was Monday's chicks-with-money-in-briefcases series, which beat Fox's highly hyped "Prison Break" in its hour by nearly 30 percent among young viewers.

LOSERS

"Celebrity Cooking Showdown." Suffering succotash -- those were some kind of stinky numbers NBC's sounded-good-on-paper celebrity cookoff series scored! After three consecutive nights, NBC came as close as it could to canceling the five-night special on which it had too many product-placement deals to actually scrub: It burned off the remaining two episodes Saturday night. And that brought NBC the smallest audience in two years of any Big Four on a Saturday night -- just over 3 million viewers.

Miss USA Pageant. Friday's pageant scored 7.8 million viewers on NBC -- about where it was when CBS decided not to renew the contract to air the chick parade after 2003.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/25/AR2006042502039_pf.html

fredfa

04-26-06, 12:52 PM

Tuesday’s prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

04-26-06, 12:55 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
'Idol' power: Building a better 'House'

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 26, 2006

Fox couldn’t have picked a better time for “House” to get hot, going into next week’s two-night May sweeps special.

The medical drama hit a new series high with a 9.9 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 last night, a 7 percent boost over its previous series high of 9.3 three weeks ago. Last night’s rating was up 65 percent compared to the 6.0 final rating the show has averaged this season, though that includes “House’s” average pre-January, before “Idol” returned to the schedule.

“House’s” two-parter next week, airing Tuesday and Wednesday partnered with “American Idol,” thus could give Fox a big enough week to finally pass ABC for first place on the season, if it doesn’t do so this week.

The two networks are tied through the week ended April 23, each averaging a 4.0 among 18-49s this season. ABC holds a slight edge in season-to-date viewers in the demo.

Why the jump for “House?” It seems to be a combination of two things. First, with less competition in the Tuesday 9 p.m. timeslot these days, with NBC’s “My Name is Earl” and “The Office” and ABC’s “Commander in Chief” all moving to Thursday, “House” has been hanging on to a higher share of “Idol’s” audience.

Last night it retained an impressive 88 percent, a series best.

At the same time, the storylines on the show of late have been terrific. Hugh Laurie and Robert Sean Leonard made an excellent odd couple forced to live together, and the odd medical cases continue to intrigue.

Last night’s “House” also attracted an impressive 24.5 million total viewers, according to Nielsen fast nationals, which would be an 8 percent increase over its previous series high, 22.7 million for the episode three weeks ago.

Fox led the night among 18-49s easily with a 10.5 average rating and a 27 share. CBS was second at 3.4/9, NBC third at 2.4/6, ABC fourth at 2.2/6, Univision fifth at 1.5/4, WB sixth at 1.4/4 and UPN seventh at 0.9/2.

Fox started the night in the lead with an 11.2 rating at 8 p.m. for “American Idol.” CBS was a distant second with a 3.5 for “NCIS,” WB third with a 2.0 for “Gilmore Girls” and Univision fourth with a 1.7 for “La Fea Mas Bella.” ABC was fifth with a 1.5 average for a repeat of “According to Jim” (1.5) and a new “Hope & Faith” (1.5), NBC sixth with a 1.3 for “Most Outrageous Moments” and UPN seventh with a 0.8 for a repeat of “America’s Next Top Model.”

At 9 p.m. Fox led easily again, this time with its 9.9 for “House.” CBS was second again that hour with a 3.9 for “The Unit,” NBC third with a 2.5 for “Scrubs” (2.8) and “Teachers” (2.5), and ABC fourth with a 2.1 average for another episode of “Hope” (2.2) and a new “Less than Perfect” (2.1). Univision dropped to fifth with a 1.6 for “Barrera de Amor,” with UPN sixth with a 1.0 for “Veronica Mars” and WB seventh with a 0.9 for “Pepper Dennis.”

At 10 p.m., NBC led with a 3.4 rating for a repeat of “Law & Order: SVU.” ABC and CBS tied for second at 3.0, ABC for “Boston Legal” and CBS for a repeat of “CSI: Miami,” with Univision fourth with a 1.2 for “Ver para Creer.”

Fox also led the night among households with a 15.6 average rating and a 24 share. CBS was second at 8.6/13, ABC third at 4.5/7, NBC fourth at 4.1/6, WB fifth at 2.5/4, Univision sixth at 2.0/3 and UPN seventh at 1.4/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4334.asp

fredfa

04-26-06, 12:58 PM

TV Notebook
Law and Order cast changes?

By Michael Starr The New York Post

April 26, 2006 -- It looks like Annie Par isse's time on "Law & Order" is coming to an end.

Parisse, who plays ADA Alexandra Borgia, is rumored to be leaving the NBC show - a development that could play itself out in the May 17 season finale.

Parisse's character was harrassed by a stalker earlier this season - although it's unclear if this plot point is related to Alexandra's exit from the "L&O" universe.

Parisse joined the "L&O" cast midway through last season, replacing Elisabeth Rohm, who played ADA Serena Southerlyn.

Parisse's exit could be the first in a cast shakeup on the long-running NBC drama.

Series creator Dick Wolf is known to change the "L&O" ensemble every few years to inject a new attitude into the franchise, which premiered in 1990.

"It is the producers' desire to keep the season finale of 'Law & Order' under wraps because of some surprising developments," a show spokeswoman said yesterday.

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/65060.htm

fredfa

04-26-06, 01:05 PM

Sports On TV
NFL Network Deal In Works

By Andrew Marchand The New York Post

April 26, 2006 -- While no contracts have been signed, the NFL Network has scheduled a press conference for today to presumably announce that Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth will be its broadcast team for its eight-game, late-season package this season.

Sources warned yesterday that with the seven-figure deals unsigned, nothing is official yet. Another complication in the negotiations is that Gumbel and Collinsworth both are already under contract to HBO. Collinsworth will also be on NBC's NFL pregame. Both HBO and NBC could receive some sort of compensation for letting Gumbel and Collinsworth work for another network.

"No deal is done," NFL Network's Seth Palansky said.

A contract that is completed is Sterling Sharpe's. NBC is expected to announce soon that Sharpe will a part of its Sunday night NFL studio show.

Since Collinsworth is also working Sunday nights for NBC, logistics could be a potential problem for his NFL Network gig. Three of NFL Network's eight games are on Saturday nights. While two are on the East Coast (Atlanta and Washington), one is in Oakland.

NFL Network has put pressure on itself to get the Gumbel and Collinsworth deals done because it is holding an advertising event in New York today and ideally would like to present its big name broadcast team to potential sponsors. Collinsworth is scheduled to be in New York today. The question is: Will he or Gumbel have signed contracts?

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/sports/65090.htm

fredfa

04-26-06, 01:08 PM

Sports On TV
Bryant Gumbel, Cris Collinsworth to announce NFL Network games

(nfl.com)

(April 26, 2006) -- Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth will form NFL Network's broadcast booth, when the league-owned and operated television channel kicks off its live regular-season coverage on Thanksgiving in primetime Nov. 23.

"Bryant is a premier broadcaster with impeccable credentials and allows NFL Network to immediately distinguish its coverage," said NFL Network President and CEO Steve Bornstein. "Cris has proven himself to be the top analyst in football and his presence establishes instant credibility to our telecasts."

Gumbel and Collinsworth will be teamed together for the first time in their careers as Gumbel will handle the play-by-play, while Collinsworth will serve as lead analyst.

The pair are the first on-air hires for NFL Network's "Run Up to the Playoffs" package of primetime games, which begins on Thanksgiving night when the Kansas City Chiefs host the Denver Broncos at Arrowhead Stadium in the nightcap of the first-ever Thanksgiving tripleheader.

Gumbel is currently the host of HBO's 15-time Emmy-Award winning Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel, where he will continue to work.

Prior to his work with Real Sports, Gumbel anchored NBC's Today show for 15 years.

During his 16-year broadcast career, Collinsworth has earned an unprecedented five Sports Emmy Awards as the Outstanding Sports Studio Analyst/Personality.

In 2006, Collinsworth will return for his 16th season on HBO's Inside the NFL as well as join NBC as a studio analyst and co-host of Football Night in America.

Collinsworth began his broadcast career in 1990 when he joined NBC Sports as a game analyst for the network's NFL coverage and select college football telecasts.

Due to scheduling conflicts, Collinsworth will work six of NFL Network's games with a yet-to-be-determined analyst paired with Gumbel on the Dec. 16 and Dec. 23 contests. Game telecasts on NFL Network will include pregame and postgame shows hosted by Rich Eisen, with additional analyst roles to be determined.

NFL Network's eight-game package will consist of primetime games kicking off at 8:05 p.m. ET from Weeks 12-17 of the NFL season. The schedule is as follows:

http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/9398370

RemyM

04-26-06, 01:32 PM

"Bryant is a premier broadcaster with impeccable credentials..."

I guess they forgot, or didn't listen to, his racial comments about the winter olympics.

mabrym

04-26-06, 04:28 PM

AFH

04-26-06, 04:35 PM

I've said it before - Julia Louis Dreyfus lucked into Seinfeld. She wasn't funny before and she's not funny after.

Ah, but you forget one thing. She's easy on the eyes. Half way funny and easy on the eyes will get you a television pilot when you have her resume.

fredfa

04-26-06, 04:47 PM

TV Notebook
Desperately Seeking?

By Chase Squires St. Petersburg Times television critic

Not sure how much stock to put in this ...

But the Internet is filling up with rumors that Eva Longoria is considering leaving Desperate Housewives. One Toronto fashion mag is quoting Ms. L. as saying she doesn't want to work on a dying show. Yikes.

"Honestly, I think shows wear out their welcome. I don't want to be on (American TV series) Seventh Heaven - on for 20 years and no one's really watching and it's hanging on by a thread," Eva Longoria told Glamour magazine." ... that's from the Toronto Fashion Monitor.

Lesse, DH has slipped a bit, but it still ranked 7th in the Nielsens last week, with nearly 17-million viewers. But it got beat by not just powerhouse American Idol, but also CSI, CSI: Miami, and Without a Trace ... What's up with that show? Without a Trace? Who watches that??

http://www.sptimes.com/blogs/tv/

bphisig

04-26-06, 05:07 PM

I used to watch Without a Trace religiously, but this season it's really fallen out of favor with me. The stupid storyline with Martin's addiction to painkillers was a little much to handle, and I just find myself not caring about the storylines.

What doesn't make sense is that this show is probably enjoying its best ratings this season, go figure.

archiguy

04-26-06, 05:09 PM

Desperate Housewives has sunk further faster in terms of quality between the first and second season then any show I can think of; it's a shell of what it was last year. Yet, 17 million folks still watch it...! WTF?? Proof positive that much TV watching among the masses occurs because of habit. You get used to plopping yourself down in front of the tube at a certain time on a certain night, and just let it wash over you. One less decision to make that day. That's not true of the more discerning viewers on this Forum, of course (or DVR owners in general, I suspect). ;)

harley1

04-26-06, 06:03 PM

'Law & Order' in Trouble as Actress Quits

Things are pretty dicey over at "Law & Order," NBC's 16-year-old police series.

For one thing, the actress who plays the assistant district attorney just quit. For another, insiders from the show are "convinced" that their beloved employment is about to be terminated.

"They're either getting cancelled or getting a one-year renewal," a source said.

One of the many reasons is lower ratings, thanks to being up against ABC's powerhouse "Lost" on Wednesdays in the 9 p.m. timeslot. In recent weeks, NBC finally moved "Law & Order" out of harm's way, to 10 p.m., but it may too little, too late.

There are, of course, three "Law & Order" shows: the mothership (as it is known), "SVU" (or fondly, SUV) and "Criminal Intent." The latter are still doing well enough that their pick-up seems assured.

Nevertheless, there's been trouble at "Criminal Intent" this week. S. Epatha Mekerson, the Emmy-winning actress who appears on the main show, was written in and then written out of the final episode when she didn't like the way her character was being treated.

"Whoopi Goldberg is the guest star. She plays a con man. Epatha's character was supposed to be her old friend. But Epatha didn't like it that her character was clueless about how evil Whoopi's was," a source said.

To make matters even more complicated, sources tell me that Annie Parisse, the talented brunette who had been playing the assistant district attorney on the main show, has quit.

"She saw the writing on the wall," an insider said. "They never treated her very well. They were always complaining about her hair. And they also thought she looked too young next to Sam Waterson."

Parisse joins a long list of actresses who have played the assistant district attorney over 15 seasons, including Jill Hennessey, Angie Harmon, Carey Lowell and Elizabeth Rohm (who discovered her character was a lesbian in her final scene).

The problem now is that creator and executive producer Dick Wolf can't cast a replacement because no one knows if the show is coming back.

There's a significant morale problem, too. Sources say that there have been "a lot" of firings, including a portion of the camera crew.

"None of the original writer-producers are there anymore," a source said. "They've all been replaced by people from L.A. who don't get the show."

And then there's the issue of Jerry Orbach. Everyone I spoke to said the same thing in one way or another: Without the late beloved actor, "Law & Order" isn't the same. "And people don't like Dennis Farina" is the comment I got about the actor who was hired to succeed Orbach even before he died.

If "Law & Order" does get cancelled, or renewed just long enough to do a finale season, it won't be a tremendous surprise. Sixteen years, after all, is twice the length of the run of a regular hit show. Still, insiders blame the constant reruns on TNT for over-saturating the brand.

"Even they're cutting back now," a source said.

And then there were the problems with the show's lead-ins. All three forgettable shows are already gone, as well.

But that doesn't mean we won't be seeing the other two "Law & Order" shows in syndication for years to come.

"The 'CI' deal was too rich," a source said. "It will be on NBC for one or two more seasons definitely."

NBC declined comment except to say: "It is the producers' desire to keep the season finale of 'Law and Order' under wraps because of some surprising developments."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,193259,00.html

fredfa

04-26-06, 07:34 PM

(The previous story is by Roger Friedman of Foxnews.com)

fredfa

04-26-06, 07:37 PM

The Business of Television
House Commerce Approves National Franchise Bill

By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 4/26/2006

The House Commerce Committee, by an overwhelming vote of 42 to 12, has paved the way for the creation of national video franchises, though the bill itself still has a ways to travel before it becomes law.

The goal, say the bill's proponents including Committee Chairman Joe Barton, is to increase price and service competition to cable, while speeding the rollout of high-speed Internet service.

Both the House and Senate are revamping the 1996 Telecommunications Act to reflect the rise of the Internet to near-utility status and the government's compelling interest in promoting high-speed Internet access.

Opponents almost all of whom concede some video franchise reform is needed, say this bill will, instead, pave the way for telcos to cherry pick service while discriminating in the provision of Internet access, "fundamentally and detrimentally" changing the character of the Internet.

Whatever it will do, it won't be doing it just yet.

The bill must still pass the full House, where amendments can be reintroduced, then be reconciled with a Senate bill that will contain a lot more elements. Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-Tex.) has almost guaranteed a bill will make it to the President's desk this session, daring reporters to bet against it. But at least one cable lobbyist privately advised this reporter to take that bet.

Not included in the bill are voted-down amendments that would have held national video franchisees to a build-out schedule and toughened prohibitions on red-lining--building out more attractive parts of a franchise and bypassing ones with less potential return on investment or, as Democrat Ed Markey puts it, "the other side of the tracks."

Still the bill as passed has language that requires telephone companies getting into video service to eventually serve all of a franchise, rather than allowing them to choose which parts of an area to offer service to, as the bill passed out of the Telecommunications Subcommittee allowed. That anti-redlining addition sat well with the cable industry, which had been pushing for it, but was not enough for Markey and others who wanted build-out requirements as well.

Also pleasing the cable industry was an amendment that was adopted that will allow cable companies to seek national franchises immediately if they currently have competition from an overbuilder.

Another amendment that was defeated would have prevented discrimination in service on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, or national origin. While everybody agreed they were against such discrimination, the amendment was voted down as unnecessary given that current civil rights laws already assured that. In addition, the amendment might have triggered a referral to the Judiciary Committee where, Barton said, "mischief" could be done to the bill which could delay its passage.

The committee voted 34-22 not to adopt an amendment toughening "network neutrality" provisions in the bill, an issue that has gained major traction and could resurface on the House floor and will almost certainly do so in the Senate version.

Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who spearheaded the amendment, had argued that without the amendment, the bill would spell the "end of the Internet as we know it," allowing telephone companies to discriminate in Internet service and fundamentally change the character of the Internet.

He and others warned during mark-up of the bill Wednesday that there would be backlash from constituents. Chairman Joe Barton strongly opposed the amendment, saying the bill already contained sufficient protections for Internet access--through FCC adjudicatory powers--and that anything more specific would be unnecessarily preemptive.

Net neutrality backer Media Access Project was not surprised, but saw hopeful signs for adding net neutrality in the Senate version of the bill, buoyed by the recent lobbying blitz by 'neutrality' forces.

"This outcome was expected," said MAP President Andrew Schwartzman, "but we are somewhat surprised - and encouraged - by the progress that net neutrality advocates have made in the last few weeks.

"A broad-based industry and citizen coalition supporting net neutrality is rapidly gaining steam. Prospects in the Senate are looking better and better."

Savetheinternet.com, one of the groups that had just coalesced around the issue, called the vote a sell-out and vowed to "continue rallying public support for Internet freedom as the legislation moves to the full House and Senate."

Withdrawn was an amendment to help law enforcement track online child pornographers. Barton said there were some germaneness issues. But he promised to get it in the bill before it is voted on in the House.

Verizon lobbyist Peter Davidson, senior VP for federal legislative affairs, pushed for swift passage sans any net neutrality additions. "Today, consumers won yet another decisive victory with committee passage of the video choice bill," he said. "The House should now pass, without delay, legislation to empower video consumers with more choices, and not weigh down this important reform with other issues -- such as mandating government regulation of the Internet."

fredfa

04-26-06, 09:16 PM

The 2006-2007 Season
Primetime Ratings For Tuesday, April 25th

Synchronicity slips at the network. Strong comedies are needed.
By Scott Collins Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 26, 2006

This time of year, it's anybody's guess which pilots the network chiefs will choose to put on their fall schedules. But CBS might need a comedy or two more than they were initially expecting, because with "Everybody Loves Raymond" long gone programmers have had some trouble finding companions for "Two and a Half Men" this season.

Monday night's ratings provided a case in point. The once-hot sitcom "How I Met Your Mother" drifted down to its lowest-ever rating at 8:30 p.m. in the adults aged 18 to 49 demographic (2.5 rating/7 share), with 7.6 million total viewers, according to preliminary figures from Nielsen Media Research. True, some of that decline was because "Mother" followed a repeat of "King of Queens." But it's clear that a fourth-place finish in the demo is not what CBS is looking for, regardless of the context.

Meanwhile, the heavily publicized Julia Louis-Dreyfus sitcom "The New Adventures of Old Christine" has settled into a solid if unexciting performer at 9:30 p.m. On Monday, it did a 3.8 rating/9 share in the key demographic (12 million total viewers), which is roughly where it's been the past few weeks. But "Christine" has had increasing difficulty hanging on to the demo audience for "Men," CBS' top comedy, which on Monday had a 4.7 rating/12 share (14.7 million total viewers).

The comedy issues may be affecting the "CSI" franchise. "CSI: Miami" has lost 10% of its young-adult audience compared with last season, a decline at least partly attributable to lead-in problems. On Monday, the forensics drama squeezed out a 6.0 rating/16 share (18.2 million total viewers), which is on par for its average this season.

Meanwhile, rivals have had some unexpectedly good fortune building audiences on the night. NBC has found at least a temporary hit in Howie Mandel's game show "Deal or No Deal," which easily won its 8 p.m. slot Monday (4.8 rating/14 share in demo; 15.3 million total viewers). And Fox's thriller "24," paired successfully this season with "Prison Break," has grown its demographic audience by 16% this season — an almost unheard-of feat for a fifth-season show. On Monday, "24" won its 9 p.m. hour with a 5.1 rating/13 share in the demo (12.8 million total viewers).

So what does all this mean? Well, three weeks before the fall-schedule announcements, nothing can be counted on as certain. But CBS honcho Leslie Moonves might want to take a hard look at comedy pilots and pick up a couple that look the most promising.

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et-channel26apr26,0,7215850,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

SnakeEyes

04-26-06, 10:40 PM

Again, Outpost Gailifrey (http://www.gallifreyone.com/news.php#newsitemEEuypFuVElQaFOsKsA) has this past weeks Doctor Who numbers.

Ratings for the seventh episode of the first season of the new series, The Long Game, on US television on the Sci Fi Channel, are in. The numbers were slightly up from the previous week, averaging a 1.20 household rating with an average viewing audience of 1.4 million viewers, up one-tenth of a million from the previous week's low for "Dalek". Season-to-date, Sci Fi reports that Doctor Who is currently averaging a 1.35 household rating and an average audience of 1.6 million viewers for the season (noting also that the audience, according to their current mid-season demographics, is 64% male/36% female, with a median age of 47 years.)

fredfa

04-27-06, 12:00 AM

How do this season's Dr. Who numbers compare with the past, SnakeEyes?

keenan

04-27-06, 04:19 AM

From The Hollywood Reporter, Published April 26, 2006

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/feature_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002423918
Milestone: 'Alias'

Milestone: 'Alias'
ABC's spy drama hits 100 episodes and says adieu.

By Ray Richmond

There are a lot of ways for a network TV primetime series to reach 100 episodes, but ABC's "Alias" -- which achieves the prestigious milestone tonight before permanently heading off into the sunset May 22 -- is unique even among that rarefied group.

When the serialized, high-production-value drama launched in September 2001, ensemble dramas such as NBC's "The West Wing" and HBO's "The Sopranos" were the hot shows of the moment.

Having a then-unknown actress (Jennifer Garner) playing an action role traditionally reserved for men in an expensive hourlong series airing on a struggling network was, without a doubt, a risky move.

But "Alias" has overcome the odds, enjoying the type of longevity reserved for an elite few and keeping ABC's lights burning during some lean years until "Desperate Housewives," "Grey's Anatomy," "Lost" and "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" could ride to the ratings rescue. It has grown into a creatively rich and complex series, earning critical raves along with the proverbial devoted cult following by refusing to be a mere clone of everything else. In fact, "Alias" quickly created its own genre-hopping handle as "spy-fi."

ABC Entertainment president Stephen McPherson, who became president of Touchstone TV in June 2001 -- shortly after "Alias" was picked up by ABC -- has deep affinity and respect for the show and what it has represented to ABC and Touchstone. He calls it "the first unproducible drama ever produced on television." Meaning what?

"Well, it was unproducible from the standpoint of the scope of the production itself," McPherson says. "The special effects, the action, the storytelling -- every aspect of 'Alias' brought an elevated level from what we'd seen before with regard to production values on TV. And, I mean, all of that credit has to go to (creator/executive producer) J.J. Abrams, whose vision is exceeded only by his execution."

Abrams, who also co-created the ratings bonanza "Lost" and recently finished directing Paramount's upcoming action feature "Mission: Impossible 3," possessed only a handful of credits when he created "Alias," having co-written the screenplay to 1998's "Armageddon" and created and produced WB Network's "Felicity." It took a great leap of faith for ABC and Touchstone to support Abrams in making a show with a complicated international-espionage tapestry rife with codes and references that served to capture a tight fan base but discourage those who might have arrived late to the party.

"I'm still so grateful that I got to do 'Alias' at all and that ABC was as patient and supportive as they've proven to be all along," Abrams says. "It was always an inherently serialized show that ABC wanted me to sort of deserialize, which we tried to do. But it always snapped back to what it was by nature: a story, not a situation with stand-alone episodes. I feel like we were a bit of a forerunner in showing that serialized shows can work for the long haul."

Abrams also is grateful to have had a guiding hand on a series that reminds him of the spy dramas he watched as a child, such as "Mission: Impossible" and "The Twilight Zone."

"We got to push the boundaries of what was real and familiar to sometimes enter the supernatural," he says. "And, I mean, it's always a thrill to be able to work on something you love and care about as much as we all did about 'Alias' -- it's like being rewarded for your passion."

At the time ABC picked up "Alias," the network was looking for "fresher, younger-skewing programs and a form of escapism," current Touchstone TV president Mark Pedowitz says. "'Alias' was a home run because it told great stories and had great characters, and its core sensibility clicked in with a certain kind of educated fan base that likes to chat on the Internet. That helped the show's word-of-mouth a lot -- it was almost like an ongoing focus group."

The Internet thus helped to build the show's profile, and cyberspace is littered with "Alias" fan sites.

"I think 'Alias' did a lot to develop the whole idea of an Internet fan community bonding over specific shows," ABC senior vp marketing Mike Benson says.

"It creates great synergy -- but it doesn't replace the viewing experience, of course."

For the uninitiated, "Alias" centers on the undercover adventures of Sydney Bristow (Garner), a young and athletic type recruited to be an agent for a top-secret branch of the CIA known as SD-6. Once she learns that SD-6 is really a group of megalomaniacal mercenaries out to rule the world, though, she becomes a double agent then a regular CIA agent -- losing colleagues, friends and family members along the tumultuous way. The show has a spy-vs.-spy dynamic that keeps viewers consistently off-balance.

Part of what has made "Alias" unique is its central female character, something that has become far more common during the past five years (on such series as CBS' "Cold Case" and NBC's "Crossing Jordan," to name a couple).

But merely having a female lead would not have been enough to ensure the show's success: There is general agreement that without an actress who carries Garner's charisma and sheer fortitude, there would have been no "Alias." She has proved the show's steadying, riveting core while growing into a star in her own right; she's also said to be a beloved figure on the set -- a sentiment trumpeted by co-stars Ron Rifkin and Victor Garber, as well as Abrams.

"There's nobody like Jennifer in the world," says Rifkin, who portrays Arvin Sloane. "Everything you hear about her is true: She's truly a wonderful human being with grace and kindness and generosity. The crew just worships her."

Adds Garber, who plays Sydney's father Jack Bristow: "She embraces the crew in a way that's not common, honestly: Everybody is a friend, treated with respect. She came up with the idea of a 'crew member of the week,' where a different one would get a prize. You'd be working at 2 a.m. on a Friday, and a pizza truck would pull up -- compliments of Jennifer. It makes you happy to go to work."

For her part, Garner -- who became a new mother in December with the birth of daughter Violet, with husband Ben Affleck -- sounds most happy simply to take a deep breath after five years of 18-hour workdays that found her in nearly every scene of an hourlong series.

"I think I had two days off in the last three years because I was doing movies, too," she says. "So I have the big emotion of getting my life back, of having this amazing new baby, but at the same time I'm so emotional about the 'Alias' part of my life ending. It has meant so much to all of us. Just surviving it has been an accomplishment, for sure -- but, I mean, we had an amazing set. I've just been blessed to be on a show like this.

"As an actress, you just want to keep working," Garner adds. "To be on something that runs 100 episodes, that just never happens. And thank God the material has been so good -- I'll always be able to talk about this with pride."

In addition to carving out a 41⁄2-month hiatus during the current fifth season to accommodate Garner's pregnancy and birth, "Alias" addressed it by similarly making the plucky Sydney a new mother. In fact, the 100th episode finds Sydney returning early from maternity leave after learning that best pal Will Tippin (Bradley Cooper) has been abducted by her nemesis Anna Espinosa (Gina Torres).

Rifkin believes that as "Alias" has gone along, "the level of writing has changed and gotten more exciting and more complicated. It has always kept me guessing as to where Sloane's mind and heart are going; that unpredictability is a rare thing to encounter as an actor."

Garber agrees, adding that being on "Alias" has given him the feeling of "having hit the lottery. In a way, it kind of spoils me for everything else I may do from here on. I mean, this is a show that I believe really did change television in a way by so seamlessly combining the spy world with family drama. It also helps me get into restaurants now."

While "Alias" has not set ratings sheets afire, it consistently has averaged a 9 or 10 share among the prime adults 18-49 demographic (falling to a 6 during the current campaign that returned last week, resulting in only 17 original final-season episodes). That said, though, the fact that "Alias" falls under the Walt Disney Co. umbrella via Touchstone hasn't hurt its survival to the 100-episode milestone.

And while Abrams has not been actively involved in the show's production during the past couple of years to focus his attention on "Lost" and "M:I-3," he's confident that "Alias" is leaving the air on a creative high. "The cast and crew continue to work together to pull off what amounts to a magic trick every week -- I have enormous respect for them all," Abrams says. "But it really all gets back to Jennifer and what she's been able to do -- she's always been the key to its success. She's believable both in her vulnerability and in being dynamic, and she's got such a phenomenal work ethic. Without her, well ... you finish the sentence."

pwrmetal

04-27-06, 08:15 AM

How do this season's Dr. Who numbers compare with the past, SnakeEyes?

Not SnakeEyes, but anyway... This is an impossible question to answer. This is the first season of the "revamped" Doctor Who. The last Doctor Who to air in any national way in the US was the 1996 FOX TV Movie "Doctor Who". I believe it got around 5 million viewers. Before that, Doctor Who wasn't broadly viewed in the US since the late 80s early 90's on PBS, and I have no idea what the "national" ratings would have been for that given that it aired at different times, at different frequency on a per market basis.

I think if the ratings stay at about the level they are, Sci-Fi will probably pick up the second series, if the rumors of Sci-Fi getting a cut of US DVD revenue on series 1 and its rumored low cost are true. It appears to be outperforming the reruns of SG airing on Friday.

harley1

04-27-06, 09:48 AM

(The previous story is by Roger Friedman of Foxnews.com)

Thanks for adding that.

Posting these these articles is harder than reading them.

Thank You again for posting these articles everyday.

fredfa

04-27-06, 10:06 AM

The Business of TV
Comcast 1st Qtr Financials

Comcast today announced a strong first quarter which included adding 47,000 new basic subs, 340,000 digital subs and revenue growth of 10%.

If you want full details, go here:

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/11/118591/Earnings_1Q06/1q06pr.pdf

fredfa

04-27-06, 10:10 AM

The TV Column
The Unmerry Month of May

By Lisa de Moraes The Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, April 27

What can you say about a wrist-slittingly gloomy-doomy slate of May sweeps specials that includes an ABC flick about a bird-flu mutation about to wipe out the population of the United States; an NBC miniseries about the mother of all earthquakes, which could obliterate the Western Hemisphere unless FEMA saves a seismologist trapped in a Las Vegas casino; an "unspeakable horror" beastie thing posing as a small-town cop in the Nevada desert and terrorizing the locals and the local insects (you think I make this stuff up, but I don't) on ABC; and David Blaine being "Drowned Alive" from Lincoln Center, also on ABC?

Plus, an actual woman trying to escape an allegedly abusive husband by seeking Dr. Phil's help, and Joan Collins trying to hang on to her whole slutty kitten thing at 72 in a "Dynasty" reunion -- both on CBS.

ABC, NBC and, to a lesser degree, CBS are literally trying to scare up numbers in the vacuum created by the ratings tornado that is Fox's "American Idol."

"Idol" is averaging 30.6 million viewers -- about 4 million more than last year. During the May ratings sweeps, Fox will air at least eight hours of the singing competition.

NBC and ABC come into this sweeps with their prime-time schedules looking kind of tatty. ABC had been the No. 1 network among younger viewers, but recently, thanks largely to "Idol," Fox moved into a tie for first and, short of a ratings miracle, it will win the season among the 18-to-49-year-olds advertisers covet.

NBC, meanwhile, is trying to claw its way out of its prime-time rubble -- like that seismologist trapped in that casino in a 10.5-quaked Las Vegas. It and ABC are really ramping up the Chicken Little stuff for the sweeps.

Against "Idol" on May 9, ABC will air "Fatal Contact: Bird Flu in America," about which the network says in its news release:

"There are times that test humanity and challenge the soul of a community or a nation. News images and headlines tell stories of rising waters, quaking ground and tragic acts by man himself. But the real story, the human story, is found in the lives changed forever, in the strength of the survivors and the resilient hope that give them the courage to recover.

"On Tuesday, May 9, ABC will bring such a story to television," the network added, finally getting to the nub of the issue, "in a two-hour original movie [that] follows an outbreak of an Avian Flu from its origins in a Hong Kong market through its mutation into a virus transmittable from human to human around the world."

It's a "meticulously researched film," ABC assures us; among the consultants was John M. Barry, author of "The Great Influenza: The Epic Story of the Deadliest Plague in History," about the 1918 Spanish flu, which killed as many as 100 million people.

ABC also has lined up the Stephen King flick "Desperation," about that small-town cop-unspeakable horror beast named Tak, for May 23, the second-to-last night of "Idol."

And ABC will bring us Blaine trying to hold his breath underwater longer than anybody else after spending seven days imitating dinner choices at Red Lobster in an aquarium in front of Lincoln Center. But David, for all his death-defying bravado, is too chicken to face "Idol"; his special will air on a Monday.

NBC will air the first half of the sequel to its popular end-of-the-world miniseries "10.5" on Sunday, May 21. But Part 2 will air on an "Idol" night -- May 23 -- though it will start at 9, after "Idol" -- unless Fox decides to beef up that penultimate episode, which could happen.

CBS's prime time is in a stronger position than the other two networks', and the network will emerge this season as the most watched among viewers of all ages. Still, CBS has a few sweeps specials up its sleeve, including that "Dynasty Reunion: Catfights & Caviar," which is worth watching for the plastic surgery alone.

And, for sheer horror, you can't beat the sinful exploitation of a young woman turning to Dr. Phil for help when she wants to leave her allegedly abusive husband in "A Dr. Phil Primetime Special: Escaping Danger."

UPN and the WB are, literally, over. They will cease operation in the fall when the merged CW debuts.

What good can come of all this "Idol"-izing during the May sweeps, you wonder?

How about catching pedophiles?

NBC has scheduled four new hours of its "Dateline" episodes in which it sets up sting operations to nab pedophiles. Three of those hours are being produced to counterprogram "Idol" during the May sweeps.

Since 2004, "Dateline" has aired three reports in the sting operation series, titled "To Catch a Predator." NBC News worked with a group called Perverted Justice, whose volunteer members pose as boys and girls in Internet chat rooms and wait to be contacted by adult men seeking sex with minors. The volunteers lure the men to a house rented by NBC, where they are caught on hidden cameras and confronted by a "Dateline" reporter. Some are arrested.

Each of the first three "Dateline" stings drew more than 8 million viewers. During the February ratings sweeps, an episode of "To Catch a Predator" drew the newsmag's biggest ratings of the year.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/26/AR2006042602583_pf.html

fredfa

04-27-06, 10:22 AM

The Business of TV
Warner Bros. Television Starts Unit to Produce Cable Shows

By Bill Carter The New York Times April 27, 2006

Warner Brothers Television, the biggest producer of prime-time series for broadcast networks over the last two decades, is creating a unit to generate series specifically for cable TV networks, the company announced yesterday.

The longtime head of the studio, Peter Roth, will also lead the unit, to be called Warner Horizon Television. Warner Brothers Television, a unit of Time Warner, also announced that it had signed a multiyear extension to Mr. Roth's contract as president of the television studio.

Mr. Roth said in a telephone interview that the creation of Warner Horizon was an acknowledgment that cable networks were becoming ever more important in the series television business. He called cable "the one clear potential growth opportunity" for series development.

The goal will be to find ways to produce series, both scripted shows and reality shows, for much less than they generally cost on broadcast network television, Mr. Roth said.

Ad-supported cable channels have much smaller production budgets than broadcast networks and have never paid anything close to what networks pay for shows. An hourlong network show generally costs $1.5 million to $2 million an episode.

Mr. Roth said that Warner Horizon shows for cable networks would have to be produced at "a significantly lower cost" than that. He estimated the budgets would have to be $400,000 to $500,000 less per episode. "That means you have to use new or less expensive talent on these shows," Mr. Roth said.

He cited two examples of series that Warner Brothers made for cable that turned into successes: "Nip/Tuck" for the F/X channel and "The Closer" for TNT. Those shows have been the templates for what the studio wants to achieve with the new unit, Mr. Roth said.

Warner Brothers will seek to place series on almost any cable network. "We'll be very targeted," Mr. Roth said. "A show like 'Nip/Tuck' is perfect for F/X and 'The Closer' is in tune with the specific needs of TNT. A channel like Lifetime will have a specific set of circumstances if they come to us. But our focus here will not be on volume. It needs to be absolutely about quality."

Mr. Roth said he believed that there was "profitability to be had" in making shows for cable, even though cable series have not yet generated the kind of continuing profits that hit network shows have in syndication. He cited the changing marketplace for distributing TV shows as opening up new opportunities.

"There is always library value," he said. "There is brand extension, and there are windows being created in this new digital age." Among those are outlets like the Internet and iPods, which will have increasing demands for video content.

Beyond that, Mr. Roth said that whatever the studio could achieve in terms of producing quality programs for cable channels for lower costs might be applied to the ever more expensive business of creating broadcast network shows. "That's the long-term goal here," he said. "The whole idea is to learn and grow."

Mr. Roth, who took over leadership of the studio in 1999, emphasized that the new venture will have no impact on Warner Brothers' traditional television production business. The studio produced 33 series for broadcast networks last season.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/27/business/media/27warner.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-27-06, 10:25 AM

Sports On TV
Keith Jackson Silences His Voice of College Football

By Richard Sandomir The New York Times April 27, 2006

Keith Jackson, the storied voice of college football, is calling it quits, declining offers from ESPN officials to keep him at ABC Sports.

"I'm finished with play-by-play forever," Jackson said yesterday by telephone from his home in Sherman Oaks, Calif. "I'm going out to learn to be a senior citizen and find a president I can vote for and believe in." He added, "I'm not angry, I'm just going off like an old man and sitting by the creek."

Jackson was one of the last of the stars at ABC Sports from the 1960's and 1970's. Although best known for college football, he was also the voice of "Monday Night Football" in its inaugural season in 1970. Most recently, Al Michaels left ABC for NBC to call Sunday night football.

Jackson planned to retire after the 1998 season and was the star of a lengthy farewell tour. But he returned to call a largely West Coast, Pac-10 Conference schedule. But he said there would be no returns from the rocking chair. "This is different," Jackson said. "I'm 77."

He said an early schedule had him going to East Lansing, Mich., and State College, Pa. "Been there, done that," he said. He surmised that he would not get the largely West Coast schedule he desired. "They offered me a schedule I couldn't have done under any circumstances," he said.

But he said ESPN was willing to pay a lot to keep him.

Norby Williamson, the ESPN and ABC Sports executive vice president who negotiated with Jackson, insisted that he offered a schedule similar to last year's. "When he expressed to us that he was considering retirement, we repeatedly tried to convince him otherwise, but completely respect his decision," he said.

Jackson said he was feeling his age, had had skin problems and yesterday had a basal cell carcinoma removed from his forehead. "This is the perfect time," he said. "I don't want to get back into the pressure-cooker of play-by-play and worry about travel. I don't want to die in a stadium parking lot."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/27/sports/ncaafootball/27jackson.html?pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-27-06, 11:05 AM

Sports On TV
For OLN, the hurdle looks a bit higher

By Kevin Downey MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 27

When OLN said it would rename itself Versus this week, it was only the latest sign of the Comcast-owned network's ambition to abandon its niche as an outdoor channel to become a major sports network akin to Disney’s ESPN.

But it will take more than a name change. It's going to take far longer, and lots more investment to boot, judging by how its first season airing the National Hockey League is finishing out.

For sure, the addition of the NHL helped OLN's audience numbers, pushing them up by 23 percent, to an average 196,000, and giving OLN its best quarter ever and putting it on par with networks like WE: Women’s Entertainment.

But that's still only about one-ninth the size of ESPN’s audience, which was up 7 percent to 1.67 million viewers.

More to the point, though, hockey didn't deliver nearly the attention the network had been expecting when it swooped in to pick up the rights last summer. Through 58 games the network has averaged a 0.2 rating in households and key male demographics, less than half of what the NHL averaged on ESPN.

Rather than OLN rising up on the power of hockey, hockey slumped even more airing on OLN. Further, few hockey fans who tuned in to OLN for the games hung around to catch other shows.

OLN will face other challenges when it becomes Versus in the fall. At its present size--somewhere over 60 million homes--it's still too small to land deals with major sports franchises like the NFL of the sort that could really draw in viewers.

Still, network executives remain committed to their strategy of slow, steady growth.

“In July 2005, we stopped calling ourselves Outdoor Life Network and went to the acronym OLN. What we’ve done is lift the outdoor filter,” says Gavin Harvey, the network’s president.

“We already had the Tour de France and bull riding, and now we have the NHL, the Stanley Cup and the Davis Cup (tennis). We’ve been able to do things that we hadn’t been able to put on the network. That is where our future growth is coming from.”

OLN landed rights to the NHL last August and is currently airing playoff games and in June will broadcast the Stanley Cup. And while ratings have been low, the network believes airing the games has boosted OLN’s profile, gaining it recognition among viewers and the press that other events like the Tour de France and repeats of CBS’s “Survivor” have not.

The higher-profile programming is part of a slow build that will likely see OLN grow in stature, says Brad Adgate, senior vice president and corporate research director at Horizon Media.

“They have benefited from having a very aggressive owner, Comcast,” he says. “They are throwing out a bigger net and getting programs besides hunting and fishing."

OLN is also working hard to beef up distribution, which Harvey concedes is its greatest challenge.

The network has been hovering at around 63 million subscribers for more than a year. That’s about 27 million fewer subscribers than ESPN has. But OLN this week was picked up again by EchoStar’s Dish Network after a protracted contract dispute. The network isn’t saying how many subscribers that will add to its total but it’s likely to be around 4 million.

Harvey says the network will also continue expanding its programming with original reality series and movies, largely tied into its NHL coverage, and newer events like the Boston marathon and the Iditarod dog-sledding race.

“We have been repositioning the network for a couple of years,” he says. “We’re opening up the brand for growth. Although we are a leader and intend to remain the leader in outdoor sports and adventure and recreation, what people increasingly come to us for is competition.”

Horizon’s Adgate says OLN has a shot at eventually competing with ESPN and regional sports networks.

“Certainly, the NHL put them more in the sports landscape,” he says. “Re-branding itself from OLN to Versus is part of that. It says, ‘We’re about things other than hunting and fishing.’”

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4361.asp

fredfa

04-27-06, 11:09 AM

TV Notebook
Sci Fi Upfront: Battlestar Prequel Slated for '07

Sci Fi Pulse Broadband Site Unveiled

By Anthony Crupi MediaWeek.com APRIL 26, 2006 -

Sci Fi Channel is hoping to build on the buzz generated by its Battlestar Galactica franchise with a slate of scripted series for the 2006-’07 television season, including a prequel to the Peabody Award-winning space opera and a number of shows that don’t strictly hew to the network’s core genre.

At the network’s upfront luncheon in New York Wednesday, Sci Fi executive vp and general manager Dave Howe introduced the concept of “Sci Fi Plus,” a new initiative that will find the channel programming series that are “much broader, much more relatable, much more human, much more fun.” Of the seven new shows slated for this season, four will fall into the new category, which “will help break down the narrow preconceptions” about the network that many people have, Howe said.

The most promising new strip looks to be The Dresden Files, a quirky drama based on the best-selling books by Jim Butcher and executive produced by Nicolas Cage. Paul Blackthorne stars as Harry Dresden, a professional wizard/private investigator who uses his supernatural powers to fight crime in contemporary Chicago. Sci Fi originally picked up The Dresden Files as a two-hour pilot in October 2005.

One of the more traditional science-fiction projects on the network’s slate is Eureka, a 13-episode drama that places a U.S. Marshall (Colin Ferguson) in a small town full of eccentric geniuses, who have been surreptitiously brought together by the government to conduct top-secret research. Sci Fi first announced the Eureka pick-up last September.

Other programs in the hopper include a reality/competition series, Who Wants to be a Superhero, which is a bit like American Idol in tights and a cape; a number of documentary specials co-produced by NBC News under the rubric Sci Fi Investigates; and the aforementioned Battlestar Galactica prequel, Caprica, set to bow in the first quarter of 2007.

Also in development is the six-hour limited series Chariots of the Gods, based on the Erich von Daniken novel about aliens who tamper with human evolution.

Sci Fi/USA Network Bonnie Hammer said that because TV “is no longer just about ratings or views,” the channel is taking steps to develop more branded content across all digital media. “Genre fans are really early adopters, so if we are to own the genre, then we have to own the digital space as well,” Hammer reasoned.

In keeping with that line of thinking, Hammer unveiled Sci Fi Pulse, a new broadband site that will incorporate original content (i.e., webisodes) and complete episodes of existing Sci Fi series, as well as spin-offs and behind-the-scenes fare culled from the linear network.

The first original Web series set to bow on Sci Fi Pulse is Exposure, a virtual festival of short films that will be judged by visitors to the broadband site. The creator of the best film will see his or her finished product run on the linear network sometime next year.

According to Hammer, each show on the linear net will have a digital component going forward.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002423854

fredfa

04-27-06, 12:59 PM

Wednesday’s prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

04-27-06, 01:01 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Kid rocker: Fading celeb lifts 'CSI: NY'

By Diego Vasquez Apr 27, 2006

It turns out aging bad boy Kid Rock still has a following.

His guest appearance on CBS’s “CSI: NY” last night helped the show to a 5.1 overnight rating among viewers 18-49, an 11 percent boost over the 4.6 final rating the show has averaged this season and a 13 percent bump over the 4.5 it had averaged over its previous four original episodes.

Rock starred as himself, a rocker implicated in the murder of his limo driver outside of one of his concerts. Before the hour was done, he’d been cleared.

It helped that the show aired against a repeat of NBC’s “Law & Order,” but still encouraging for CBS is the way “CSI: NY” grew throughout its hour. During its first half hour the show averaged a 5.0 among 18-49s then jumped 6 percent to a 5.3 for the final 30 minutes.

Last night’s performance gives the third entry in the “CSI” franchise some welcome momentum heading into the all-important May sweeps period, with CBS, Fox and ABC neck and neck for the season crown in 18-49s.

Elsewhere last night, a special Wednesday 9 p.m. edition of NBC’s “Dateline” posted a 3.3 overnight rating among 18-49s, a 43 percent increase on the 2.3 the newsmagazine averages on Fridays, and an 83 percent improvement on the 1.8 its Sunday editions have averaged this season.

The show, which focused on online sexual predators, improved 154 percent on the 1.3 the canceled “Heist” posted in the same timeslot last week and was the highest-rated NBC program in the slot since the Winter Olympics in February. It bettered NBC’s season average in the timeslot by 57 percent.

Meanwhile, based on the strength of an “American Idol” results show, Fox took the night among 18-49s with a 5.9 average rating and a 15 share. CBS was second at 3.8/10, NBC third at 3.7/10, ABC fourth at 3.1/8, UPN fifth at 2.0/5, Univision sixth at 1.5/4 and WB seventh at 1.1/3.

NBC started the night in the lead with a 5.0 rating at 8 p.m. for “Deal or No Deal.” Fox was second with a 3.5 for “Bones,” CBS third with a 2.9 for “The Amazing Race” and UPN fourth with a 2.3 for “America’s Next Top Model.” ABC was fifth that hour with a 2.2 for “Alias,” Univision sixth with a 1.6 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and WB seventh with a 1.3 for “One Tree Hill.”

Fox took the lead at 9 p.m. with an 8.3 average for “Idol” (11.2) and “Unan1mous” (5.4). ABC jumped to second with a 4.4 for a “Lost” recap show, with NBC third with its 3.3 for “Dateline” and CBS fourth with a 3.2 for a repeat of “Criminal Minds.” UPN was fifth with a 1.7 for another hour of “Top Model,” Univision sixth with a 1.6 for “Barrera de Amor” and WB seventh with a 0.9 for “Bedford Diaries.”

At 10 p.m. CBS led comfortably with its 5.1 for “CSI: NY.” NBC was second with a 3.0 for its repeat of “L&O,” ABC third with a 2.8 for “Invasion” and Univision fourth with a 1.4 for “Don Francisco Presenta.”

Fox also led the night among households, averaging a 9.1 rating and a 14 share. CBS and NBC tied for second at 7.4/12, with ABC fourth at 5.5/9, UPN fifth at 2.8/4, Univision sixth at 1.9/3 and WB seventh at 1.8/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4363.asp

fredfa

04-27-06, 01:04 PM

The May Sweep
In May: Showstoppers, stopped shows

By Robert Bianco USA TODAY

It's Maytime, and as the TV season winds toward its conclusion, series will depart, cliffs will be hung, games will be won, and an Idol will be crowned. USA TODAY helps you find your way through a finale-laden month (times ET/PT):

Friday, April 28

Daytime Emmys (ABC, 8 p.m.)

Soap stars go Hollywood as ABC moves their act from daytime to prime time and their awards from N.Y. to L.A.

Tuesday, May 2

Dynasty Reunion (CBS, 10 p.m.)

Joan Collins, Linda Evans and John Forsythe gather to salute ABC's catfight-camp classic. It's odd that they're gathering on CBS, but the show always was known for its strange bedfellows.

Wednesday, May 3

House (Fox, 8 p.m.)

The wicked good doctor makes a special Wednesday house call in this conclusion of a two-part special. And to up the dramatic ante, his endangered patient is Dr. Foreman.

Monday, May 8

7th Heaven series finale (WB, 8 p.m.)

What was the most successful WB series ever? Some of you may be surprised by the answer: the family favorite 7th Heaven, which ends its 10-year run tonight.

Tuesday, May 9

Veronica Mars (UPN, 9 p.m.)

Catching the creep who blew up that bus is the least of Veronica's season-ender worries. She also has to find a way to immunize her viewers against ABC's bird-flu flick Fatal Contact.

Thursday, May 11

My Name Is Earl (NBC, 9 p.m.)

NBC had a terrible year, but it did give us TV's best new comedy, Earl, which ends its season tonight. Let's hope karma leads NBC to a suitable Earl companion this fall.

Sunday, May 14

West Wing series finale (NBC, 7 p.m.)

What a night: Fox's Malcolm ends its run; Survivor names a winner; Grey's Anatomy launches a two-night finale; and Wing's retrospective lets us look back on the show as it once was.

Thursday, May 18

Will & Grace series finale (NBC, 8 p.m.)

Will may not qualify as a classic, but it did break new ground with some very funny episodes along the way. That all ends on a night that also hosts the finale of That '70s Show on Fox.

Sunday, May 21

Desperate Housewives (ABC, 9 p.m.)

While NBC kicks off 10.5 Apocalypse, ABC devotes two Desperate hours to solving Betty Applewhite's mystery. If that's what it takes to get rid of her, so be it.

Monday, May 22

Alias series finale

(ABC, 9 p.m.)

What's a spy lover to do? 24 ends its best season yet, as Alias ends its last season ever. Luckily, a VCR should be able to take the sting out of the which-to-watch problem for most of you.

Wednesday, May 24

Lost (ABC, 9 p.m.)

There'll be winners on Idol, Top Model and Amazing Race. But the night's real winner should be the two-hour Lost, which promises to answer some questions while raising new ones.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-04-25-may-sweeps-calendar_x.htm

fredfa

04-27-06, 03:17 PM

Many thanks to Aaron Barnhart at his greatly informative and fun-to-read Kansas City star TV blog http://www.tvbarn.com/ for pointing this column out.

(Note: You might want to keep the kids away from the following columnist’s shall we say “colorful” use of language, but Nikki Finke does make some interesting points.
If her way of making them offends you, I apologize in advance.)

The Business of TV
The CW Network is the bastard child of The WB and UPN

By Nikki Finke LA Weekly

Everyone loves Les (Moonves, head of CBS). Fortune just sucked up to him. The New York Times Magazine recently smooched his ass. And Bill Carter’s new book, Desperate Networks, should be sharing royalties with the CBS president/CEO because it’s told entirely from his sexed-up point of view. Indeed, few media groups are more doting and docile when it comes to The Powers That Be than television critics and reporters (except for, perhaps, the White House press corps).

The reason their reportorial foreplay with Moonves has reached orgasmic proportions right now is that the other network men in their lives are so obviously impotent. NBC hustler Jeff Zucker keeps blaming his own prime-time ****-ups on his entertainment eunuch Kevin Reilly. Disney pimp Bob Iger can’t escape his biggest mistake: losing his hard-on for Susan Lyne, the ABC Entertainment programmer responsible for Desperate Housewives and Grey’s Anatomy, and replacing her with Stephen McPherson, who hated Lost. The Fox guys deserve only sloppy seconds in terms of coverage — which leaves the TV press lusting after Les instead of mooning Moonves under headlines that tell the naked, and awful, truth about him. Here’s mine: “Moonves Kidnaps Netlet and Harms Underserved Network Audiences.”

Sure, all those press releases back in January claimed CBS and Warner Bros. were supposed to be equal partners parenting the new bastard child of The WB and UPN networks. That’s how The CW got its lame name — “C” for CBS, which owns UPN, “W” for Warner Bros. What no one dared mention was how right from the beginning Moonves out-maneuvered Barry Meyer, the chairman and CEO of Warner Bros. Entertainment, and Bruce Rosenblum, the president of the Warner Bros. Television Group.

The Warners duo had been warned over and over to build in every safety clause they could think of to prevent the 50-50 partnership from becoming the “Les Network” instead of the “Can’t Win Network,” as wags now refer to it. Instead, they rolled over. “The deal should have been pretty straightforward. After all, no money changed hands. But Moonves was more aggressive. On tiebreaker issues, Barry and Bruce were folding every negotiation to Les,” a Warners insider tells me.

The result, the source explains further, is that “we were willing to trade a more valuable asset much more easily than we generally do at Time Warner given that we were bringing better stations, more successful programs and way higher revenue to the table.”

That’s not inexplicable considering that Time Warner’s No. 2, Jeff Bewkes, made his career at nonadvertising-supported HBO and, because of that, isn’t a big fan of broadcast television because he doesn’t believe in its economics. Warner Bros. simply did his bidding. Besides, The WB was always seen inside the parent company as the ugly stepsister, dating back to its inception when Ted Turner became TW’s majority shareholder and sought to shutter The WB, proclaiming he’d use the money to buy what he termed a “real” network. (Then-WB boss Jamie Kellner was so angered he went nine months without speaking to Terrible Ted.) “At the end of the day, we talked about the idea of an exit strategy for the network given that the management of Time Warner didn’t want to be in that business. This was the exit strategy,” a Warners insider tells me.

Now Moonves has used his negotiated advantage to de facto seize sole custody of The CW. I’m told “everything, every business decision, every programming decision” has to go by Les. Moonves and Nancy Tellem, the president of the CBS Paramount Network Television Entertainment Group, are together programming the 13 prime-time hours — yes, that’s all CW is giving you for its September launch. “Even Bruce acknowledges at this point that Les and Nancy run the show. This is basically a CBS takeover,” sources tell me. “Everything on UPN will have first shot at coming back.”

According to my info, only The WB’s Gilmore Girls, Smallville and Supernatural are locks. UPN adds America’s Next Top Model, Everybody Hates Chris, Girlfriends, Friday Night Smackdown! and also probably Veronica Mars. Yes, the teen sleuth show has dreadful ratings, but it was Dawn Ostroff’s baby back at UPN and, as The CW’s new entertainment prez, she’s still emotionally tied to the so-so albeit critically praised. There is one piece of good news: The execrable Charmed will vaporize. (Damn them for replacing Shannen Doherty.) All the other highly watchable WB shows such as One Tree Hill, Everwood, the new Bedford Diaries and Pepper Dennis are in limbo. This really blows for the netlet’s loyalists (I confess I have the TV tastes of a 12-year-old girl. I still mourn Beverly Hills, 90210.) In the beginning back in 1995, the WB was planned as a dumping ground for Warner TV pilots and series that didn’t get picked up by the major networks. But, soon, The WB and UPN were bucking the network trend of going for the most eyeballs possible and instead targeting the younger 18-to-34 demographic and African-Americans.

The WB even entered the all-but-abandoned arena of family prime-time programming. Long-running Seventh Heaven is still so popular — with 5.2 mil viewers per week, the most-watched show on either The WB or UPN this season — that it could wind up on The CW schedule next fall despite the heavy hype that this is its last season. With that under its belt, The WB then allowed the Family Friendly Programming Forum, a consortium of three-dozen major advertisers anxious to cool the sex and violence heating up airwaves, to develop Gilmore Girls (weirdly a show about a single mother who had a kid in her teens), which became another hit.

It’s important to note that the vast majority of moviegoers can’t discern any difference in product after Universal Studios was sold to NBC, MGM/UA gobbled up by Sony, and Pixar bought out by Disney. But viewers of The CW won’t get to see UPN’s two separate nights of African-American-oriented programming (because that’s been halved) or The WB’s many family-friendly prime-time shows (because they’ve been axed). So two underserved network audiences who embraced the netlet duo will soon be served even less. That’s horrendous since it comes at a time when black, Latino, Asian and other minority faces are as rare on network TV as smart sitcoms. Also dispiriting is the way that The CW cherry-picked the two netlets’ affiliates in major and minor TV markets around the country. That leaves those orphaned WB and UPN stations to subsist on syndicated shows, which are programming’s nutritional equivalent of pork rinds.

When I pointed out how much worse the network landscape will be for viewers because of the above, one of the executives involved in the deal demonstrated that special sang-froid network suits reserve for any discussion about the airwaves being a vehicle for the public interest instead of just a wheelbarrow for corporate profits. “As a business move, it was the smartest [for] our company to make,” he told me. That’s because execs at CBS and Time Warner greedily expect The CW to be profitable in its first year.

In the end, the unexpected but not surprising merger of the two hobbled netlets begs the question “Why can cable television support 500 channels, yet network TV not even six?” As with most everything related to Hollywood, it’s a conundrum of money and ego complicated by the FCC’s unwillingness to police a Big Media consolidation that hampers competition and harms consumers. TV execs talked ad nauseum about the challenging ad market and declining upfront sales (literally, 10 percent of total sales just disappeared from the marketplace). Of course the “P” word used most often by network heads these days is poverty, as in pleading it because of programming. They claim original programming is now upward of $8 mil in average launch cost for 22 episodes. By contrast, TNT puts on 13 episodes of The Closer and calls it a series but doesn’t have to worry as much about advertising because so much of its revenue comes from cable operators. Yes, it’s a lousy business having to face more competition from cable and the Internet, but so are a lot of media lately. The reason why broadcasters continue to spend billions on what they know is a broken system is obvious when Will & Grace sold its first 175 shows in syndication for $700 million.

The moguls would have us believe they couldn’t afford to operate two competing netlets when the reality is they simply didn’t want to. Big difference. Both parent companies have been under tremendous pressure on Wall Street because of lagging stock prices: CBS because of its recent spinoff from Viacom, and Time Warner because of penny-pinching billionaire investor Carl Icahn.

I’ve already found out that, on the night that The WB signs off, there’ll be a nostalgic stunt: five hours of clips from the netlet’s most iconic programming. Execs even are resurrecting that singing–and-dancing ’toon mascot who croaked, Michigan J. Frog. No doubt, the TV press will write reams about this and nothing about the real story — greed over good. Here’s hoping that, one day, they grow big enough balls to stop sucking up to Moonves and start focusing on his screwing of The CW viewers.

http://www.laweekly.com/general/deadline-hollywood/screwing-the-tv-viewers/13276/

fredfa

04-27-06, 06:47 PM

The 2006-2007 Season
Fox Picks Up Two Series for 2006-07

By Christopher Lisotta TVWeek.com April 27, 2006

Fox made two series pickups Thursday, giving the green light to Sony's marriage comedy "'Til Death" and 20th Century Fox TV's political thriller drama "Vanished."

Both shows have been given 13-episode commitments for the 2006-07 season.

"'Til Death," created by Josh Goldsmith and Cathy Yuspa, stars Joely Fisher, Brad Garrett, Kat Foster and Eddie Kaye Thomas in a comedy that profiles two couples -- one recently married, the other long-term -- at different stages in their respective marriages.

"Vanished" was created by Josh Berman and follows a political conspiracy that surrounds the mysterious disappearance of a U.S. senator's wife. Ming-Na, Gale Harold, Chris Egan and Rebecca Gayheart star.

Fox gave no word on whether the shows will have a pre-season launch. At the beginning of this season, Fox found success with the early launch of its drama "Prison Break."

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=9877

fredfa

04-27-06, 07:21 PM

(Note: Notice there is no mention of the new Dick Wolf show “Conviction”.)

The 2006-2007 Season
NBC Renews all three “Law & Order” Shows

(NBC Press Release) Published: April 27, 2006

BURBANK, Calif. -- April 27, 2006 -- NBC has renewed "Law & Order," "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" and "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" for the 2006-07 season, it was announced today by Kevin Reilly, President, NBC Entertainment.

"Since 'Law & Order's' inception 16 years ago, these well-crafted series have come to define quality dramatic television," said Reilly. "All of us at NBC are grateful to Dick Wolf and his amazing team for producing these extraordinary shows, and we're glad they'll be back again next season."

"We are thrilled that we are continuing to do what this remarkable team has done so successfully for the past 16 years -- create episodes that excite, educate, disturb and sometimes, even infuriate our audiences," said Dick Wolf, creator and executive producer of the "Law & Order"-branded series.

Entering its 17th season this fall, the venerable and Emmy Award-winning "Law & Order" drama is the longest-running police series and the second longest-running drama series in the history of television. Filmed entirely on location in New York City, the drama takes a realistic look at crime, justice and the criminal justice system from the dual perspective of police investigators and prosecuting attorneys.

This season, the original "Law & Order" series (Wednesdays, 10-11 p.m. ET) is averaging a 3.5 rating, 9 share in adults 18-49 and 11.1 million viewers overall. "Law & Order" is building on its 18-49 lead-in by 38 percent in the Wednesday (10 p.m. ET) hour and is delivering the #3 most upscale audience for any primetime network drama this season (in concentration of homes with $100,000-plus incomes in its 18-49 audience).

"Law & Order" is a Wolf Films production in association with NBC Universal Television Studio. Dick Wolf is creator and executive producer; Nicholas Wootton, Matthew Penn, Peter Jankowski and Walon Green are executive producers.

"Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" is in its seventh season and the pickup will mark its eighth season. The series chronicles the life and crimes of the elite Special Victims Unit of the New York Police Department and is also filmed entirely on location in New York City and New Jersey.

"Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" (Tuesdays, 10-11 p.m. ET) is averaging a 5.0 rating, 13 share in adults 18-49 and 13.9 million viewers overall. For the season, "SVU" is NBC's #2 drama in adults 18-49 behind only "ER," and is the network's #1 drama in total viewers. "SVU" is matching its highest 18-49 rating ever for original episodes at this point in the season (a 5.6) and is winning the Tuesday (10 p.m. ET) hour in 18-49 by an average 35 percent margin.

"Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" is a Wolf Films production in association with NBC Universal Television Studio. Wolf is creator and executive producer; Neal Baer, Ted Kotcheff and Peter Jankowski are executive producers.

"Law & Order: Criminal Intent" (Sundays, 9-10 p.m. ET) is in its fifth season and celebrated its 100th episode in January. In true Sherlock Holmes fashion, the series takes viewers into the minds of criminals while the squad employs psychological approaches to solve the crimes. The drama is averaging a 3.2 rating, 7 share in adults 18-49 and 10.9 million viewers overall. "Criminal Intent" is building by 41 percent on its 18-49 lead-in for the season in the Sunday (9 p.m. ET) hour.

keenan

04-27-06, 08:12 PM

I'm glad to see L&O: CI is returning as I enjoy D'Onofrio, even if it's only every two weeks.

fredfa

04-27-06, 08:16 PM

I agree, Jim, but the other combo has been growing on me, too.

fredfa

04-27-06, 08:18 PM

TV Notebook
'Lost': Now With Extra Mystery

The 'Lost Experience' develops a related story on the Internet. The clues are everywhere.
By Maria Elena Fernandez Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 28, 2006

Get ready to get more "Lost" than ever.

Beginning Wednesday, when the popular mystery drama returns to the ABC schedule with original episodes for the entire month, fans will have new and, of course, mysterious ways to get clued into a new "Lost" world that begins on the Internet but also will take advantage of "other platforms that are out there in the real world," according to ABC executives.

The show's executive producers, Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse, have created the "Lost Experience," so assume it will be complex and addicting. But what is it exactly, and are those "other platforms" perhaps those gadgets we call cellphones and iPods?

"I'd have to kill you if I told you," joked Steve McPherson, ABC's president of prime-time entertainment. "It's an all-encompassing experience for the extremely dedicated fan who wants to extend their experience with the show beyond the weekly viewing. It's Internet, it's mythology, it's puzzle-solving and it's games. It's groundbreaking in that sense that it's never been done before, but it's hard to put it into a single sentence to describe it."

This much has been gleaned: The "Lost Experience" is a story that is related to but separate from the television series, includes the same characters, expands familiar plots and will have run its course by the beginning of next season. To enjoy the experience, you do not have to be a dedicated "Lost" viewer, and fans who do not participate on the Internet will not be at a loss when watching the show.

"You might think of it as 'Harry Potter,' " said Mike Benson, ABC's senior vice president of marketing. "You don't necessarily have to see the first one to enjoy the second one. The great thing that Carlton and Damon have done in writing this story line is that it reaches back into season one, looks at the current season and goes forward into the future."

To find the new adventure, you must watch the show's entire May 3 episode. TiVo and DVR-users be warned: There are clues in the commercials as well.

"It's TiVo-proof," Benson said. "We will surprise the audience with where and how things are placed as far as clues and content and information. The whole experience is designed to dig deep and find lots of interesting stuff."

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/la-et-lost28apr28,0,1269192,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

fredfa

04-27-06, 09:57 PM

TV Notebook
“The View” Picks Viera’s Replacement

“Access Hollywood” is reporting tonight that “ Rosie O'Donnell will be named as the newest co-host of ‘The View,’ replacing the exiting Meredith Vieira.

According to the show, ABC will reportedly make the official announcement tomorrow, Friday, April 28.

O'Donnell will replace Vieira who is leaving to replace the departing Katie Couric on NBC's ‘Today.’”

fredfa

04-28-06, 01:04 AM

Sports Business and Media
Look for Something New at the N.F.L. Draft: A Second Network

By Richard Sandomir The New York Times April 28, 2006

For 26 years, ESPN had the N.F.L. draft to itself, carrying what was once deemed a nonevent, a silly, talking-heads endeavor and the sports equivalent of a political convention. But a devoted, growing viewership long ago overcame the criticism. And still, somehow, the state of the draft expert Mel Kiper Jr.'s pompadour remains relevant.

"If any event typifies how far we've come as a company, it's the N.F.L. draft," John Wildhack, an ESPN senior vice president, said earlier this week.

Legend has it that when ESPN suggested to N.F.L. Commissioner Pete Rozelle that it carry the draft, he took leave of the marketing prescience that remade the league and responded, "Why would you want to do that?"

The popularity of ESPN's draft coverage has not been lost on the league; it has become an off-season promotional tool that brings the teams together in one athletic meat market to choose future talent in 15 minutes or less.

The five-and-a-half-hour first round of last year's draft posted a 4.3 rating (or 3.8 million households), a 13 percent leap from 2004 and an event record for ESPN.

But it is not surprising that after allowing ESPN to reap the rewards for carrying the draft since the presidency of Jimmy Carter, the N.F.L. will inaugurate draft coverage on its 30-month-old network tomorrow at 11 a.m. Eastern. This is a coming-of-age moment for the NFL Network, which has 36 million subscribers. It will also carry eight regular-season games starting this season, with Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth as the announcers.

ESPN and the NFL Network will be at Radio City Music Hall tomorrow and Sunday, their main studio sets mounted on platforms raised above orchestra seats usually reserved to watch the Rockettes dance. They will be 75 feet apart, but Eric Weinberger, the NFL Network's executive producer, jokingly said angles would be scouted to ensure that ESPN's Chris Berman was not in the background of a shot of Mike Mayock, an NFL Network analyst.

There seems to be little rivalry between the two, unlike the animosity between NBC and CBS when both covered Super Bowl I. But the draft has not begun. ESPN, which will start its coverage at noon Eastern, has the advantages of experience and 54 million more subscribers than the N.F.L.'s TV baby.

"I feel very confident that we've been the voice of record for 26 years," said Jay Rothman, who has produced ESPN's draft coverage since 1995.

In the spirit of cooperation, the networks will share the camera that shows the podium where Commissioner Paul Tagliabue will announce the picks, and they will alternate the first interview of the draft picks (ESPN will get the odd-numbered picks, NFL Network the even-numbered ones).

Each will have cameras or teleconference technology with each team.

Each will have commentators in three locations.

ESPN's draft ticker, which shows selections made and time until the next pick will not disappear during commercial breaks.

For the NFL Network, the question is how it will differentiate itself. The draft is, after all, formulaic programming: talk, wait for pick, watch clips, cover pick, analyze pick, interview pick, watch more clips, wait for next pick.

Weinberger said his goal was to show more of the draft atmosphere than ESPN usually had, to focus on how drafted players would project as pros, and not have its voices argue over who will draft whom. (The ESPN crew is adept at debating and having team officials occasionally bark at their conclusions.)

But in the end, the focus has to be on the formula. If anything sounds different, at least in Weinberger's telling, it may be the presence of Corey Chavous, a St. Louis Rams safety who has developed an obsessive sidelight for an active player, amassing player tapes to evaluate their talent.

"It's his hobby, his lifestyle," Weinberger said. "We were amazed when we first saw what Corey did two years ago."

Chavous jots player analyses in a notebook in a four-color code. "When Butch Davis saw it," Weinberger said, referring to the former Browns coach who will assess the draft from NFL Films headquarters in New Jersey, "he couldn't understand how the guy has time to do it."

Weinberger said that the NFL Network, particularly Mayock, had been analyzing the draft since September. "Mike's been doing this on TV every day," he said. "Kiper is like a groundhog, who comes out six weeks a year."

Although no other networks are permitted live coverage from Radio City, SportsNet New York will have live Jets draft shows from its studio across Sixth Avenue from Radio City (11 a.m. to noon and 5:30 to 6 p.m.). SNY's panel will include the newly hired Ray Lucas, a former Jets quarterback; the analyst John Murphy; and the former Jets linebacker Greg Buttle.

There is no shortage of people willing to yak about the draft.

NOTES

Fox Sports is expected to hire Lou Piniella, the former Yankees, Reds, Mariners and Devil Rays manager, as an analyst.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/28/sports/football/28sand.html?pagewanted=print

fredfa

04-28-06, 01:41 AM

TV Notebook
CBS puts eye on Wallace for career retrospective work

Tribute set for '60 Minutes' host

By Paul J. Gough The Hollywood Reporter April 28, 2006

NEW YORK -- After decades of asking the questions of "60 Minutes," Mike Wallace's colleagues are turning the tables on him.

Wallace, who announced in the spring that he would step down from a regular spot on "60 Minutes," will be the subject of a retrospective Sunday, May 21, on the show he began co-hosting in 1968. The retrospective is titled: "I'm Mike Wallace: A '60 Minutes' Tribute."

CBS said the hourlong tribute to the TV legend, soon turning 88, will feature an interview with Wallace as well as parts of interviews he has done with the Ayatollah Khomeini, Mel Brooks, Vladimir Putin and Johnny Carson, among others. It's also going to include rare footage.

Meanwhile, CBS News refused to confirm or deny a report Thursday that CNN correspondent Anderson Cooper would become a contributor to "60 Minutes" while remaining as the host of "Anderson Cooper 360º" on CNN. Cooper has contributed to "60 Minutes Wednesday" when it was on the air.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002424593

Marcus Carr

04-28-06, 01:51 AM

jim tressler

04-28-06, 08:42 AM

Thank goodness for the MUTE button ... Collinsworth is OK, but Gumble is an A$$ - plain and simple.

Sports On TV
Bryant Gumbel, Cris Collinsworth to announce NFL Network games

(nfl.com)

(April 26, 2006) -- Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth

fredfa

04-28-06, 10:07 AM

Sports on TV
Jackson Didn't Want Fuss as He Leaves ABC

By Larry Stewart Los Angeles Times Staff Writer April 28, 2006

Before Keith Jackson's previous retirement, after the 1998 college football season, there were gifts, speeches, news conferences — a season-long farewell tour.

Six months later, offered a schedule of mostly West Coast games, which involved considerably less travel, he decided to unretire.

Jackson, 77, has retired again, this time for sure, he says, and this time amid little fanfare.

He said he had pretty much decided by the middle of last season but held off announcing it until late Wednesday when he called a reporter in New York and another in Los Angeles. That was it. He didn't want anyone to make a fuss.

Thursday, Jackson said, "I picked this week because, with so much going on, the NFL draft and everything else, I thought you'd probably ignore it."

Hard to ignore. Jackson, known as Mr. College Football, is a broadcasting legend.

Jackson spent 39 consecutive years announcing college football for ABC, after spending one year, 1970, in the "Monday Night Football" booth. His broadcasting career has spanned 54 years.

Jackson, at home in Sherman Oaks on Thursday nursing a sore forehead — he had a basal cell carcinoma removed Wednesday — said he had been fielding quite a few phone calls.

But, he added, "I think the big reaction will come when the season opens Sept. 2. Maybe a few folks will notice the old country voice is missing. I'll be fishing or playing golf that day in British Columbia."

He and his wife, Turi Ann, have a second home there.

Jackson, born in rural Georgia, attended Washington State and has lived in Southern California since 1964. However, he retained his Southern accent, which contributed to his legendary status.

Now the question is, who replaces Jackson? His choice is commentating partner and close friend Dan Fouts.

"I think Dan would be able to easily make the transition to play by play," Jackson said, "I hope they give him the chance."

Fouts, reached at his home in Oregon, said he had talked about making the switch with Norby Williamson, the executive in charge of ESPN and ABC announcers.

Fouts did television play by play on San Diego Charger exhibition games for several years in the late 1980s and on San Francisco 49er exhibitions for a couple of years after that.

Williamson, who said he had tried to persuade Jackson not to retire, said, "No one can replace Keith Jackson.

"This will not be a one-for-one replacement. ESPN and ABC Sports have a deep roster on college football play-by-play including Brent Musburger, Brad Nessler and Mike Patrick."

Of Fouts' desire to try play by play, Williamson said, "Dan has been a valued contributor for a long time, and we will be supportive of him as he wants to make the transition from one of the game's top analysts to a play-by-play role."

Another Tough Act to Follow

Fox is trying to replace James Brown as the host of its NFL pregame show, because Brown has gone to CBS.

Fox has auditioned Jeanne Zelasko, Chris Myers, Curt Menefee, and Kevin Frazier, formerly of ESPN and now with "Entertainment Tonight."

Pam Oliver figures to be another candidate.

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-sp-tvcolumn28apr28,0,2186920,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

archiguy

04-28-06, 10:12 AM

Thank goodness for the MUTE button ... Collinsworth is OK, but Gumble is an A$$ - plain and simple.

Gumble may be a jerk at times, but he's an excellent play-by-play man, a real pro's pro.

You know, it's funny that we get in arguments around here all the time when it comes to football commentators - some think Madden is still the greatest, some think he should have retired years ago. Some think Al Michaels is the best P-b-P guy, some think he's an arrogant pr*ck (Archie raises his hand). Heck, I like Joey T., and always get lambasted for that unpopular view.

But in basketball there is no such controversy. Best P-b-P guy? Marvellous Marv, no question. Best color guy? Doug Collins, again no question. Heck, I'd watch the Knicks play the Sonics if those two are calling the game, and actually enjoy it. :cool: :D

kjpjr

04-28-06, 11:56 AM

Or you could have TW as your provider and it becomes a non issue since we don't have NFL Network and the rumor mill says we won't. Thanks TW for again not giving us what we might want to watch!

fredfa

04-28-06, 12:00 PM

Thursday’s prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted at the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

04-28-06, 12:16 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Some worry wrinkles for NBC hit 'Earl'

By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Apr 28, 2006

“My Name is Earl” remains one of NBC’s most-watched shows, but far fewer people are watching it than were a few months ago.

Last night’s episode of “Earl” posted a 4.1 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 at 9 p.m., down 13 percent from the 4.7 it had averaged over its last four original episodes.

Even more troubling, last night’s rating among 18-49s was off 21 percent from the 5.2 rating the show averaged in its Thursday premiere back in January, after moving over from Tuesday nights.

The 4.1 was down 36 percent from the 6.4 the Tuesday night series premiere earned in September.

“Earl’s” move to Thursdays initially helped NBC on the night, combining with “The Office” in the 9 p.m. hour to replace the sinking “Apprentice.” But the show’s ratings have been on a slide over the last couple months, as have Thursdays in general on NBC.

A two-week layoff for the Winter Olympics in February zapped some of “Earl’s” momentum. And last week was a rerun as well. Plus, people may be confused by the “Earl” reruns now airing at 8:30 p.m. in place of “Four Kings,” thinking that originals are finished.

And because of “Earl’s” stand-alone format, which does not provide serialized storylines, viewers likely feel they can tune out and back in again without missing anything.

Too, the timeslot has a fair bit of competition. Fox’s “The O.C.” and ABC’s “American Inventor,” though both also fading, air opposite “Earl,” as does CBS’s major hit “CSI.” Last night, “Earl” ranked No. 2 in the 9 p.m. timeslot behind only “CSI,” which posted an 8.0 during its first half hour.

Meanwhile, CBS finished first for the night among 18-49s with a 6.6 average rating and an 18 share. NBC was second at 4.0/11, Fox third at 2.3/6, ABC fourth at 2.1/6, WB fifth at 1.7/5, Univision sixth at 1.5/4 and UPN seventh at 1.0/3.

CBS led each hour of the night, starting with a 5.8 rating at 8 p.m. for “Survivor.” NBC was second with a 2.8 for “Will & Grace” (2.8) and a repeat of “Earl” (2.8), Fox third with a 2.2 for an hour of “That ‘70s Show” and WB fourth with a 2.0 for “Smallville.” ABC was fifth that hour with a 1.6 for the first of two hours of “American Inventor,” Univision sixth with a 1.5 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and UPN seventh with a 1.1 for “Everybody Hates Chris” (1.3) and “Love Inc.” (0.9).

At 9 p.m. CBS led the way with an 8.4 rating for “CSI,” easily the night’s top-rated show in the demo. NBC remained second with a 3.9 for “Earl” (4.1) and “The Office” (3.8), with ABC third with a 3.0 for its second hour of “Inventor,” Fox fourth with a 2.4 for “The O.C.” and Univision fifth with a 1.5 for “Barrera de Amor.” WB came in sixth during the hour with a 1.4 for “Supernatural” and UPN seventh with a 0.9 for “Eve” (0.9) and “Cuts” (0.9).

And at 10 p.m. CBS completed its nightly sweep with a 5.5 for “Without a Trace.” NBC was second with a 5.2 for “ER,” ABC third with a 1.9 for the sliding “Commander in Chief” and Univision fourth with a 1.6 for “Aqui y Ahora.”

CBS also led the night among households with a 13.1 average rating and a 21 share. NBC was second at 6.2/10, ABC third at 4.2/7, Fox fourth at 3.5/6, WB fifth at 2.5/4, Univision sixth at 1.9/3 and UPN seventh at 1.6/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_4391.asp

AAF

04-28-06, 02:04 PM

I'm glad to see L&O: CI is returning as I enjoy D'Onofrio, even if it's only every two weeks.

Count me in the other camp. I prefer Logan and Barek, or even Logan and Eames, or better yet Logan, Barek and Eames...oh wait they did that show on HBO already.

Never mind. :-P

fredfa

04-28-06, 04:14 PM

The 2006-2007 Season
NBC Renews three more shows

(NBC Press Release) April 28, 2006

BURBANK, Calif. -– April 28, 2006 -– NBC has picked up three of its hit dramas in "Medium," "Crossing Jordan" and "Las Vegas" for the 2006-07 season, it was announced today by Kevin Reilly, President, NBC Entertainment.

"These three shows have A+ creative auspices and some of the most loyal audiences on television," said Reilly. "I'm thrilled that we can count on them again next season."

For the 2005-06 season-to-date, "Medium" (Mondays, 10-11 p.m. ET) is delivering a 4.1 rating, 10 share in adults 18-49 and 11.2 million viewers overall. "Medium" is generating the most upscale audience of any regular series in the Monday (10 p.m. ET) hour (in concentration of homes with $100,000-plus incomes in its 18-49 audience).

"Crossing Jordan" (Sundays, 10-11 p.m. ET) is averaging a 3.3 rating, 8 share in adults 18-49 and 11.0 million viewers overall so far this season. "Crossing Jordan" is improving by 6 percent on its 18-49 lead-in in the Sunday (10 p.m. ET) hour.

"Las Vegas" (Fridays, 9-10 p.m. ET) is delivering a 3.7 rating, 9 share in adults 18-49 and 11.0 million viewers overall so far this season. Since shifting to Friday nights on March 3, "Las Vegas" has improved the time period by 21 percent in adults 18-49 versus NBC's non-sports season average up to that point.

From Emmy Award-winning executive producer, creator and director Glenn Gordon Caron ("Moonlighting"), the chilling drama "Medium" nears the end of its second season and now will return for a third. Inspired by the real-life story of research medium Allison DuBois, Emmy winner Patricia Arquette ("Stigmata," "Flirting with Disaster") stars as a young wife and mother who, since childhood, has been struggling to make sense of her dreams and visions of dead people.

As a part-time consultant to the district attorney's office, Allison uses her psychic abilities which consist of talking to dead people, seeing the future and reading people's minds, to solve violent and horrifying crimes that have remained mysteries to her boss D.A. Devalos (Miguel Sandoval, "The Division") and others within the criminal justice system. Jake Weber ("Meet Joe Black") stars as Allison's supportive husband Joe, and Sofia Vassilieva ("Eloise at the Plaza") and Maria Lark ("10.5") star as Ariel and Bridget, the two eldest DuBois children. David Cubitt also stars as Detective Lee Scanlon and Madison and Miranda Carabello play youngest daughter Marie DuBois.

For her performance in this role, Arquette won an Emmy Award in the Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series category after the telecast of the initial 16 episodes. Most recently, she received nominations for Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild Awards this year for her portrayal of DuBois.

Currently in its fifth season, "Crossing Jordan" will be celebrating its 100th episode on May 7 and looks forward to a sixth with its popular cadre of coroners. Jill Hennessy ("Law & Order") stars as Jordan Cavanaugh, the beautiful, smart and fearless Boston medical examiner who investigates disturbing topical crimes and offenses.

In the morgue, Jordan works under the guidance of Dr. Garrett Macy (Miguel Ferrer, "Traffic") along with criminalist Nigel (Steve Valentine, "The Muse"), forensic entomologist "Bug" (Ravi Kapoor, "Gideon's Crossing") and grief counselor Lily Lebowski (Kathryn Hahn, "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days"). Jerry O'Connell ("Jerry Maguire") and Leslie Bibb also star as detectives, who the coroners rely upon to put in the legwork to hunt down perpetrators of these crimes.

The fast-paced, sexy drama "Las Vegas" is currently in its third season. From Gary Scott Thompson, the writer of the hit film "The Fast and the Furious," the series follows the elite Las Vegas team charged with maintaining the supervision and security of one of Sin City's hottest casinos.

Oscar and Golden Globe nominee James Caan ("The Godfather," "Misery") stars as Ed Deline, the head of the glamorous Montecito Resort & Casino. With his head of security Danny McCoy (Josh Duhamel, "All My Children") -- a former U.S. Marine and Las Vegas native -- they deal with card-counting cheaters, costly streaks of random luck and rival casinos stealing their big-money players. Rounding out this cast of high rollers is Ed's daughter Delinda (Molly Sims, "Starsky and Hutch"), Mary Connell (Nikki Cox, "Nikki"), Mike Cannon (James Lesure, "For Your Love") and Samantha "Sam" Jane (Vanessa Marcil, "Beverly Hills 90210").

fredfa

04-28-06, 04:22 PM

The 2006-2007 Season
Lifetime Axes Missing from Fall Lineup

By Anthony Crupi MediaWeek.com APRIL 28, 2006 -

Lifetime’s weekly FBI drama series will be, well, Missing from the lineup, as the network has not elected to pick it up for a fourth season.

Missing, which starred Vivica A. Fox and Mark Consuelos as members of an elite FBI missing-persons unit, averaged around 2.2 million viewers during its three-season run.The final episode ran February 5, 2006.

A spokesperson for Lifetime said that while Missing “ran its course,” the network will roll out new original programming over the next few months, including the drama Angela’s Eyes, from the producers of the Academy Award-winning movie Crash, and Lovespring International, a half-hour comedy from actor Eric McCormack’s Big Cattle production company and Missing producer, Lionsgate.

Slated for a summer debut, Lovespring was the first scripted series commitment made by Lifetime Entertainment Services president of entertainment Susanne Daniels since she joined the network last fall.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002425083

fredfa

04-28-06, 04:39 PM

The 2006-2007 Season
Networks look to crime for guaranteed pay

By Phil Rosenthal Chicago Tribune Media Columnist April 28, 2006

Like putting a bunch of cops on the street, putting a bunch of crime-solvers on the air offers network programmers a sense of safety, real or imagined.

So prime time will remain crime time, at least for another year.

That NBC on Thursday announced renewals for all three of executive producer Dick Wolf's "Law & Order"-branded procedural crime dramas--"Law & Order," "Law & Order: SVU" and "Law & Order: Criminal Intent"--is hardly big news in and of itself.

But added to Fox's decision last month to renew the rookie "Bones" and CBS' even earlier announcement that it will be bringing back "Without a Trace," "NCIS," "Cold Case," "Numb3rs," "Criminal Minds" and all three "CSI" series, we're now assured of at least a dozen procedural crime dramas on the major broadcast networks next TV season.

That's a lot by nearly any standard. It's only one less hour than the entire weekly prime-time lineup The CW--the CBS and Warner Bros. successor to UPN and The WB--intends to air beginning this fall. Imagine if NBC hadn't made the mistake of cutting loose Wolf's "Law & Order: Trial by Jury" a year ago.

And the schedules aren't set yet. There may be even more of the mystery sub-genre.

Network execs have maintained that the audience will tell them when the saturation point is reached on procedural crime dramas. But the audience has made it clear it's more attached to some in the genre than others.

"CSI: Crime Scene Investigation," "Without a Trace" and "CSI: Miami" are three of the five top-rated scripted shows on TV so far this season. But "Bones," even with mega-hit "American Idol" next to it, finished last week in 27th place and is averaging less than 9 million viewers this season.

What we're seeing is a tense TV industry, hoping to score at least a modest increase in revenues despite the Internet siphoning off both viewers and advertisers, leaving some room to take chances with its fall lineups but tacitly acknowledging that same is safe.

This past season NBC has used the original "Law & Order," now in its 16th season, as a bit of a punching bag to protect newbie Nielsen weaklings such as "Heist" on the assumption that its loyal fans give the old timer resilience.

What's actually happened is that a long-running show that only four years ago was the fifth-most-watched program on network TV, with an average of 18.7 million viewers, is now barely in the top 40, with 11.1 million.

Wolf always proudly points out that his "Law & Order" empire--arguably the most valuable programming asset in NBC Universal's portfolio--brings in $1 billion in ads annually, between network broadcast episodes and cable reruns. That counts for something.

He likes to describe his relationship with the company as a long-term marriage. "There are stresses and strains intermittently, but we are kind of stuck with each other," he has said, especially when "Trial by Jury" is mentioned. In other words, there's far too much at stake to even consider a divorce.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/tv/chi-0604280317apr28,1,5385398.column?coll=chi-ent_tv-hed

fredfa

04-28-06, 04:43 PM

Sports On TV
Bradshaw Ranks Tops as TV Sports Personality

By John Consoli MediaWeek.com APRIL 28, 2006 -

Terry Bradshaw of Fox NFL Sunday pre-game show and former Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback, is the highest-ranking TV sports personality, according to the Davie-Brown Index, which is made up of a 1.5 million member research panel that evaluates TV celebrities' awareness, appeal and relevance to a brand's image and their influence on consumer buying habits.

Rounding out the top five are NBC's Sunday Night Football commentator John Madden, ESPN football commentator Mike Ditka, HBO Real Sports host and NFL Network announcer Bryant Gumbel, and Fox NFL game commentator Troy Aikman.

There is some irony at the bottom of the list though. Ernie Johnson, host of TNT's Inside the NBA, is ranked 1414 overall out of 1500 celebrities in the entire DBI Index, with an awareness factor of just over 5 percent among American consumers. But, among those who know him, he ranks as one of the most appealing TV sports personalities, ranked fourth in "appeal." Only ESPN's Dan Patrick, sideline reporter Michele Tafoya and ABC/ESPN's John Saunders rank ahead of him.

Saunders is the most "likable" TV sports personality in the index, while Patrick is the "most trusted."

Ranking as the least-trusted TV sports personality is YES Network's and TNT's basketball announcer Marv Albert.

The Davie-Brown Index was created by Hollywood marketing firm, Davie-Brown Entertainment.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002424938

fredfa

04-28-06, 08:05 PM

A Critical View:
Truly a medical anomaly

Dr. Gregory House's uniquely peevish allure gives the Fox series a stellar prognosis.
By Ellen Baskin (Special to The Los Angeles Times) April 30, 2006

When 19th century English cleric Charles Caleb Colton wrote "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery," he had no way of envisioning a 21st century universe where "Law & Order" spinoffs would number nearly enough to qualify for their own cable network. Television is such a hungry beast it's not fair to expect originality around every prime-time corner.

But every so often, despite formula demands and limitations, TV writers deliver a truly singular character we've not encountered before. Such was the case when "House" premiered on Fox in November 2004; from the moment the eponymous lead opened his mouth, it was obvious that the brilliant Dr. Gregory House (Hugh Laurie) was no generic made-for-television medicine man.

As abrasive as he is articulate, House cares little for politeness and even less for political correctness. An equal opportunity offender, he says out loud what most of us hardly dare think, and his no-holds-barred sarcasm would surely have blown the stethoscope out of Marcus Welby's ears. It's waiting to hear what Dr. House is going to say next — to patients, to his telegenic posse of racially and sexually balanced co-workers, to anyone unlucky enough to cross his acerbic path — that keeps a growing audience coming back for more.

The relationships among staff members at Princeton-Plainsboro Teaching Hospital have shown symptoms of interpersonal development, but when it comes down to it, "House" is essentially a well-written variation on the same theme from one episode to the next. It's a stand-alone malady-of-the-week kind of show, with a hearty dose of Holmesian mystery added to the medical mix. So if it's pretty much the same old same-old week after week, why are people watching in such impressive numbers?

What show creator David Shore has spawned in House is a three-dimensional, grown-up character — petulant outbursts notwithstanding. In part because we see the same people week after week, television has evolved into a more character-driven medium than feature films, where such a fully formed human-like being is a rarity — and let's face it, they're not even all that easy to find in literary fiction these days. Tony Soprano certainly fits the one-of-a-kind bill. Dr. House also compels viewers to come back for a weekly dose — and we don't even have to cough up premium HBO bucks to see him.

Television has seen its fair share of curmudgeonly medicos — from "Ben Casey" to "Quincy" to Mark Craig (William Daniels) on "St. Elsewhere" to Mandy Patinkin's irascible "Chicago Hope" brain surgeon — but House has elevated the sardonic retort to a laugh-out-loud art form. He suffers neither fools nor wise men gladly; this guy doesn't even soften up much around a doe-eyed child. House's biting catchphrases haven't entered into the cultural vernacular, but EBay merchants are doing a brisk business selling T-shirts emblazoned with such House-isms as "Everybody Lies," "Perseverance Does Not Equal Worthiness" and "Humanity is Overrated."

House genuinely doesn't care if people like him, by episode's end he hasn't had a warm and fuzzy epiphany, and this is precisely why audiences love him. (The dazzling blue eyes don't hurt, either.) He limps — certainly a metaphor for his wounded psyche as well as the physical manifestation of serious injury — but wields his cane more like a weapon than a sign of weakness. Nevertheless, for all the scorn House heaps upon those around him, there's a magnetic appeal to Laurie's portrayal; he didn't top People magazine's list of sexiest TV doctors for his diagnostic derring-do. (Did I mention the dazzling blue eyes?)

It's a career-defining role for Laurie, a Cambridge-educated Brit best known in this country until now for playing effete, ineffectual types such as the dad in the "Stuart Little" films, Vincente Minnelli in the miniseries "Life With Judy Garland: Me and My Shadows" and Bertie Wooster in "Jeeves and Wooster" on PBS (which costarred his longtime writing partner Stephen Fry).

Dr. House is always the smartest guy in the room — and can be counted on to be the first to point this out. There's lots of arcane med-speak on the show, but the good doctor expects those around him to keep up, colleagues and viewing audience alike. He must be doing something right: In addition to curing nearly all of his patients, House's namesake show ranks in or near the Nielsen Top 10. No doubt the "American Idol" lead-in helps, but Simon Cowell, who before House was the network's reigning prince of put-downs, was nowhere in sight at the beginning of the season and "House" was still a big hit.

Watching House, the audience can't help but wait for the moment when we see the mushy soft-boiled egg beneath the hard shell. But he hasn't cracked. The closest was when House was briefly reunited with his true love, played by Sela Ward. But even that was short-lived, and then House did the uncharacteristically unselfish thing and sent her back to her husband, a gesture reminiscent of Rick in "Casablanca" — one of the big screen's classic reluctant romantics.

So what's the message in all this for TV producers? If you're going to create a show that's something of a one-trick pony you'd better make sure you have the right pony and a hell of a trick. Which is exactly what you get with Hugh Laurie in the "House."

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-ca-monitor30apr30,0,6878984,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

fredfa

04-28-06, 09:40 PM

The 2005-2006 TV Season
Ask Matt

(from the Ask (TV Critic) Matt (Roush) column at TVGuide.com
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: While this topic crosses over into film territory, it could have major ramifications for a certain top TV series. It was recently announced that Lost cocreator J.J. Abrams is now going to direct a prequel Star Trek movie for release in 2008. And he's bringing along producers and current show-runners Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk as copilots on this adventure (though in a reduced capacity). I personally think this is very bad news for Lost fans. While I feel that Lindelof and Burk have been handling the series quite well, there was a sense of excitement for Abrams' return to a series that seems strongest when he and Lindelof are conspiring. Now it seems like he won't ever be back. And to make matters worse, Lindelof and Burk are now going to have added distraction. Season 3 is such a vital season for a show like this; the last thing Lost needs is its three brains distracted by Kirk and Spock. Additionally, Abrams is one of the brightest, most creative people in television, having built two franchises that are superior to most movies. And his first two film-directing forays are television remakes? It sounds lazy and unoriginal. It looks like he's going to make Mission: Impossible 3 his own, but does anyone really even care about Star Trek anymore? What are your thoughts? — Jason

Matt Roush: Honestly, Jason, you do not want to rattle the cage of Star Trek fans by suggesting no one cares anymore. While I, too, would prefer that J.J. spent a little more time on small-screen matters, I can't blame him for pursuing his movie career at full speed while he's white-hot. And far from being lazy and unoriginal concepts, sequels and prequels to some of the most enduring pop-culture franchises in entertainment history present a challenge, and being asked to work on them is an honor, I would think. There's no shame in that line of work, unless they produce junk, I suppose. But where Lost is concerned (and that's my main concern as well, since I don't get out to the movies much), I agree it's a risk for the show to have so many of its creative captains otherwise engaged. On a week-to-week basis, the show can do fine churning its compelling character-based stories. But I would hope Abrams, Lindelof, et al would return to the fold whenever the time comes for pivotal events and revelations. It's at those critical times when having the original brain trust at the helm will be most necessary. I'm not particularly worried about this show just yet, but given how hot the Lost crew has become, it is a valid concern. For questions about the creative aspects of Lost, keep reading.

________________________________________

Question: Nearly every week, someone in your column is complaining about Lost. They're upset that we don't yet know what the numbers mean, or they want to know why no one wants to get off the island anymore or something else. Why haven't people realized by now that Lost isn't about the island, or the hatch, or the numbers or any of that? It's about the people who are on the island, or in the hatch or know the numbers. Why not just sit back and enjoy the ride from week to week? — Tony

Matt Roush: That has been my point all along. One echoed by Brian K.: "I may be in the minority, but I don't want to know much of anything that's truly behind the island from Lost. At this point, I do not believe any full explanation could satisfy me or the majority of the fans, even as much as they think they want it. I remember when John Doe was canceled and the creators decided to release info about where the story was going and where John's abilities came from. Like many others, I thought to myself, 'Well, glad it got taken off before that could happen.' Let me love the characters' histories, given to us little by little. The mysterious island is just gravy." Hear, hear.

Sandy writes in with a broader perspective: "I'm not the Lost fanatic you are (although I do watch every new episode on broadcast TV), but for a long time people have been claiming the show has jumped the shark and it's losing viewers because of the slow and intricate plotting. Actually, the Nielsen ratings don't indicate the true viewership for the show. It was one of the first shows made available on iPods and now I hear the producers are creating ancillary product for cell phones. I do think the show has great potential to last for years because ABC wants all the revenue it can squeeze from it!" Hey, whatever works.

And finally, Larry B. asks: "Do you think Lost is a critic-proof, perfect show? I ask because it seems when anyone writes in with a criticism of the show, whether small or large, you get very defensive in your response. Now, to a large part I agree with you: I love Lost immensely and liken it to a great, weird novel. There are very few episodes that I have disliked, and I hope it lasts for a while. However, my only minor quibble is that not much has happened over this season compared to last. Looking at the whole season, we had the tailies join, some dust-ups with the Others, Henry and the hatch and...? It also could use a little more group interaction among the main cast — something we saw more of in Season 1. So, again, these are just the tweaks I would make to a great program. Would you make any, or is it perfect as is?"

Look, Lost isn't perfect. No show is. More episodes or opportunities for the core cast to interact makes sense. It is weird when major characters, especially those in such a tight geographic setting, just vanish for weeks on end. But there are so many characters and stories to service here, not to mention the show's production demands, that I get why that happens. And I don't buy the argument that too little has happened this season. Adding the new castaways (leading to that brilliant episode condensing their first days into a single hour), the mystery surrounding Henry Gale, the disappearance of Walt and then Michael, the hatch itself becoming a major character with its own mysteries? That's plenty to dwell on for weeks if not months.

________________________________________

Question: I live in the New York metro area and just found out Tuesday that Veronica Mars won't be on because of a basketball game. This is the second week in a row this has happened. Luckily, last week UPN repeated the episode on Wednesday. This week, no such luck. I will now have to wait until Sunday night to view the episode. Meanwhile, I'll have to try to avoid all online postings/references to this week's episode. I also heard of this happening in L.A. a couple of weeks ago. These are two of the largest markets in the country! Why are the local affiliates allowed to do this? Will CW take this into account before they cancel the show due to low ratings? How are viewers supposed to know when their show is on? I just happened to look at my local online listings, but after last week's episode, there was a commercial advertising this week's ep airing on Tuesday. At the height of the season, just when this show is really climaxing. This just seems rude! — Mike

Matt Roush: I live in New York as well and feel your pain. But local sports preemptions on formerly independent stations (which describes most UPN as well as WB affiliates) are a fact of life and an important part of these companies' bottom line. We're just lucky we get that extra replay, or else Veronica Mars would probably be relegated to the wee hours when no one can watch it live. Believe me, UPN (and, by extension, CW) knows in what markets the show is being preempted for sports (which the stations pony up huge fees to broadcast) and that is taken into account in analyzing the ratings, such as they are.

________________________________________

Question: I am starting to love The New Adventures of Old Christine with Julia Louis-Dreyfus. To be honest, I was always hoping all the post-Seinfeld shows would fail, only because all the critics hype up their shows. The difference is that this one is actually funny and cute. I have a question, though. Why do they always have her ex-husband showing up, helping himself to stuff and walking in unannounced? That wouldn't happen to families outside of a sitcom. So what is actually supposed to be the premise? I am a little confused. J.L-D is adorable. — Nick

Matt Roush: You root against the Seinfeld cast's shows because of critical hype? Seems to me we tend to hate (for good reason) most of the shows they've done since. Christine is a notable exception. It's not an important or great comedy, just an agreeably silly and very watchable one. One of the things I like best about the show is her ex, Richard (nicely played by Clark Gregg). One of the key elements of the show's setup is that she and Richard have remained close and friendly, actually enjoying a better and healthier relationship than when they were married. His relationship with "new Christine" (who's too nice to despise) has complicated things, which is where much of the comedy comes in. And I agree, Julia is adorable.

________________________________________

Question: I just wanted to say that I nearly broke a rib laughing during last Sunday's Sopranos after the way Lauren Bacall got jacked, not to mention her subsequent reaction to it. Also, I guess I'm the only fan out there who isn't upset with the way the season is progressing. I know it's slow going right now, but a lot of good shows in the past have taken their time building up to a thrilling conclusion, like X-Files, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, etc. — John W.

Matt Roush: I am loving this season beyond measure. To me, this spring there has been all the rest of TV, and then there's The Sopranos: so much richer and more real (with, I guess, the exception of this hilarious Hollywood detour) than anything else around. The episode about Vito's gay life being exposed was truly a landmark episode, illuminating this season's theme of how everyone's life and potential have been corrupted by exposure to the Sopranos (from Vito to the poor schnook who hung himself in the premiere to pathetic Artie Bucco). I was both horrified and highly amused by Christopher mugging Lauren Bacall. I even blogged about it, musing that Tony would flip out if he knew Christopher had slugged Bogie's widow. Even if The Sopranos isn't building to a slam-bang conclusion, the journey this season is so deeply interesting to me that I am only impatient for the next episode to air, regardless of where it's heading.

________________________________________

Question: I'd just like to say that I was one of the few who did not enjoy Rob Lowe's return to The West Wing. I think fans of the show have adapted to the post-Sorkin period enough to enjoy it, but let's not kid ourselves. Many parts of the show have fallen in quality (particularly the dialogue). Bringing back Sorkin-era characters just makes them seem stilted and serves to remind me of that drop in quality (whereas I'd become accustomed to it beforehand). I mean, I honestly winced at the dialogue between Sam and Josh in the first scene. I really don't mean any offense to the current writing staff, but they shouldn't put themselves into a position where there's a direct comparison between now and the first four years because they'll always come up short. — Calvin

Matt Roush: I think you're being a little hard on what was all around a pretty enjoyable episode, but there's no question that even an improved West Wing is a diminished show when you compare it to the glittery brilliance of its early seasons (even latter-day Sorkin episodes, especially toward the end of that fourth season, didn't quite measure up). I happen to like the feeling of closure we're getting with reappearances of characters like Sam, and I didn't feel he was being overused in this episode. But there's a reason that, even as I have enjoyed the countdown to the end of the show, I wouldn't consider putting it on my top-10 list. Calvin pretty much nailed it.

Referencing the same episode, Mark writes: "Is Bradley Whitford the most underappreciated actor on TV (if you say 'no,' it will only confirm that he is)?"

Way to answer your own question. I thought he was terrific in last week's episode, and especially loved the Josh-Donna interplay as she took the reins of this relationship so it doesn't fall apart. Still, it's hard to say someone's underappreciated when he has won an Emmy and years of acclaim for this breakthrough role. Given that he's already lined up his next gig on Aaron Sorkin's new show for NBC, I think it's pretty clear he's a valued network asset. But if your point is that we shouldn't take him for granted, then I agree wholeheartedly.

________________________________________

Question: How often have you seen a show start off mediocre or as a disaster and then become a surprise hit? I can think of only one. Touched by an Angel was written off as dead after its first season and surprised everyone by being renewed. The second surprise came when, after being renewed, it suddenly came out of nowhere and became a top-10 hit. Do you really think Commander in Chief could pull that off? — Mike

Matt Roush: Commander in Chief, no. Its best bet would be to be regarded as a possible utility player if the show could be successfully retooled. But a signature hit for the network? That's looking more and more like the longest of long shots. To answer your broader question, there are many examples of shows that struggled at first but went on to become giant hits: Cheers, Seinfeld, Everybody Loves Raymond, The Practice. But none of those shows had quite the backstage turmoil that marked Chief's turbulent freshman year.

Also on Commander, Ryan S. remarks: "I personally would really like the show to be renewed if for no other reason than the way its timeline is in the show, that an election year is coming up. The evilness that is Speaker of the House Templeton duking it out with Mac, I think that could be great television. Just see how excellent West Wing has been with its election episodes driving a very good final season. Your thoughts?"

Makes sense. If Commander in Chief were to be renewed, it would need to be driven by a dynamic story arc, and you couldn't do better than this conflict.

________________________________________

Question: Even though Scrubs, Grey's Anatomy and ER are all different (comedy, dramedy, drama), one tends to compare the hospital-based shows. I have to say, Scrubs is hands-down the best. ER is too serious — I feel like over 80 percent of the people coming into that ER die and it takes too much out of me emotionally. Each episode is handled really well, but as you said, the characters tend to fall into stereotypes (apparently only Joss Whedon understands the concept of having a character evolve). Grey's is the mix of the two (not that Scrubs doesn't have its serious moments, which, by the way, affect me a lot more than Grey's or ER). However, Grey's just doesn't excite me that much. The show is more about the love life of the interns/attendings rather than a hospital and its issues. I know every show on air stays on because of romantic/lusting tension, but even if you took out J.D. and Elliot's flings, there is a lot more behind Scrubs than that tension. I guess my point is, while I do watch Grey's and enjoy it for the most part, I feel its huge following is because of the who-is-sleeping-with-whom aspect. — Mili

Matt Roush: To each their own. I love Scrubs as well — that's no secret — but I also think it shares a bond with Grey's, which has exploded for a reason. Not just because of sex, but because of its heart. Both of these shows are so easy to love and make me feel great for watching, and are blessed with incredible, very diverse casts. To reduce Grey's to the mere level of an oversexed soap opera does not take into account how smartly it weaves its medical cases into its personal dramas, and how well it achieves its results. Not to mention the powerful chemistry of its various couples. Grey's is an almost perfectly satisfying show right now, but then, so is Scrubs. No reason to use one to club the other.

________________________________________

Question: Let me get this straight. The Palladinos write an incredibly bad season of Gilmore Girls, then drop the show, leaving others to clean up. Unless this show does a 180 next year, I won't be watching. Also, why would I be interested in any new projects by Amy Sherman-Palladino and Daniel Palladino? — Julie

Matt Roush: All concerned Gilmore Girls fans should check out Michael Ausiello's newsy chat with Amy Sherman-Palladino and Daniel Palladino in his recent Ausiello Report. What that made clear to me is how complicated the business of making TV really is. That said, I can understand a reluctance to stick with Gilmore Girls. I'm struggling to make it to the end of this season myself. But why anyone would shun a future project from these creators is beyond me. Gilmore Girls has provided such genuine and original pleasures for so long, I can only hope Amy and Dan get a chance to realize another creative dream before too much time passes. They may not be perfect, but they're clearly gifted. I can't wait to see what they do next.

________________________________________

Question: Hey Matt, why is Unanimous different from any other reality show? The people on the show had no idea why they were going to be there. If you were given the chance to win $1.5 million, what would you do? Survivor is a show about backstabbing for dollars. Big Brother, same thing. What about The Real World? At least on Unanimous they are going for money. Deal or No Deal? Great show. However, way to promote total gamblers. The best is, they do it with their children sitting right there! You just jumped on the Unanimous hate bandwagon. Instead of watching the first 10 minutes, you should have kept watching. I gave it a chance and it got really entertaining. — Jenn

Matt Roush: You're really asking me to defend my contempt for this utter piece of trash? (If it doesn't end up as the No. 1 worst show on Television Week's semiannual Critics Poll, I will be flabbergasted.) Look, anyone is entitled to a guilty pleasure, but Unanimous takes what was heretofore my least favorite reality concept, the claustrophobic Big Brother, and makes it uglier and nastier. (And for the record, I have watched more than 10 minutes of this show. In this genre, I follow the ratings, and since people actually are watching, I check in from time to time. Still hate it.) In all of the other reality shows you mention, there may be some mean-spirited or voyeuristic aspects and attitudes, but in the case of Survivor and Real World, at least they're having an actual experience in the world and there is the possibility of adventure. With Unanimous, it's just a wretched display of greed, not my idea of a good time. (I'm also no fan of Deal or No Deal, but at least it doesn't look like it's taking place in a prison.)

http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/askmatt/

fredfa

04-29-06, 12:15 AM

TV Notebook
Rosie O'Donnell to Join the Cast of 'The View'

By Jacques Steinberg The New York Times April 29, 2006

Barbara Walters and Rosie O'Donnell told a live national television audience last (Friday) night that Ms. O'Donnell would return to daytime television this September as a co-host of "The View" on ABC. In joining a cast that includes Ms. Walters, Star Jones Reynolds, Joy Behar and Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Ms. O'Donnell replaces Meredith Vieira, a co-host of "The View" since its inception in 1997, who is leaving to take Katie Couric's place on "Today" on NBC.

After much media speculation in recent days, including reports on the entertainment television show "Extra" and in The New York Post, Ms. Walters and Ms. O'Donnell confirmed her new job during the broadcast of the "Daytime Emmy Awards" on ABC.

"I'm sorry to interrupt your big award, but I just read something on the Internet I wanted to talk to you about," Ms. O'Donnell said to Ms. Walters at the Kodak Theater in Los Angeles, just after Ms. Walters had presented a lifetime achievement award to Carroll Spinney of "Sesame Street."

Ms. Walters, an executive producer of "The View," told the audience that she indeed wanted Ms. O'Donnell to join the show, five years after Ms. O'Donnell ended her own talk show.

As host of her own talk show for six years, and later as its producer as well, Ms. O'Donnell won a dozen Emmy awards. But her impending arrival alongside the wood table that is a centerpiece of "The View" raises the immediate question of how she will fare as a member of a very vocal, opinionated ensemble.

An indication that there could be fireworks between her and at least one cast member — something "View" producers have not necessarily discouraged in the past — was foreshadowed in an interview she did on April 6 on "Good Morning America," before her name began swirling, at least publicly, as a possible replacement for Ms. Vieira.

In the interview, which was mainly to promote a documentary she had done for HBO about a cruise for gay parents and their children, Ms. O'Donnell was asked by Diane Sawyer to free associate in response to the names of several celebrities, including Tom Cruise. When given only "Star Jones" as a prompt, Ms. O'Donnell responded, "An interesting woman on many levels," before looking directly at the camera, raising an eyebrow and laughing.

"I don't wish her any ill will," Ms. O'Donnell said, before adding: "I think it's very hard for everyone to participate in the illusion she presents as her truth."

"You mean about the weight loss?" Ms. Sawyer interjected, an apparent reference to the radical change of late in Ms. Jones Reynolds's appearance, as well as, perhaps, her recent medical treatment for complications following a plastic surgery procedure.

"Well," Ms. O'Donnell responded, "whatever."

Since her talk show went off the air, Ms. O'Donnell, 44, has mostly, though not entirely, retreated from the limelight to raise a family. Openly gay, she and her partner, Kelli Carpenter, have four children, the oldest of them 10. In addition to being seen this month on HBO, she has had guest roles on television in recent years on the shows "Will & Grace," "Judging Amy" and "Queer as Folk," as well as a lead role last year in a Hallmark Hall of Fame television movie, "Riding the Bus With My Sister."

Before an improbable run opposite Harvey Fierstein on Broadway as Golde, the mother in "Fiddler on the Roof," she also appeared in "Grease" and, briefly, "Seussical: The Musical," and served as host of the Tony Awards.

And she started a Web log, recently relocated to www.rosie.com, in which she often uses verse to discuss topics from her family to celebrities to her criticisms of the Bush presidency, which by itself could be seen as a preview of what she might say on "The View."

Ms. O'Donnell has suffered several public, professional losses in recent years, which could, conceivably, also serve as "View" fodder. She was a producer of the Broadway flop "Taboo," in which she had invested an estimated $10 million, nearly all of it lost. She was also sued, unsuccessfully, for $100 million, by the publishing company Gruner & Jahr USA for walking away from Rosie, a magazine to which she lent her name and editing talents.

In joining "The View," Ms. O'Donnell will become the first new cast member since Ms. Hasselbeck, a former contestant on the reality show "Survivor," arrived in 2003.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/29/arts/television/29rosi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

grittree

04-29-06, 09:07 AM

But in basketball there is no such controversy. Best P-b-P guy? Marvellous Marv, no question.

Ranking as the least-trusted TV sports personality is ... basketball announcer Marv Albert.

Best, but least trusted?

fredfa

04-29-06, 09:29 AM

The May Sweep
The Finale Countdown

Designed and Compiled by Brad Walters The Washington Post Sunday, April 30, 2006; Y05
Grab a tape or fire up the TiVo: TV Week's May sweeps calendar highlights the broadcast series scheduled to say so long for the season -- or forever.

With a WB-UPN merger looming and new scripts flowing in for the fall, how many other established hits will get the heave-ho? Stay tuned.

(Note: All times are Eastern and Pacific.)

Sunday

April 30:

"The War at Home," 8:30, Fox

May 14:

"The West Wing," 7, NBC

"King of the Hill," 7:30, Fox

"Survivor," 8, CBS

"Malcolm in the Middle," 8:30, Fox

"American Dad," 9:30, Fox

"Law & Order: Criminal Intent," 10, NBC

May 21:

"Extreme Makeover: Home Edition," 7, ABC

"The Simpsons," 8, Fox

"Charmed," 8, WB

"Family Guy," 8:30, Fox

"Desperate Housewives," 9, ABC

Monday

May 1:

"Supernanny," 8, ABC

May 8:

"7th Heaven," 8, WB

"What About Brian," 10, ABC

May 15:

"Prison Break," 8, Fox

"How I Met Your Mother," 8:30, CBS

"Grey's Anatomy," 9, ABC

May 22:

"The King of Queens," 8, CBS

"24," 8, Fox

"Two and a Half Men," 9, CBS

"Alias," 9, ABC

"The New Adventures of Old Christine," 9:30, CBS

"CSI: Miami," 10, CBS

"Medium," 10, NBC

Tuesday

May 2:

"According to Jim," 8, ABC

"Hope & Faith," 9, ABC

"Teachers," 9:30, NBC

May 9:

"Gilmore Girls," 8, WB

"Veronica Mars," 9, UPN

May 16:

"NCIS," 8, CBS

"Boston Legal,' 9, ABC

"The Unit," 9, CBS

"Scrubs," 9, NBC

"Law & Order: Special Victims Unit," 10, ABC

May 23:

"House," 9, Fox

Wednesday

May 3:

"One Tree Hill," 8, WB

May 10:

"Criminal Minds," 9, CBS

May 17:

"The Amazing Race," 8, CBS

"Bones," 8, Fox

"America's Next Top Model," 8, UPN

"Invasion," 10:01, ABC

"Law & Order," 10, NBC

"CSI: NY," 10, CBS

May 24:

"American Idol," 8, Fox

"Lost," 9, ABC

Thursday

May 4:

"Supernatural," 9, WB

May 11:

"Everybody Hates Chris," 8, UPN

"Smallville," 8, WB

"My Name Is Earl," 8:40, NBC

"The Bedford Diaries," 9, WB

"The Office," 9:20, NBC

May 18:

"Will & Grace," 8, NBC

"That '70s Show," 8, Fox

"CSI," 9, CBS

"The O.C.," 9, Fox

"Commander in Chief," 10, ABC

"Without a Trace," 10, CBS

"ER," 10, NBC

Friday

May 5:

"Ghost Whisperer," 8, CBS

"Survival of the Richest," 8, WB

"Reba," 9, WB

May 12:

"Las Vegas," 9, NBC

May 19:

"America's Funniest Home Videos," 8, ABC

"Close to Home," 9, CBS

"Numb3rs," 10, CBS

Saturday

May 20:

"Mad TV," 11, Fox

Parting Is Such Sweet Sorrow

. . . but at least we'll always have the syndicated memories to keep us warm. More on the seven longtime broadcast staples wrapping it up for good:

"7th Heaven" (WB)
• Finale: May 8
• Debuted: 1996
• Fun Fact: Stephen Collins (Rev. Eric Camden) is the author of two suspense novels.

"Malcolm in the Middle" (Fox)
• Finale: May 14
• Debuted: 2000
• Fun Fact: Frankie Muniz starred in a production of "The Sound of Music" with Clay Aiken.

"The West Wing" (NBC)
• Finale: May 14
• Debuted: 1999
• Fun Fact: Martin Sheen has played an American president in three previous TV productions.

"That '70s Show" (Fox)
• Finale: May 18
• Debuted: 1998
• Fun Fact: Original cast member Ashton Kutcher was once a floor sweeper at General Mills.

"Will & Grace" (NBC)
• Finale: May 18
• Debuted: 1998
• Fun Fact: Megan Mullally auditioned for the role of Elaine on "Seinfeld," and the role of Grace.

"Charmed" (WB)
• Finale: May 21
• Debuted: 1998
• Fun fact: Original cast member Shannen Doherty was in the cast of "Little House on the Prairie" when she was 11.

"Alias" (ABC)
• Finale: May 22
• Debuted: 2001
• Fun Fact: Jennifer Garner was a chemistry major at Denison University in Ohio before switching to drama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/25/AR2006042501518_pf.html

fredfa

04-29-06, 09:39 AM

The May Sweep
Not encouraging signs

By Hal Boedeker Orlando Sentinel Television Critic in the Sentinel’s TV blog

Thursday, the first night of the May sweeps, provided some ominous signs about next season. The ratings removed any doubt about "Commander in Chief": It won't live beyond this season. ABC's White House drama, starring Geena Davis, brought in a measly 6.5 million viewers opposite CBS' "Without a Trace" (nearly 18 million) and NBC's "ER" (12.3 million).

Viewers aren't feeling particularly nostalgic as "Will & Grace" ends it run on NBC. Just 7.6 million watched Will (Eric McCormack) mourn his father. This once-uproarious comedy is taking a lot of mawkish twists at the end. Won't someone make them stop? Two episodes of Fox's "That '70s Show" fared even worse, averaging roughly 5 million.

ABC's "American Inventor" -- a ripoff of Fox's "American Idol" -- isn't so inventive anymore, as far as viewers are concerned. The show averaged just 5 million in the 8 o'clock hour and 7.3 million an hour later.

Fox's "The O.C.," once a hot-hot-hot show, averaged 5.4 million. What happened? Blame Fox for sending this once-addictive soap off to Thursdays without ratings support.

And what about last fall's brightest newcomers? They're not so bright these days. UPN's "Everybody Hates Chris" averaged just 3 million. The WB's "Supernatural" drew nearly 3.3 million. A new episode of NBC's "My Name Is Earl," the best new sitcom last fall, pulled in 9 million.

Only one network had a great story to tell Thursday night. Of course, it was CBS.

"CSI" averaged 27.3 million. "Survivor" did nearly as well as "Without a Trace," drawing 17.1 million. The ejection of Courtney was satisfying. Shane seems the most likely to go next. And Terry is among the most formidable players in the show's history. If Terry keeps winning challenges, he deserves to be declared overall victor.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2006/04/not_encouraging.html

fredfa

04-29-06, 09:51 AM

The 2006-2007 TV Season
Mocking!: The CW + NFL. Veronica Mars for A.J. Hawk?

By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle in his TV blog

As a longtime and die-hard Niners fan, this is a big weekend. The NFL Draft. For about the last month, I've been totally geeked out on various "mock drafts" from around the country. Who will the Niners take at No. 6? How about No. 22? Hell, how about in the 7th Round? It all matters to me. I love drafts. I even watched the NBA draft in hopes the Warriors would get some much needed help. (Still to be determined. That didn't stop me from buying two hats and a jersey on draft day. I got caught up in the excitement. Well, maybe not excitement in the literal sense. When you're a Warriors fan, you learn to temper.)

But the NFL Draft is a big deal. At least at my house. And from a television perspective, it makes me laugh how much content ESPN can milk out of the draft. Clearly, they need an entirely separate network just for the draft. Or for drafts and fantasy sports. Non-stop speculation with experts. I'm not mocking it. I know it's pointless and probably stupid. But I watch it. And if they do create that network, I'm all over it. As if I'm not watching enough ESPN.

But here's the real hook of this post: So I'm watching ESPN do something like four hours of a mock draft with their experts on Thursday. And it hits me. I'm an expert. And I make a living, essentially, from mocking. I could draft something, mock it and use my expertise all at once. Brilliant! (Hey, did somebody just say A.J. Hawk is still going to be available at No. 6?)

I digress. Two networks - UPN and The WB - are closing up shop at the end of May and from their ashes will come one new network: The CW. The big speculation among fans of shows on both about-to-be-extinct networks is, "Will my favorite show make the cut? Will it get picked up by The CW?" So I dashed off some e-mails to sources I have at both networks. And then I picked up the phone and made some calls. And I have produced for you a - wait for it! - mock draft of The CW.

You should know something up front here. This isn't a fantasy thing. I'm not dreaming scenarios about Les Moonves calling up Joss Whedon and letting him put a show on whatever night he pleases. I'm not speculating on The CW sliding in some series developed for CBS that turns out to be just a tad too, ahem, "cutting edge" (see: "Love Monkey")and thus manages to surfaces at the new, younger skewing channel.

No, this has been sourced out. But the people I talked with don't want to be quoted. Partly because they're guessing. The people at The CW who will be making the final call on who lives and dies are keeping that information pretty close, partly because speculation doesn't help them and partly because, in the time-honored tradition of networks presenting their fall line-ups at the "upfronts" in New York next month, they honestly don't have much set in stone. Some people - actors, producers, writers - have yet to get the bad news that they won't have a series, and therefore a job, to work on.

The "upfronts," where networks unveil their new stuff to advertisers and press, are fast approaching. And much like this weekend's NFL Draft - which one pundit said was the most undpredictable in 28 years when it comes down to the first seven or eight slots - the fall schedules are always in flux. Some shows have lived and died based on decisions made mere minutes before each network presentation.

Now, the next caveat: I'm not going to attempt to nail down days and time slots for these shows. I have a pretty good idea on most of the days, but two of the six are completely up for grabs, and that would just mess up my percentages. I don't want to be Mel Kiper.

Let's mock. Let's draft. Let's go:

• Veronica Mars. Pop the cork, cultists. This looks to be a hard-won "yes." True, the ratings are bad. Very bad. But it has a few things going for it. Most important - and probably the reason it will return - is because it has a diverse cast. UPN is likely to lose a chunk of its African American programming but Dawn Ostroff, entertainment president of The CW, gives more than just lip service to diversity. So she'll be looking to keep some minority faces on the fall schedule - particularly since The WB is so lily white. Though "Veronica Mars" will likely be paired with "Gilmore Girls," the latter isn't exactly hitting on all creative cylinders, has just lost its creator and voice, Amy Sherman-Pallidino, replaced her with someone who's getting savaged in the press, and could, ultimately, be paired elsewhere, perhaps with a new drama called "Palm Springs." An over-riding factor for renewal was that "Veronica Mars" has loads of potential, good press, a faithful but small audience and a solid creative team. Those all helped.

• "America's Top Model." It was renewed long ago.

• Wrestling. (Currently called "Friday Night Smackdown.") Ditto.

• "Gilmore Girls." Yes, woes and all.

• "Smallville." Inked.

• "Everybody Hates Chris." Ditto. And that was a no-brainer.

• "Supernatural." Good in the demos, good critical acclaim, fun to watch, has upside.

• "Beauty and the Geek." It will probably share a timeslot on Wednesdays with "Top Model," to keep up the content, reduce repeats.

• "Reba." Don't ask me why. It pains me just to type it.

• "Girlfriends." A good, underappreciated show that may benefit from a new audience, fresh start.

Every year in the NFL Draft, somebody's stock slips dramatically. All kinds of reasons factor in, but the bottom line is they go tumbling down the draft board and, in some instances, right off it.

Here are the shows that, at this point, are not in the plans at The CW:

• "Everwood."

• "One Tree Hill."

• "Related."

Those were the bubble shows that concerned fans the most (after "Veronica Mars" of course). Anything can happen come May 18, but my sources believe the odds are trending down on those. Then again, two different people predicted that at least one other UPN comedy, in addition to "Girlfriends" and "Chris," will make the roster, but I just can't see it. (In fact, as a critic, it's hard to see a lot of potential in many of these shows, but for all of its desiret to be a big-time network, The CW is still building itself out of very low-rated shows.)

The CW has eight pilots to choose from, and based on cost alone, I'd project as many as three of those to make the fall schedule. With only 13 hours to program, that tightens up who lives and dies, though some of the bubble shows could be renewed with reduced episodes and placed on the bench. It might be a sound strategy.

Already canceled series include: "Charmed," "What I Like About You," "Just Legal," "Eve," "All of Us" and "Sex, Love & Secrets," with "7th Heaven" going into retirement. Forget the rumors about the latter series coming back, despite the relatively high ratings for a WB series. It simply costs too much and The CW needs to turn a profit as fast as possible.

Look for the ax to swing on "Pepper Dennis," "Living With Fran," "Twins," "Blue Collar TV," "Love Inc." (wasn't that dead already?), "One on One" and "Half & Half."

As for the Niners, all the mocks are coming up with Vernon Davis, the fast, furious and talented TE at No. 6, and probably some much-needed CB at No. 22. I'd rather have Hawk at 6, but the Niners need so much help that anyone will help - in any slot.

Not sure that's the same for The CW, but I'll let Nielsen decide that.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=24&entry_id=4738#readmore

fredfa

04-29-06, 10:17 AM

Sports On TV
D.C. Tries to Force Comcast's Hand

Council Will File Emergency Legislation to Get Nationals Ballgames on TV
By Thomas Heath Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, April 29

D.C. Council members Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) and Vincent Orange (D-Ward 5) will submit emergency legislation on Tuesday aimed at compelling Comcast to carry Washington Nationals games or risk losing lose their license to operate in the District.

"I am taking matters into my own hands and moving forward to get the Nationals games on TV," Evans said yesterday. "I hope this compels the interested parties to move swiftly and reach an agreement."

Comcast subscribers throughout the Washington region can watch only Nationals games broadcast on WDCA (Channel 20) and WTTG (Channel 5). Additional games are broadcast on ESPN, but some are blacked out locally. The vast majority of Nationals games are shown on Mid-Atlantic Sports Network (MASN).

Philadelphia-based Comcast is the largest cable company in the United States with more than 21 million subscribers. Comcast serves 1.3 million customers in the region and has more than 100,000 customers in the District.

Five cable and satellite providers in the Washington area have agreed to broadcast MASN's Nationals games to about 2 million households, but the team cannot achieve maximum distribution throughout the Washington region without Comcast. And with the Nationals' home attendance sagging and the team playing poorly, Orange said it's critical that the team get maximum television exposure.

"Putting the games on television helps create interest and brings fans to the ballpark," Orange said. "We feel we have the right to do that and that's why we are going to introduce the legislation. It's the right thing to do. We have a $611 million investment in this team and we can't have Comcast destroying that investment."

Evans and Orange said yesterday they are confident they have the nine votes needed to pass the emergency legislation, which would become effective in 10 days or upon Mayor Anthony A. Williams signing it, whichever comes first. The legislation would last 90 days before expiring, and then must be renewed, Evans said.

Comcast has refused to air MASN, which is the home network for the Nationals, because of a dispute between its network subsidiary, Comcast SportsNet, and MASN owner Peter Angelos over the television rights to the Baltimore Orioles. Angelos owns the Orioles as well as MASN.

Comcast is suing Angelos over the right to air the Orioles after the cable company's contract with the team expires at the end of this season. A Montgomery County Circuit Court judge dismissed Comcast's lawsuit twice, and the company is now appealing.

Angelos and Comcast executives were called before a U.S. House committee this month, where they were urged to strike a deal that would break a stalemate preventing Comcast's area customers from receiving Nationals games. Angelos offered to combine MASN with Comcast's SportsNet if Comcast will put the Nationals games on, but a deal has failed to materialize.

"At the local, federal and regulatory levels, there is growing outrage against Comcast for abusing its monopoly and punishing Nationals fans," MASN spokesman Todd Webster said. "We applaud this effort and hope the council will work quickly to get the games to the fans."

Comcast has said that if Major League Baseball terminates its joint ownership in MASN and frees up the rights to the Nationals for public auction, Comcast will pay the Nationals $20 million for the games this year and more in the future. MASN currently pays the Nationals $20 million to air the games, and the Nationals have 10 percent ownership in MASN that grows to 33 percent in future years.

"We are the only party that has offered a compromise solution to resolve this unfortunate situation, which has not been reciprocated by the other parties who are responsible for the Nationals not being on television," Comcast Executive Vice President David L. Cohen said in a statement yesterday. "We share and understand the frustration about the Nationals' TV rights. We have talked and met with MASN and have urged Major League Baseball to convene a meeting of all parties in an attempt to resolve this situation as expeditiously as possible."

The Orioles, who own most of MASN, were given TV rights to the Washington area by MLB in 1981. When the Nationals moved here last season, Angelos agreed to share the territory and dropped his opposition to the franchise's relocation in return for control of local television broadcasts of the Nationals.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/28/AR2006042802134_pf.html

fredfa

04-29-06, 06:50 PM

Sorry for the delay, but Saturday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-29-06, 08:07 PM

A Critical View
Sweep away your cares with this guide to May TV

By Maureen Ryan from the Chicago Tribune TV blog
(Note: All times are Central)

The spring ratings sweeps period begin Friday, but the real madness, as any TV maven knows, happens in May.

You won’t find a listing here for every single season finale or special event in May but these are the upcoming TV episodes that I think are worth anticipating, noting or at least making fun of. A few spoilers about plot points lurk here, by the way: Look away if you simply cannot know what happens on the “Two and a Half Men” finale.

Monday, May 1
• 8 p.m.: “Texas Ranch House,” the latest in a long line of PBS “step into the way-back machine” reality shows, all of which have made me glad that I was born in the age of lattes, laptops and washing machines. (PBS)
• 9 p.m.: Molly Ringwald guests on “Medium.” (NBC)

Tuesday, May 2
• 8 p.m.: During the “Blow Out” season finale, try my Jonathan Antin drinking game: Drink if Anton insults one of his hair-care product executives, drink if he storms out of a photo shoot/meeting/salon, drink if Anton cries, finish the bottle if he cries at his therapist’s office. (Bravo)
• 8 p.m.: The first-half of a “House” two-parter airs; part two airs 7 p.m. Wednesday. And yes, House does take a gun in hand at one point in Tuesday’s episode. But what happens is so not what you think will happen. Which is why we love this show. (Fox)
• 9 p.m.: “Dynasty Reunion: Catfights and Caviar,” a retrospective on the infamous soap, features interviews with original cast members. Personally, I think they should have invited Tanya from “Footballers Wives,” Joan Collins’ splendid TV heir, but nobody asked me. (CBS)

Wednesday, May 3
• 9 p.m.: “South Park” wraps up the first half of its 10th season (it returns in October). If this outing is anywhere near as good as the death of Chef episode or the impassioned “Cartoon Wars,” it’ll be, well, really good. (Comedy Central)

Thursday, May 4
• 8:30 p.m.: In the new episode of “The Office” that airs this week, Michael Scott discusses his favorite form of resolving differences between co-workers: cage matches. “How could they not work?” he asks. Also, there's conflict in the office regarding Pam planning her wedding on the job. (NBC)
• 9 p.m.: “ER” airs an episode centered on the ongoing conflict in Darfur, where Drs. Pratt and Carter encounter chaos as they attempt to provide medical aid. (NBC)

Friday, May 5
• 9 p.m.: Reiko Aylesworth guests on “Conviction.” That’s probably not enough of a reason to tune in, swell as she is, but still, thought you might want to know. (NBC)

Monday, May 8
• 7 p.m.: “Seventh Heaven” wraps up its run after 289 years on television (or will it? Rumors swirl about some kind of “Heaven” revival in the fall). (WB)
• 7 p.m.: Watch tonight’s “Prison Break.” It’s not the finale, but I’m telling you, watch this episode! (Fox)
• 8:30 p.m.: Wanda Sykes guest stars on “The New Adventures of Old Christine.” Could somebody give Sykes a show of her own (one that succeeds, that is), instead of making her the go-to funny guest star? I’m just askin’. (CBS)

Tuesday, May 9
• 7 p.m. ABC airs “Fatal Contact,” a two-hour movie about a bird-flu epidemic. No, seriously. (ABC)
• 7 p.m.: In the two-part “NCIS” finale (Part 1 of which airs tonight), according to creator Don Bellisario, “we’re going to learn more about [Leroy] Gibbs and learn more about what I hinted at when I brought [Ziva David] on. [We’ll learn more] about his first wife - he had a wife and daughter, both were murdered. I’m going to reveal more of that story, which nobody in `NCIS’ knows … except for Ziva.” (CBS)
• 7 p.m.: It’s the “Gilmore Girls” season finale and the last episode with the show’s creative gurus, Amy Sherman-Palladino and Daniel Palladino, at the helm. That’s just too darn sad (and I’m very afraid for next season). A tiny upside: Sonic Youth, Sam Phillips, Mary Lynn Rajskub (Chloe on “24”), Yo La Tengo, Sparks, Joe Pernice and Grant Lee Phillips are the musical guests in this episode, in which there’s trouble with Stars Hollow’s troubadors. (WB)
• 8 p.m.: “Veronica Mars” airs its second-season finale. Who sent that ill-fated school bus over the cliff? I’m betting whoever we guessed it was, we’re all wrong. (UPN)
• 8 p.m.: Kathy Griffin’s “Strong Black Woman” comedy special airs on Bravo. There’s an extended riff on Kathy’s meeting with Celine Dion. Need I say more? (Bravo)
• 9 p.m.: “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” does an episode about the sexual abuse of children, something they’ve only done a few dozen times before. (NBC)

Wednesday, May 10
• 8 p.m.: On the season finale of the grim “Criminal Minds,” the detectives are “drawn into the elaborate fantasy game of a psychopathic suspect.” Wait, a serial murderer plot? On prime-time TV? No way! Oh, and a member of the “Minds” team might die. Which would be a drag if I could tell them apart. (CBS)
• 8:32 p.m.: The guilty pleasure “Unan1mous” ends. Will there be any money left for anyone to win? (Fox)
• 9 p.m.: Michael Imperioli returns to “Law & Order” for another guest-starring turn as Detective Falco, who finds one of his dates slashed to death in his bathroom. (NBC)

Thursday, May 11
• 7 p.m.: On the typically solid season finale of “Everybody Hates Chris,” Julius gets to spend Father’s Day by himself. There is some sleeping involved. (UPN)
• 7:40 p.m.: “My Name Is Earl” gets a supersize finale, in which the repentant Earl attempts to cross off transgression No. 1 (“Stole $10 from a guy at the Camden Market”) from his list of sins. (NBC)
• 8:20 p.m.: “The Office” also gets a supersize season-ender, written by star Steve Carell. Just throwing this out there: Think anything could go wrong at a Dunder Mifflin Casino Night? What’re the odds? (NBC)

Sunday, May 14
• 6 p.m.: A “West Wing” retrospective, featuring interviews with the show’s cast, precedes the one-hour finale of this long-running political drama. Former cast member Rob Lowe returns for the finale, by the way. Ten to one this outdraws the “Surreal Life” finale on VH1. (NBC)
• 6:30 p.m.: “King of the Hill” airs its 200th episode. Who knew Hank had it in him? (Fox)
• 7 p.m.: “Survivor Panama: Exile Island” has its three-hour finale-fest. I know one thing for sure about the reunion special: All the women will be wearing way too much makeup. (CBS)
• 7:30 p.m.: Now that all the kids on the show are receiving Social Security, “Malcolm in the Middle” ends its run. (Fox)

Monday, May 15
• 7 p.m.: Two full hours of “Deal or No Deal”! Taste the happy! (NBC)
• 7 p.m.: The “Prison Break” season finale. Now that is exciting. (Fox)
• 7 p.m.: Oprah’s “Legends Ball” special airs. Only a year after it took place! (ABC)
• 7:30 p.m.: Joss Whedon fans, rejoice! Both Amy Acker (“Angel”) and Alexis Denisof (“Buffy,” “Angel”) guest on the season finale of “How I Met Your Mother,” in which Ted makes one more grand play for Robin as Marshall and Lily’s relationship hits a rough patch. There's more on "Mother" here, here and here. (CBS)
• 8 p.m.: A two-hour “Grey’s Anatomy” season finale. Cannot. Wait. (ABC)

Tuesday, May 16
• 7 p.m.: As “NCIS” comes to a close for the season, Bellisario said, “somebody from the main cast is leaving `NCIS.’ It’s going to be a good year-ender and a good beginning for next year’s story.” (CBS)
• 8 p.m.: “Scrubs,” which has had a stellar season even as NBC treated the fine comedy like week-old garbage, has a two-part season finale, in which Elizabeth Banks from “The 40 Year-Old Virgin” guests as a urologist J.D. falls for. Also, there’s an unexpected pregnancy at Sacred Heart Hospital. Eeek! (NBC)
• 8 p.m.: How much macho, alpha-dog manliness can you stand? Find out when two full hours of “The Unit,” including the show’s season finale, airs. (CBS)
• 8 p.m.: Robert Wagner stars as the urbane head of Crane, Poole and Schmidt’s L.A. office and Jeri Ryan guests as a reality TV host on the 2-hour season finale of “Boston Legal.” I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that either Denny Crane or Alan Shore - or both - put the moves on her. (ABC)

Wednesday, May 17
• 7 p.m.: “The Amazing Race” has its season finale on CBS. Phil Keoghan’s eyebrows should get a workout. (CBS)
• 9 p.m.: “My Super Sweet 16’s” season finale airs. Somewhere a bratty teen will get way too much stuff and pout when he or she doesn’t get more. (MTV)

Thursday, May 18
• 7 p.m.: “Will & Grace” signs off with a retrospective and a one-hour series finale. Do you think they’d end the show without one last bit of stunt casting? What, are you nuts? At least the finale’s stunt guest is Kevin Bacon, who has guested to good effect in the past. (NBC)
• 7 p.m.: “That ’70s Show” also has its series finale. A year too late. (Fox)
• 8 p.m.: The “CSI” team investigates a case involving a man with a weird sexual fetish. Just for a change. Oh, and in this season finale, a team member’s life “hangs in the balance.” Hmmm. Still not caring. (CBS)
• 8 p.m.: “The O.C.’s” third season ends. Will the show come back? Will someone die? Does anyone care? (Fox)
• 9 p.m.: Jason Priestly guest-stars on the “Without a Trace” season finale as a guy who does something naughty. There’s a gun involved. Jason, don’t make Jack Malone mad! It’s never a good idea. (CBS)
• 9 p.m.: From NBC’s press release about tonight’s “ER”: “Chaos strikes when injured jailbirds come into County General looking to escape their prison time.” So, “ER” is resorting to imitating “Prison Break”? Every time you think NBC can’t sink lower… . (NBC)

Friday, May 19
• 9 p.m.: On the show’s season finale, the “Numb3rs” gang must solve a case involving a serial killer. Because nothing says CBS drama like serial killers! Why, oh, why, just once, can’t it be a cereal killer? You know, a guy who goes around finishing off everyone’s Cap’n Crunch? Now that I would watch. (CBS)

Sunday, May 21
• 8 p.m. Don Cheadle is the man in the hot seat on “Inside the Actors Studio.” (Bravo)
• 8 p.m.: NBC airs a mini-series called “10.5: Apocalypse.” A sequel to its last super-popular apocalyptic mini-series. Really. Insert your own snarky NBC-disaster analogy here. (NBC)

Monday, May 22
• 7 p.m.: A two-hour “24” finale. Prepare your beverage for the Watcher’s Jack Bauer drinking game. (Fox)
• 8 p.m.: Charlie gets ready for his wedding on “Two and a Half Men,” which will no doubt occasion plenty of sexually suggestive banter. Ha ha! (CBS)
• 8 p.m.: “Alias” ends its five-year run. No more shots of Sydney Bristow running very fast in tight clothing down dark hallways and alleys. And I’m totally fine with that. (ABC)
• 9 p.m.: In the “CSI: Miami” finale, Horatio (David Caruso) “mourns the murder of someone close to him.” Please, don’t let it be the Sunglasses of Justice! They are the true star of the show, after all. (CBS)

Tuesday, May 23
• 8 p.m.: “House’s” season finale will leave viewers on a "freaky" cliffhanger, according to star Robert Sean Leonard (more on "House" here). (Fox)

Wednesday, May 24
• 7 p.m.: “American Idol” wraps up its fifth season with a 2-hour outing, stomping everything in its path. (Fox)
• 8 p.m.: “Lost” wraps up its second season with a Desmond-centric 2-hour finale, and it will no doubt get stomped by “Idol” in the ratings. (ABC)

Tuesday, May 30
• 7 p.m.: Despite its attempts to botch it to death, NBC was unable to completely kill “Last Comic Standing.” Its fourth season begins tonight with celebrity judges Kathy Griffin and Tim Meadows. (NBC)
• 9 p.m.: “Rescue Me” begins its third season. (FX)

Wednesday, May 31
• 9 p.m.: “The Hills,” a “Laguna Beach” spinoff starring Lauren Conrad, debuts. It'll be, like, awesome. Or, you know, not. (MTV)

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/entertainment_tv/2006/04/post_2.html#more

fredfa

04-29-06, 11:51 PM

The Business of TV
How a Hit Almost Failed Its Own Audition

By Bill Carter The New York Times April 30, 2006

Network television programmers face a challenging job, though not a complicated one: they need to find hits. That's why they spend millions to find and hire talented writers, actors and producers. In many cases they would be wiser to invest in a catcher's mitt, because really big hits, ones that can transform the fates of networks — and of network executives — tend to fall from the sky.

Here is the story of how "American Idol," the biggest hit on television, hovered over every network in 2001, waiting for one of them to grab it. This article is adapted from "Desperate Networks" by Bill Carter, a reporter for The New York Times. Doubleday will publish the book on Tuesday.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simon Cowell sat at a meeting in Los Angeles with executives from someplace he had never heard of, something called the UPN network. Mr. Cowell, a British music executive, had never pitched a television show in America before — and the way things were going, he felt as though he never would again.

The UPN executives who sat across the table from Mr. Cowell at that meeting in April 2001 clearly had no clue who this guy was, and, apparently, even less interest in finding out. Maybe they knew his business partner, Simon Fuller, from his leadership of the Spice Girls. Surely, they had heard of the Spice Girls. But, then again, as Mr. Cowell checked those blank, uninterested faces, maybe not.

No matter. Mr. Cowell had enormous faith in the idea that he and Mr. Fuller had for a music-based television show. Mr. Fuller was the most successful manager of music acts in Britain and he, Mr. Cowell, was the most successful artist and repertoire man — that is, music label talent manager — currently working there. They both knew how to launch new singing artists, and now they had an idea for a show that would allow them to utilize their talents on camera.

Despite the wall he sensed going up at the UPN meeting, Mr. Cowell, never cowed, simply plowed ahead with his pitch. "What this is really about is the American dream," Mr. Cowell told the American executives in his smooth British tones. He laid out the format for the show that he and Mr. Fuller were calling "Pop Idol" in Britain, describing how exciting this show would surely be. When Mr. Cowell wrapped up his comments, the room went quiet — stone silent.

At the opposite end of the table, a young woman executive, whom Mr. Cowell had identified in his head as the "lippy second-in-command," seemed to be calculating whether or not this truly was the end of the presentation.

"And what exactly do you think we're supposed to be doing for you?" the woman said, dismissively.

"Well, actually, sweetheart," Mr. Cowell replied, applying just a dash of acid, "it's more a question of what I could be doing for you."

Again a terrible silence fell. Then the woman piped up: "Well, we'll get back to you."

Mr. Cowell said he had heard that line before — too many times for it to bother him during his sojourn in the United States trying to spark some American interest in this hot idea. He and Mr. Fuller and a third partner, yet another Simon — Simon Jones, an executive with Thames Television — had paid calls to the broadcast networks, to MTV and to other cable networks. Every one of them had a free shot that April at landing the show that the three Simons were putting on offer. No one showed the least interest, and many of the network executives offered shoulders so cold that Mr. Cowell could have chilled his wine on them. Uniformly, they had been, Mr. Cowell was convinced, the worst, most appalling meetings of his life.

The contrast with how "Pop Idol" had been sold in Britain could not have been sharper. Mr. Cowell and Mr. Fuller met with representatives of the British network ITV, spent what Mr. Cowell estimated was no more than 30 seconds describing the idea, and they had a deal. But, of course, the two Simons had enormous reputations in the British entertainment world, and they were entering a market that had already embraced music-oriented reality shows.

In Britain, "Pop Stars," a show that was originally developed in Australia and traced the formation of a singing group, had engrossed the nation. Another music show, "Fame Academy," had also done extremely well.

Mr. Cowell had been invited to be a judge on the first edition of "Pop Stars," and, at first, had accepted. But he quickly had misgivings about being a person who ran a music label going on television to demonstrate how to put together a group. Mr. Cowell thought it was "like a magician showing how you saw somebody in half." He bowed out.

When Mr. Cowell got a first glimpse of "Pop Stars," however, he knew he had made a mistake. The show looked like a piping hot hit to him — though he had an instant insight. To him, the attractive part of "Pop Stars" was the round of auditions to select the band members. He thought that, as constituted, "Pop Stars" had no ending. With Mr. Fuller he conceived a show built around seasonlong tryouts with the winner announced at the end.

What Mr. Cowell told ITV was this: "It will have all the fun of 'Pop Stars,' but we can do it better. We can do it a lot harsher than on 'Pop Stars,' and the public will vote and choose the winner. And we won't be relying on the music to make the show successful: it will be a soap opera."

Mr. Cowell also volunteered himself as a judge, knowing that he had the precise expertise called for in selecting a singing star. Mr. Fuller and his company, 19 Entertainment, owned the show along with Fremantle Media, a big European production company. Mr. Cowell took no ownership stake, but he did get royalty rights for his label, Syco Records, a part of the BMG Music Group, on every recording released by an "Idol" performer worldwide. That was the essence of the show's appeal for Mr. Cowell.

All he was concerned with was that the right person would win, so that he would get access to a good artist. If the show was a hit, so much the better; Mr. Cowell's new artist was more likely to sell a lot of records that way.

When Mr. Cowell started shooting "Pop Idol" in England in the summer of 2001, the production plan called for four judges to sit in an audition room while contestants trooped in, one by one. The judges would discuss each singer after he or she left the room. Nothing more specific was spelled out.

The first auditions took place in Manchester. But by the time five or six singers had walked through, sung and then had their performances rehashed by the judges after they had left the room, Mr. Cowell was almost crawling up the walls.

"I'm dying in here," he told the producers. "This is not like a real-life audition." He turned to one of the other judges, the veteran British pop producer Pete Waterman, and said: "We have to actually tell the performers to their faces what we thought. We've just got to tell these boys and girls the truth. They're rubbish."

Mr. Cowell had invited Mr. Waterman to work as a judge, expecting him to be what Mr. Cowell described as the "nasty" one. But Mr. Waterman got more emotional on the show than Mr. Cowell expected. (It was published in the British press that he actually teared up at one performance). Mr. Cowell, meanwhile, acted no differently on the air than he did at real auditions — he was cold and distant. And his comments reflected that.

As the show took off after its premiere that October, the British press concentrated on Mr. Cowell and his barbed comments. He was the nasty one, the "mouthy" one. The show quickly began to revolve around Mr. Cowell and his withering appraisals of the wretched talent being brought before him.

"Pop Idol" was the hit of the year in Britain. The two finalists both released albums after the show concluded and sold millions of copies. Mr. Fuller had two new hit artists to manage; Mr. Cowell's label had two huge-selling albums. Their collaboration was a ringing success — and they were just getting started.

Alix Hartley, a British-born talent agent with an expertise in music, who worked for the Creative Artists Agency, the heavyweight Hollywood talent agency, was a natural to represent Mr. Fuller in the challenge of going back to the networks in the fall of 2001 and finding "Pop Idol" a home on American television.

Given how both "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" and "Survivor" — both conceived by British producers — had emerged as hits on American television in the summer months, C.A.A.'s strategy was to pitch "Pop Idol" around as a perfect new reality programming vehicle for the summer of 2002. It was light, entertaining and not very expensive to produce. As an added advantage, having started a 15-week British run in October, it would have fully executed weekly editions on tape to serve as the template for the American version.

ANDREA WONG, who ran the reality-programming department for ABC, was an ideal target for the C.A.A. pitch. She was aggressively seeking reality programs and had been closely watching the British market in the wake of her network's failure to secure "Survivor" when it had twice been in ABC's clutches.

But C.A.A. and the producers of "Pop Idol" ran into a problem that "Survivor" never had to face. Music had already failed in the United States in reality formats on two networks, one being ABC.

That network tried a show in 2000 called "Making the Band," about assembling a boy-band singing group. Though it had a small following, mostly among pubescent girls, the show simply could not cross over into a wider audience. The music format was blamed. Music had become just too stratified, the argument went, to ever build a wide-enough appeal in the United States to succeed on the scale that an American network television show required.

The WB network, which was mainly the network of pubescent girls, tried a similar format the next season with a show that the network called "Pop Stars," a format derived from the Australian and British models of the same name — only with an-all girl group. It, too, found only a niche audience.

Ms. Wong knew all of that when C.A.A. came in touting "Pop Idol." She passed. C.A.A. next met with NBC's reality executives. They passed. The agency never set up a formal meeting with CBS's reality division, feeling as though an initial phone call to CBS had fallen utterly flat.

That left Fox. The British producers had gotten nowhere in the spring when they tried to interest Fox's reality division, headed by Mike Darnell, in "Pop Idol." But C.A.A. made a new effort anyway. This time Ms. Hartley of C.A.A. and Mr. Fuller — without Mr. Cowell this time — went in to see Mr. Darnell himself.

Mr. Fuller pitched his idea with fervent passion, and that impressed Mr. Darnell. He really liked the notion that the format would essentially be all audition, complete with a lot of really woeful early performances. Mr. Darnell had never liked the band-making shows once they got past the auditions. Here was a format in which the auditions, replete with people making cringe-inducing fools of themselves, would rule.

Mr. Darnell, thinking of summer budgets at Fox, wanted to know if the show had sponsorship attached. Ms. Hartley told him that C.A.A. was working on that very angle. Mr. Darnell told Ms. Hartley and Mr. Fuller that they should bring up the idea with Sandy Grushow, the head of entertainment for Fox, and his chief lieutenant, Gail Berman.

When Mr. Grushow and Ms. Berman heard the pitch, both had the same reaction: tepid. A talent contest did not sound like inspiring television in the 21st century — or like a breakout hit, for which Fox had an increasingly searing need at that point.

But both executives knew that the network could also use something that might pass for fresh summer programming. The problem was, Fox was out of money. The program budget for the year was exhausted, bone dry.

Mr. Grushow told the C.A.A. representatives that Fox was simply not going to pay a license fee for this program — if it was going to get on the air, it would have to be as a fully sponsored broadcast. "We don't know much about this show," Mr. Grushow told them. "But if we can get it for nothing, it's sort of a no-brainer."

C.A.A. indicated that, of course, it could line up sponsors. Fox said: Come back to us when you do.

By this point, early in winter, "Pop Idol" had become the talk of Britain. Fox had made no effort to secure the show, so C.A.A. went back to Ms. Wong from ABC, armed with those mighty ratings from the British run. She asked to see a tape of the British show. That was encouraging. A tape was delivered. Ms. Wong watched it — and passed again.

The impasse with Fox continued. C.A.A. heard nothing from Mr. Darnell. Ms. Berman and Mr. Grushow continued to press for a fully sponsored show; nothing was happening, despite the fabulous success in Britain.

But even as talks with Fox dragged on, C.A.A. was trying to exploit a connection that some at the agency believed might play out to their advantage. Back in October, several C.A.A. executives had met with Elisabeth Murdoch, daughter of Rupert Murdoch, the founder and chief executive of the News Corporation, which owns Fox. The meeting took place at Mipcom, the international television programming festival in Cannes, France. A blossoming relationship took hold there.

With the talks about "Idol" stalled in Los Angeles, the C.A.A. representatives at one point mentioned the show in a conversation with Ms. Murdoch, who ran the News Corporation's most important television operation in England, the BSkyB satellite channel. She, of course, was witnessing the phenomenon of "Pop Idol" firsthand, on her home TV set.

Fortunately for C.A.A., Ms. Murdoch flat-out loved the show. Hearing that her father's American network had yet to act on making a deal for the United States rights, she decided to give the process a helpful nudge. She called her father and told him how much she loved "Pop Idol" and how big the show was becoming in England. She urged him to buy the rights for Fox.

Mr. Murdoch put in a call the next day to Peter Chernin, his No. 2 at the News Corporation and the top decision-maker on all the biggest moves made by the Fox network. "What's going on with this show 'Pop Idol,' Peter?" Mr. Murdoch asked Mr. Chernin. "It's a big hit in England. I spoke to Liz and she says it's great."

Mr. Chernin was familiar enough with the situation to report that Fox's network people had been talking about it with the agency, discussing potential advertising backers. "We're still looking at it," he said.

Mr. Murdoch shot back: "Don't look at it. Buy it! Right now."

With those marching orders ringing in his ears, Mr. Chernin followed up quickly, calling Mr. Grushow and Ms. Berman. He asked them the status of "Pop Idol." They told him that they were still waiting for the advertiser sponsorships to come through.

"Just close the deal," Mr. Chernin said. He explained the call from Mr. Murdoch.

Mr. Grushow said, "We'll get it closed today."

The actual order for the series suddenly changed as well. Instead of an eight-episode summer order, Fox began asking C.A.A. for the rights to broadcast 15 episodes — the same duration as the show in Britain. The C.A.A. agents concluded that one of the Murdochs, or maybe both, had insisted that the show be done exactly as it was in England.

That did not mean that Fox would import the British hosts and judges. Fox fully expected to hire figures from the American music industry for those jobs. But after the deal was concluded, and Mr. Grushow finally was able to watch a tape of the British version, he told Ms. Berman that he was taken by the nastily charismatic figure on the British judging panel. "I think as part of the deal, we should insist on bringing this guy over as a judge," he said. At that point, he could not remember Simon Cowell's name.

"Pop Idol" made Mr. Cowell one of the most talked-about cultural figures in Britain in the winter of 2002. He was a tabloid newspaper's dream: seen by millions every week on television, saying something outrageously quotable ("You're a disaster"), doing something unconscionably cruel (several young women left the auditions convulsed in tears after hearing his corrosive assessments of their talents) and tirelessly promoting his program (by doing every sort of interview in print and on television and radio).

Mr. Cowell said he was pleased when he heard that the show had finally sold in the United States but mildly shocked when he learned that Fox was requesting that he come along to be a judge on the American version. He had not planned on turning himself into an international television star; he said he wanted only to make the show a hit for the benefit of his record label.

At first he had doubts about whether he knew enough about American music to judge American singers. He was also concerned because of the way American television executives functioned during those hideous meetings in the spring. He expected that some genius at the American network was bound to try to water down the show, and especially his honestly acerbic comments. He would have no interest in a sweetened version of "Pop Idol."

Then Kevin Warwick, one of the producers of the British show, called. "Look, Simon, we're going over to produce the show in America," he said. "I will look after your back again. You won't have to compromise what you do. You can be yourself."

Mr. Cowell asked, "So I can really be the same as I was in England?"

Mr. Warwick assured him that he could.

A few weeks later, Mr. Cowell arrived in Los Angeles for his first round of meetings with Fox and the American producer, Brian Gadinsky. At first they considered rechristening it "America's Idol." Mr. Darnell thought that made it sound as if it might be about a New York fireman, so he suggested "American Idol." (Nobody wanted "pop" in the title because nobody in the music business in the United States ever used the word "pop" anymore — with the exception of Michael Jackson — and because "Pop Stars" had been a failure for the WB network.)

Mr. Murdoch, as he often did, sat in on a meeting that winter to go over the full development slate for the network. When it came time to talk about reality programs, he jumped right in and asked about "Idol." Mr. Darnell was ready with his plans for how to execute the format. "Here's what I want to do," he began.

Mr. Murdoch cut him off. "You don't change a thing," he said, according to one of the Fox executives in the meeting. "This show works in England. And you're going to make the same show they made in England. The problem with you Hollywood people is you always want to change things and you ruin everything."

Mr. Murdoch had not likely studied the structure of the British format to determine that it was flawless. But he did know that the network would not have "Idol" had he not insisted on it.

No one would think of challenging Mr. Murdoch's views, but some Fox executives really did believe that the British format had some obvious flaws. For one thing, it had two hosts, which surely made the show seem unnecessarily cluttered. And the four-judge panel invited trouble because it was an even number. If the judges split two to two, the format called for Mr. Cowell to break the tie, but that seemed actually to reduce the number of judges to one.

FOX had not signed Mr. Cowell to a contract — at his insistence. He told the Fox executives, "I'll do one season and see how it goes." That was music to the ears of the Fox group, still worried about the expense of this little summer show that had suddenly grown to 15 episodes. Nobody really knew how the show would do. Mr. Cowell was still emphasizing that he was in it not for the fame or the salary, but for the money that would come from having yet another hot artist for his label. He did not even acquire an American agent — not right away.

The whole Fox network operation impressed Mr. Cowell because there was never a hint of an attempt to censor him or to turn him into a sweetheart of a guy. Fox seemed to him to be bravely acknowledging that the American audience, like the British audience, was ready to rebel against what Mr. Cowell called "the terrible political correctness that invaded America and England."

To Mr. Cowell, it looked as if Fox was going to allow the audience to see something that wasn't sanitized for a change. They would embrace the fact that with Mr. Cowell doing the talking, "lots of useless people were going to be told that they were useless."

The selection of the other judges went relatively smoothly. When Fox brought in Randy Jackson, the onetime bass player for the band Journey who became a successful producer and talent manager for Columbia Records, Mr. Cowell liked him immediately. When Mr. Cowell heard that Paula Abdul would also be named a judge, Mr. Cowell thought that she was also a solid choice, given her long music career in the United States.

Mr. Cowell did not meet Ms. Abdul until the first round of auditions for the show, which took place in Los Angeles. At that point, no one at Fox had ever even seen the three judges interact with one another. A fourth judge had still not been chosen, but given how much time the auditions were expected to take, the idea was to start with three and, if a fourth was found, to add him or her later.

Almost nothing was said among the judges before the first auditions rolled. Ms. Abdul seemed quiet and polite to Mr. Cowell; Mr. Jackson was affable. The first singers came in. They had already been screened, of course, and included a healthy mixture of respectable warblers and tone-deaf screechers.

This was teed up for Mr. Cowell, who unleashed his lash on every offending wannabe. He told one girl to get a lawyer and to sue her vocal coach. Others he labeled with such terms as wretched, horrid, pathetic. When one kid said he would someday regret all the hearts he was breaking, Mr. Cowell dismissed him with the line, "You're a loser."

The chorus of put-downs was clearly not what Ms. Abdul had been expecting. Several times during the first day, she looked over at Mr. Cowell in shock. He took notice. Apparently, Ms. Abdul had been anticipating the kind of audition that American kids usually got: "Oh, you were great! Thanks, we'll let you know." Instead, they were leaving either angry or in tears.

After the taping, Mr. Cowell cornered the producers. "I think Paula is going to walk," he told them. "I don't think she's going to want to continue to do the show." Ms. Abdul did not quit, but the relationship between her and Mr. Cowell was instantly tense. Their fractiousness on the air in those early shows was definitely not a put-on, Mr. Cowell said.

As the auditions moved on to a second round, Mr. Cowell remained concerned about how Ms. Abdul was going react to his give-no-quarter style. Just before the taping was to begin, one of the newer American producers came up to him with a long sheet of paper in his hand. He offered it to Mr. Cowell.

"What is it?" Mr. Cowell said.

"We've written a script for you today," the producer said.

"What do you mean a script?" the befuddled Mr. Cowell said.

"We've written put-downs for you, more put-downs," the producer said.

"What do you mean, you've written me put-downs?"

"Well, you're scripted, aren't you?" the producer said.

"No, I'm not scripted," Mr. Cowell said, now more appalled than surprised.

"Well, do you want these?" the producer said, offering the list again.

"No!" Mr. Cowell said, utterly indignant at the insult. Apparently these people were accustomed to everything being scripted.

AFTER the auditions, Mr. Cowell flew home to London. He was confident that the show would make great television. He had no idea if it would break through and be a hit, because he felt that he could not predict American tastes the way he could British tastes. But he was more than satisfied with how the auditions had gone. He would return for the live-performance shows just after the first few editions of "American Idol" went on the air.

Mr. Cowell was back at his day job in London on June 11, 2002. He had music artists and selling records on his mind, not "American Idol." The fact that the show had gone on the air the previous night in the United States had slipped his mind.

About 3 p.m. London time, he got a call. It was one of the "Idol" staff members in Los Angeles. When Mr. Cowell picked up the phone, the guy on the other end was so excited that he could hardly get the words out.

"Simon, this is amazing; it's a hit," the voice said.

Confused for a moment, Mr. Cowell said: "What are you talking about? What's a hit?"

" 'American Idol.' We opened last night, and the ratings are going through the roof."

"Fantastic!" Mr. Cowell said. "I'm really pleased."

The report was only a slight exaggeration. "Idol" was the most-watched show on American television, with 10 million viewers, on the Tuesday when it had its premiere; the next night it eclipsed 11 million. Both ranked even better among the young viewers whom Fox coveted, beating all competition in the 18-to-49 age group and, even better, finished first and second for the week among viewers 18 to 34.

Mr. Cowell immediately embarked on a round of publicity, doing 50 interviews with American radio stations in one day alone. Of course, the phenomenon that would soon dominate American pop culture — and ignite Fox on a spectacular ratings run toward real competitive balance with the other three networks — was only beginning. Within a matter of weeks, Fox was making arrangements to bring "Idol" back in the regular season, starting the following January.

"American Idol" would not be only the "game changer" that Mr. Grushow and Fox had been searching for.

It would be a business-changer for all of network television.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/30/business/yourmoney/30idol.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

RussTC3

04-30-06, 01:49 AM

A bit off-topic, but I couldn't resist.

Nintendo names new video game console "Wii"
Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:39pm ET

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Nintendo Co. Ltd. has given the name "Wii" to its new video game console that up until now has been known by its code-name "Revolution," the company said on Thursday.

The name of the new gaming machine is pronounced "we" and emphasizes that the console is for everyone, Nintendo said.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-04-27T163909Z_01_N4R140093_RTRUKOC_0_US-NINTENDO.xml

:eek:
Damn strange no?

I got a kick out of BBC's reporting of it. Check out the end of this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4953650.stm) article:

The company has already sold five million copies of its brain training game, Dr Kawashima's Brain Training: How Old Is Your Brain?, for its handheld console, the Nintendo DS.

The game sees players follow a daily routine of brain enhancing exercises to boost their IQ.

Only time will tell whether Nintendo can replicate that kind of success with its Wii.

Gotta love it. :D

fredfa

04-30-06, 09:56 AM

TV Notebook
Broadcast's spring bows lacking wow

Midseason skeins prove underwhelming

By Rick Kissell Variety.com April 30, 2006

One year after "Grey's Anatomy" defied conventional TV wisdom by blooming in April, no spring addition to the primetime sked looks like a game-changer.

In fact, pretty much all of midseason -- at least since December's bow of "Deal or No Deal" on NBC -- has been underwhelming.

A whopping 27 series have preemed on the broadcast nets in 2006 and only one, CBS drama "The Unit," is a lock to return next season.

This is in contrast to last year, when four skeins bowing post-January advanced to a second season, highlighted by megahit-in-the-making "Grey's Anatomy." Medical skein is one of the few April bows of the past decade to stick around.

Last year's midseason crop also included hit crime dramas in CBS' "Numbers" and NBC's "Medium" as well as the Peacock's "The Office," which didn't do much when it bowed but is on the rise this season.

In many cases this year, though, the quality simply wasn't there for the midseason shows. A handful of skeins drew favorable reviews but none was an overwhelming consensus choice of critics.

There were mixed results for the shows that garnered the best reviews, with ABC's "Sons & Daughters" and CBS' "Love Monkey" doing little while the well-reviewed CBS combo of "The Unit" and "The New Adventures of Old Christine" have fared better.

"The Unit," which bowed in mid-March, has averaged a 4.4 rating in adults 18-49 and a 6.2 in adults 25-54 for its first eight episodes. It also should be the season's most-watched newbie at about 16 million viewers.

Verdict is still out on "Old Christine," which started hot (holding about 95% of its "Two and a Half Men" lead-in) before settling into the 80%-82% range -- on par with "Out of Practice" in the slot last fall.

Another midseasoner to make some noise was ABC's "American Inventor," although this poorly reviewed series slipped to a 3.3 average for its previous three segs after earning a 4.7 for its first three outings.

Critics also hurled bricks at Fox's "Unanimous," which will end the season as the No. 1 new program in 18-49 (roughly 6.0) by virtue of retaining about half of its "American Idol" lead-in on Wednesday.

Both "Inventor" and "Unanimous" could return in some form next season.

Auds mostly yawned at the midseason comedies, including NBC's "Four Kings" and "Teachers," Fox's "The Loop" and "Free Ride," ABC's "Crumbs" and CBS' "Courting Alex." They also gave up quickly on two NBC dramas that opened decently, "Book of Daniel" and "Heist," and have offered only modest support for the net's "Conviction."

And then there were the real turkeys of the new year -- ABC comedy "Emily's Reasons Why Not" and NBC unscripted skein "Celebrity Cooking Showdown" -- which wasted massive promotional efforts by their respective nets and were cooked after one airing.

It's also been brutal for new shows on the WB and UPN. Latter struck out with "South Beach" and "Get This Party Started," while all four of the Frog's new shows have failed.

Nobody expected much from comedy "Modern Men," drama "The Bedford Diaries" or reality entry "Survival of the Richest," but dramedy "Pepper Dennis" has been a disappointment. The Rebecca Romijn starrer averages a 1.1 rating compared to a 2.0 for lead-in "Gilmore Girls" (2.0).

Along with the WB and NBC, ABC has had a weak midseason. The return of "Dancing With the Stars" was a nice addition to the sked, but dramas "In Justice" and "The Evidence" proved to be Nielsen lightweights.

If the Alphabet is edged out by Fox for the season's demo crown, it can look back at the lackluster return it got from its midseason offerings.

fredfa

04-30-06, 12:30 PM

Saturday’s network prime-time ratings are now at the top of RATINGS NEWS (the first post in this thread).

fredfa

04-30-06, 08:25 PM

TV Review
Doc, Heal Thyself

A medical mystery hits home on House
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

"Did you call Jack Bauer?" Dr. House snarks to his agitated boss when told the hospital's crisis this week has escalated to a Biosafety Level 3.

Funny line, as usual. But also telling. Because House (Tuesdays at 9 pm/ET on Fox) often feels like the 24 of medical dramas. It's that extreme, and that suspensefully entertaining. Besides, given the acidic way House treats patients and staff, his behavior isn't that far removed from Jack's methods of casual torture.

The desperation to solve the latest deadly puzzle is absolutely excruciating in this week's remarkable two-part thriller (Part 2 airs on Wednesday at 8 pm/ET). It's a tour de force, not just for the delightfully curmudgeonly Hugh Laurie as House, but for Omar Epps as long-suffering protégé Dr. Foreman.

This time Foreman's the patient, contracting the same mysterious and fast-acting symptoms (including blindness and unbearable pain) that put a wounded policeman in toxic quarantine. Epps gives a wrenching performance, sweating anguish and terror as his body succumbs while his colleagues scramble against time for answers.

Foreman's conflicts with colleague Dr. Cameron (Jennifer Morrison) and his estranged father (Charles S. Dutton) add to the tension. But it's House's fretfulness and guilt over Foreman that set these episodes apart and above.

"The reason you don't see patients is because if you know them, you'll give a crap about them," House's pal Wilson (Robert Sean Leonard) tells him. Bottom line: There's no way not to care how this one turns out.

This House is on fire.

http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/review/

fredfa

05-01-06, 12:13 AM

The 2005-2006 TV Season
Ask Matt

(from the Ask (TV Critic) Matt (Roush) column at TVGuide.com
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: OK, I know you love to beat up on Will & Grace, but you left it off your predictions list for this year's best-comedy Emmy nominees; you didn't even recognize it as being in the running! This season has been quite a return to form and I guarantee it will be in the race with likely competitors Arrested Development, Desperate Housewives, My Name Is Earl and Scrubs. I'd bet the HBO shows cancel each other out and The Office doesn't get in, but Steve Carell does. — Jason

Matt Roush: You may well be right, but I wouldn't look at this possibility as a triumph, but more of a vindication that the Emmys are eternally out of sync with the times. They are stuck in a rut, repeatedly nominating the same shows with little regard for sustained quality. (Will & Grace should be disqualified if only for those poorly executed live episodes, especially the second one.) If W&G trumps Entourage or even The Office (which is uneven but more inspired in its ensemble work than W&G has been in ages), it will be among what I imagine will be many grievances for us to obsess over between the nominations and the actual ceremony.

________________________________________

Question: I have been an avid fan of Lost for a long time now and must say that Michael Emerson (Henry Gale) is one of the best villains I have seen on television in recent years. My husband and I just began watching 24 faithfully in the past few weeks, and while we are enthralled with the suspense of the story line, we are unimpressed with Gregory Itzin's portrayal of President Logan as the villain. But Emerson's Henry is extremely intimidating and creepily believable; he's a wonderful character whom we love to hate. What do you think it takes to create a truly creepy and convincing villain? Do you think this is more reliant on the writing or the actor's abilities? Thanks. — Molly H.

Matt Roush: A bit of both, surely. The best villains are also often the most enigmatic, and Henry Gale (at least up to now) certainly fits that bill. Michael Emerson was also amazing in a recurring role on The Practice way back in 2000, as the supercreepy serial killer William Hinks. But comparing this character to Gregory Itzin as Charles Logan is a bit unfair. And for what it's worth, Itzin has been enjoying quite a bit of acclaim (all deserved) for his sinister about-face. Logan is a bad guy, for sure, but this one's played more for pathos. Here's a guy who's in way over his head, caught up (don't ask me how) in a bizarre scheme that spiraled way out of control and claimed the life of a former president and a current secretary of state. Logan, despite his position of power, is essentially weak and pathetic, and he knows it, as do we. Whereas Gale is still a total mystery to us, and he seems to enjoy toying with everyone who comes in contact with him in the hatch. All we know for sure is that he's scary as all get-out. Both actors are doing breakout work this season, they're just doing it differently.

________________________________________

Question: It was recently announced that a certain cast member of Lost joined a pilot for CBS in the fall (as a guest star), and it caused massive speculation in the entertainment press. Lately I've gotten weary of these kinds of announcements — the same thing happened to characters on 24 and The Sopranos. I know actors can sometimes star in two different shows at the same time, but given that Drea de Matteo's character, for example, seemed in peril on the show, I couldn't help but figure that her character was a goner sooner or later anyway. With shows like 24 and Lost, I know that anyone could die, but are you getting tired of the rush to scoop the next person, and is revealing vital information getting in the way of enjoying a good show? — James

Matt Roush: As both a provider and consumer of entertainment news and commentary, I can only say that this subject is a minefield. For every person who (like you) seems to despise spoilers, there's someone else who lives for them. I fall in between. There's no way, for instance, we could avoid reporting on something as basic as Drea de Matteo joining the cast of Joey, no matter what speculation that might raise about her role on The Sopranos. But did that spoil it for me when Adriana met her maker? Not a bit. I didn't know when, how or even if it was coming (for all we knew at the time, she could have escaped into witness protection). News is news, and that includes entertainment news.

Where I have a bigger problem is in knowing too many plot details on the shows I love. Working here, I can't tell you how many times I've plugged my ears during a story meeting so I could stay in the dark about an upcoming assignment. Case in point: We had a story ready to go on Gregory Itzin following the plot twist on 24. I knew something was happening, but I didn't know what. And I would have been furious to have known about it in advance. That's why we put spoiler alerts in front of items, as best we can, if we think it's going to ruin a twist. But I also have little sympathy for those who have yet to watch an episode that has aired and who then gripe after visiting a site like this that there wasn't a spoiler alert in any discussion of said episode. Once something has aired, it's fair game. Before that, I'm like you. I'd be cautious about what reporting and speculation I read. But it's getting harder and harder to stay completely in the dark, I'll give you that.

________________________________________

Question: I have recently started watching Love Monkey reruns on VH1 and have completely fallen in love with the show. (Tom Cavanagh rules!) I only wish I and about a million other people had started watching the show earlier so that we could all look forward to many seasons to come. My Question: Oftentimes, such as with Love Monkey or My So-Called Life, other channels will pick up episodes and rerun them for the "cult" fans. Why can't these same channels actually produce new episodes for the show, knowing they already have a large fan base? Is it that difficult to obtain rights to a show that another network has already canceled? — Catherine

Matt Roush: From what I've read of VH1's numbers for Love Monkey so far, I wouldn't overestimate how "large" that fan base is, though it certainly deserves one. The basic issue here is that cable networks like VH1 simply don't have the budget to produce costly new episodes of a sophisticated scripted drama (with A-list actors like Cavanagh, Judy Greer, Larenz Tate, Jason Priestley, etc.). Have you seen most of what VH1 produces? Bargain basement would be a compliment. And even picking this up from CBS, which is a corporate sibling, was probably more expensive than it looks. (I've been told one reason Bravo didn't pick up the unseen episodes of NBC's Book of Daniel was because of the expense of license fees, even though the episodes were already produced.)

________________________________________

Question: Boston Legal is a well-written David E. Kelley series in the tradition of Picket Fences and The Practice. But I have become turned off in recent weeks by the show's tendency to break the fourth wall time after time. In one instance, Denny Crane (William Shatner) berates his friend and colleague Alan Shore for withholding important information from him. "I wish you had let me in on the game," Crane said. "I can act, you know. I won an Emmy." Shatner, of course, has won two Emmy awards for playing the off-the-wall attorney. In Tuesday night's episode, Shore (played by James Spader, another two-time Emmy winner) is warned by his overamorous secretary (Marisa Coughlan) not to become romantically involved with a female attorney (Kerry Washington). "Don't fall for her, Alan," the secretary said. "She's just a guest star." I don't know about you, but I take my TV dramas seriously. Satire is fine in its place, but it seems as if Boston Legal is taking things to a whole new level. Does it bother you as well? — Jakeem

Matt Roush: Reason number "I've-lost-count" of why I don't watch this show anymore: It's so busy cracking itself up I rarely find myself amused. But the show's fans love this sort of meta wink-winking. If you take your TV dramas seriously, I'm surprised you didn't bail on Boston Legal long before. It's not meant to be taken seriously. Kelley himself regards the show as more of a comedy, which allows him to take outrageous liberties with character, plot and, obviously, dialogue. That's what many people love about the show.

________________________________________

Question: I was watching American Idol last night, but as usual, every time I tried to call, I couldn't get through because the lines were busy. I'm not obsessed enough with the show to try more than a few times, so my question is: How can American Idol claim to ouster people with the fewest votes, when it seems like half the votes aren't even being counted because the lines are busy?! Is it possible that they're actually getting it wrong week after week? (Although, to be fair, I'm OK with everyone who has left so far — except for Mandisa!) — Caroline

Matt Roush: This question comes up every season, perhaps less this year than in earlier seasons. The voting procedure and the actual results tally are easily the most controversial aspects of the show, and I don't have a good answer on how one could possibly gauge their accuracy. (This week I actually placed some calls as an experiment on Tuesday night to see if they'd go through — also because I thought the judges were unnecessarily harsh to Katharine McPhee, especially in light of how abysmal Kellie and Paris were. I used my redial function, which isn't as fast as I'd like it to be. I got through a handful of times, but the lines were often busy.) Perhaps you can take some comfort that if the lines you were calling were always busy, that at least means someone else was voting for your favorite.

________________________________________

Question: Seeing that next season is possibly the last one for Gilmore Girls, don't you think a great spin-off idea would be a prequel showing the 16-year-old Lorelai leaving her parents and trying to raise a baby daughter? What is the likelihood of this? I think it is a great idea, assuming younger Lorelai were properly cast. — David

Matt Roush: Actually, this sounds more like a good, or perhaps "very special," episode of Gilmore Girls than an actual series. But at least you're not beating up on the show or on the creators, so thanks for the refreshing change of pace.

________________________________________

Question: In last Monday's edition of Ask Matt, you mention that Invasion was the only genre show to get the entire season aired on network television. I just want you to know that this is incorrect: I realize you weren't a Surface fan, but they did play the entire season. It was a short one due to, I believe, the Olympics, but it still had a season finale, which was good enough for me. — Adele

Matt Roush: True, but my point was that Invasion was the only show of its type to get a full-season order of 22 episodes. Surface was rushed to a finale after only 15 episodes, in part to make room for the Olympics and to make way for a mid-season slate of new shows to follow, but also because (you have to think) NBC had pretty much given up on it. And while that was good enough for you, it wasn't for many fans, who continue to write in confusion about where the show went and if it's coming back (an answer we won't have until NBC announces its schedule on May 15). But from what I hear of the network's development, I'd be surprised if Surface is part of NBC's future.

________________________________________

Question: What the heck has happened to A&E? Dog the Bounty Hunter is their top show and now there is a reality show called God or the Girl? Please tell me A&E plans on offering us something better in the upcoming summer and winter. — Jacki W.

Matt Roush: I wish I could, but A&E seems to have gone almost completely to the dark side, with an obsessive devotion to reality-based series, and not even particularly good ones. Still, there is another season of first-rate British spy drama MI-5 in the wings, and the network keeps telling me they'll air it, although there is still no airdate. One positive sign: With The Sopranos joining the schedule in January, there are reports that the network is developing some quality-minded original dramas to complement it. (And a few of the original movies in A&E's pipeline sound promising as well.) But by and large, A&E is content with its downmarket shift in focus. It has brought the network a younger base demographic, and to advertisers, that's all that apparently counts.

________________________________________

Question: I've read that the Oscar-winning Crash is being adapted as a TV series. I'm excited by this because while it wasn't perfect, I liked the movie, and with its abundance of interesting characters and plotlines, it will be intriguing to see where they go with it from here. But I'm wondering where such a series would go; the best-picture win might make it attractive to TV execs, but the movie had so much touchy language and subject matter that I'm not sure what network would be brave enough to air it in this age of heavy fines. What are your thoughts on the possibilities for the show and where it might end up? — Jake L.

Matt Roush: If that report turns out to be true, and not just part of the euphoric post-Oscar buzz (I have no idea if this will ever happen), I can't imagine it would go anywhere but to one of the more adventurous cable networks. Not just because of the adult tone and the racially charged material, but because (Oscar aside) it's not especially commercial. And then there's the issue of those of us who will never forgive it for stealing the best-picture trophy from Brokeback Mountain. But that's another story.

http://tvguide.com/tv/roush/askmatt/