Hot Off The Press! The Latest Television News and Info [Text View] - Page 73

fredfa

11-16-06, 02:23 PM

TV Review
“30 Rock”:
Solid Enough to Rebuild a Thursday Foundation
By Tom Shales Washington Post TV Critic Thursday, November 16, 2006

In desperation there is consolation, because if NBC weren't taking such a shellacking in prime time -- if its nightly lineups looked a little less like the fall of the Roman Empire -- then the low-rated comedy "30 Rock" might already have been canceled.

But happily for viewers (especially those feeling burned out on the kind of pop-Kafka spookiness that the networks are so infatuated with this season), "30 Rock" has not only survived but also, as of tonight, been moved to potentially more advantageous Thursday nights -- land of "Must-See TV" in the days when NBC ruled the waves instead of groveling in the sand.

It gets a bit complicated, however. As a sweeps stunt and to inaugurate a new, mostly comedy lineup on Thursdays, NBC is tonight offering "super-sized" episodes of its better sitcoms, meaning that new episodes of "My Name Is Earl," "The Office" and "30 Rock" will be 40 minutes each instead of 30. Eventually that lineup will be joined by "Scrubs," thus giving "30 Rock" a good lead-in and a good lead-out.

All that strategic mumbo jumbo aside, "30 Rock" clearly deserves another shot, and tonight's episode shows why. The series has consistently and considerably improved since its premiere, and although it unfortunately shares its setting -- backstage at a "Saturday Night Live" kind of comedy show -- with NBC's congested windbag "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," the sitcom is refreshingly bright, sweet and, lest one forget, funny.

The cast is a huge plus, and it's dominated by the noblest Baldwin of them all: Alec, a veteran who has proved himself to be full of surprises. His Tony Bennett impression, spotlighted hilariously on the most recent "SNL" (with Bennett himself making a surprise appearance), is a wonderfully affectionate caricature. And on "30 Rock," Baldwin plays Jack Donaghy, vice president of East Coast Television and Microwave Oven Programming for NBC's owner, General Electric, as someone more complex than the jerk you might expect.

Donaghy's prominence in the story lines has grown because Baldwin's performance is so rare and rich. He isn't doing the easy thing, which would be portraying a network executive as a clueless doofus. Although it's true that Donaghy is full of stupendously wrongheaded notions that he foolishly mistakes for ideas, as well as a pronounced bullying streak, Baldwin gives him an unlikely subtle poignancy. Instead of merely hating Jack, you're likely to develop a soft spot for him, especially when he tries to dismiss failure as mere foible.

Tina Fey, who created the show and plays Liz, the head writer, engages in smart, even sexy sparring sessions with Baldwin, tolerating all but his most onerous abuses on the grounds that the poor schnook doesn't know any better. His vulnerability is brought front-and-center tonight when Donaghy decides that he'd just love to play himself in a comedy sketch, even if it is live TV and even if he can't remember a line of dialogue longer than "Hello there."

When he says, "I thrive on fear," everybody knows he's bluffing.

The episode is a little shaky, however, when it comes to comic perspective. Presumably, viewers are not to take seriously Liz's pompous announcement -- that "we are not compromising the integrity of this show" -- when Donaghy asks her to insert product placements, for such GE wonders as its offshore drilling motors, into the comedy scripts. But then in a blink, Liz is heaping gratuitous praise on Snapple, by name, and later a man dressed as a bottle of Snapple saunters into the scenario.

Is Fey making fun of the show-within-the-show or the show itself? Or both, or neither? Fortunately, it's not worth worrying about, and there's enough going on with the other characters -- including Tracy Morgan's rakish, risk-taking portrayal of rich and lazy movie star Tracy Jordan -- to keep one not only distracted but also amused.

In light of all the good news, it's painful to report that young Jack McBrayer, who plays an impossibly starry-eyed NBC page, doesn't appear tonight, except in the opening credits. McBrayer is the show's brightest discovery, and his performance has been a bittersweet beauty from Scene 1.

So where did McBrayer go? Fey said yesterday from her office in the real 30 Rock that there is "such a big ensemble" in the episode that he was sort of crowded out.

Ironically, room was found for creepy Scott Adsit as a creepy writer named Frank -- basically a waste of time and space.

"I agree that Jack McBrayer is fantastic," Fey said, "and we are planning to use him lots and lots." Maybe it's a budget thing; NBC isn't exactly rolling in rubles.

For the record, Executive Producer Lorne Michaels, who knows more about comedy than the rest of us put together, also chimed in with praise for McBrayer: "We're very high on him. He's obviously the breakout performer on the series. We like him, the network likes him, viewers like him, everybody likes him."

Unless you're already a fan of the series, though, you'll have to take all that praise on faith. And although "30 Rock" is now part of the Thursday lineup -- once hallowed home to such sitcom classics as "The Cosby Show," "Cheers" and later "Seinfeld" -- the show won't air next week because of Thanksgiving, so McBrayer might not pop up again until December.

Regardless of problems, "30 Rock" has earned its spot on the schedule, and not just because comedies are in such woefully short supply -- although, come to think of it, that might be reason enough right there. "30 Rock" is as good as "The Office," "My Name Is Earl" and the rapidly aging "Scrubs." All four shows lined up in a row do not compare with NBC's greatest Thursday nights, but network executives deserve at least a peep of gratitude for keeping the freshmen on the air while smart people tinker with the entrails and make the shows better.

Baldwin's performance, on the other hand, seems perilously close to perfect, beyond improving -- whether wacky Jack is taking a sneaky peek at video of his performance on the show, or irritating Liz by lecturing: "Don't gloat. It makes you seem mannish."

Most of the time, Baldwin's character is the one doling out abuse and yet, in a truly neat trick, Baldwin makes him the show's most sympathetic soul. That's beyond acting; it's more like alchemy. And a crazy joy to watch.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/15/AR2006111501577_pf.html

RemyM

11-16-06, 02:43 PM

2006-07 College Football Bowl Schedule
(All games in HD. All times are Eastern.)

Sunday, December 24th
Sheraton Hawaii Bowl
Hawaii vs. Pacific-10 Honolulu, HI 8 PM ESPN HD

Hey, they finally got a HD truck in Hawaii. I guess we can also expect the NFL Pro Bowl to be in HD this season for the first time.

fredfa

11-16-06, 02:44 PM

Washington Notebook
Another Digital Transition Delay?
Democrats Air Concerns About Analog Switchover
By Ira Teinowitz Television Week November 16, 2006

On the eve of their takeover of the House, Democrats on Thursday raised new issues about the government's plan to manage the switchover from analog to digital TV in 2009 and hinted that the switch could be delayed if the program isn't handled right.

"Failure to devise a consumer-friendly converter box program, or to inform consumers properly of its existence, could significantly jeopardize the public's acceptance of the transition and derail the firm deadline," said incoming House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, D-Mich., and committee Democrats in a letter to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration. The NTIA is the president's principal adviser on telecommunications policy.

Democrats have been critical of the Republicans' plan for the switchover, suggesting insufficient money has being set aside to provide converter boxes to analog households or to publicize the switch. The new letter signals that those concerns will continue in the next Congress, when the Democrats take charge.

"We continue to believe this plan is highly flawed and disadvantages the poor, the elderly, minority groups, and those with multiple analog television sets in their home," the letter states.

The Democrats didn't propose to immediately change the Feb. 17, 2009, switchover date. Instead, their concerns are whether offering $40 coupons for converters only to homes without cable or satellite is sufficient, whether the government needs to require that converter boxes don't provide downgraded signals, and that the $5 million spending on a consumer education touting the change is "woefully inadequate for such a broad and fundamental change."

The government's limiting the boxes to over-the-air households "would unfairly disenfranchise consumers who possess perfectly functioning analog televisions," according to the letter. "Consumers who have purchased analog [TVs] deserve a government backed plan to hold them harmless in this transition."

The letter said the converter boxes "at a minimum [should] replicate the picture and audio quality consumers experience today when watching their analog televisions," and called on the agency to see that the government's $5 million public education effort is bolstered by industry efforts.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11084

dad1153

11-16-06, 04:25 PM

The New York Post may be a sleazy tabloid but sometimes it scores exclusives with very good sources that turn out to be right most of the time. Speaking of "right"...

The Business of TV
WRIGHT HIM OFF
NBC UNIVERSAL CHAIRMAN'S EXIT IS IN WORKS
By Peter Lauria The New York Post November 16, 2006

Say goodbye to Bob Wright.

According to four sources with knowledge of the situation, NBC Universal is laying the groundwork for Wright to cede his role as chairman of the Peacock network to CEO Jeff Zucker, possibly by the end of this year.

"There's strong indication that that's the plan they are moving toward," said one of these sources.

Said another: "Something significant is going to happen [with Wright and Zucker] sooner rather than later."

A third source said three weeks ago, on an Amtrak ride to Washington, D.C., two GE executives were overheard openly talking about replacing Wright.

While Zucker assuming the chairman's title has been widely anticipated - the General Electric-controlled entertainment giant reshuffled its executive ranks last December in order to position Zucker to take over when Wright retires - a move at this time would be unexpected.

An NBCU spokesman vehemently denied Wright's departure was imminent: "There will always be rumor and speculation, but the truth is, a decision like this can only be made by the chairman of GE and the board of directors, and no decision has been made."

Bill Conaty, head of human resources for all of GE, said: "I'm a huge fan of Bob's and Jeff's, and The New York Post will never dictate the timing of GE's succession planning."

The speculation about Wright comes as NBCU Television Networks Group President Randy Falco announced yesterday that he is leaving NBCU after 30 years to join Time Warner's AOL as chairman and CEO. He replaces Jonathan Miller.

It was a poorly kept secret that Falco was miffed about being passed over for the CEO post when NBCU restructured the executive suite late last year.

NBCU has been under a cloud for the past two years as its NBC broadcast network has seen its ratings tumble with the departure of the hit series "Friends" and "Frasier."

While the cable networks NBCU owns have been strong performers, challenges at NBC have become a drag on GE's overall results. That's bad news for Wright, who was said to have viewed the 2004 merger of NBC with Vivendi Universal that created NBCU as his corporate swan song.

The challenges facing NBC have prompted the company to trim jobs, even at its morning show powerhouse "Today." With 65 the mandatory retirement age for GE executives, combined with the internal tension that has marked the relationship between Wright and Zucker over the last year, sources said they wouldn't be surprised if the 63-year-old Wright walked away before he is forced.

NBC is in the midst of a massive restructuring that aims to save $750 million through the elimination of 750 jobs.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11162006/business/wright_him_off_business_peter_lauria.htm

humdinger70

11-16-06, 05:09 PM

I think this is the official sign that there are too many bowl games. A local credit union is really the best sponsor they could get?

I'm a member of that credit union (since 1985). It used to be only open to employees (and family members) of the County of San Diego.

Since they opened up membership to the general public, it's really gotten big. Assets are now approaching 3 1/2 billion (yes, billion) dollars! It's one of the largest in the country.

To have their name attached to a bowl game and a local one at that (both it and the Pacific Life Holiday Bowl are played at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego) is a big boost to their name recognition. :cool:

fredfa

11-16-06, 06:42 PM

Washington Notebook
Senators Attempt To Save Dish Distant Signals
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 11/16/2006

With satellite operator EchoStar facing a Dec. 1 cut-off of all the distant network TV station signals it delivers to some 800,000 customers, a pair of Senators have dropped a bill to block court action mandating the cut-off.

A court had ruled that EchoStar delivered distant TV station signals to customers who could receive an acceptable signal from their local affiliate, in violation of FCC rules. Because the court said it did not have confidence in EchoStar's ability to determine which subs were and were not eligible to receive distant signals, it ordered them to pull all the signals.

Senators Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) and Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy Thursday offered a bill to "ensure that certain eligible EchoStar DISH Network customers that are able to receive distant network signals under current law will continue to receive them," and asked the Congress to act immediately.

It would have to since it is planning to exit for the Thanksgiving break at weeks end, not to return until Dec. 5.

“Without distant signals, many satellite subscribers around the country will not be able to watch a network affiliate, which is a primary source of news, sports and entertainment for many,” said Allard.

EchoStar had sought a delay of implementation of the court order, pointing to the 800,000-plus customers that would have their signals yanked and to a multimillion-dollar settlement it had hammered out with most of the affected stations.

In a statement, the National Association of Broadcasters, which opposes the delay, wasn't mincing words. "NAB strongly opposes a bail - out by Congress of a habitual copyright infringer that has skimmed millions of dollars infringing copyrights and violating the law on a nationwide basis for eight years or more," said spokesman Dennis Wharton. "The fact is consumers will not lose access to broadcast network programming when the court decision goes into effect. Consumers have a variety of easy options to receive broadcast network programming."

Those include cable and satellite competitor, DirecTV.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6392431

grittree

11-16-06, 06:57 PM

Goodman, great as usual. The below is one of the responses to the above blog,

O.J. Simpson took a knife
Plunged it forty times into his wife
But here's the part that is so gory
He went to Fox News and sold his story

(Posted By: sonofabastard)

Let's start being a little fair and balanced here. The OJ crap, just like Temptation Island, was not bought by, nor will it air on Fox News.

fredfa

11-16-06, 06:58 PM

Criic’s Notebook
Protesting to Fox over the Simpson special
By Gail Pennington St. Louis Post-Dispatch Television Critic in the “Tube Talk” blog Nov. 16, 2006

I agree 100 percent with the people who said the best protest is not to watch and encourage others not to watch. Vote with your remotes.

In general I think protesting to networks is futile. Fox doesn’t want to hear from you about anything. On the website (fox.com), you will find, after a lot of surfing, a snail-mail address, but the only reference to e-mail addresses is that there aren’t any.

It won’t hurt to let (your local Fox station) know your feelings, but (if) the station is owned and operated by Fox, (it) will have very little leeway to refuse to air a Fox show no matter how many protests there are….

To protest to Fox, you might join a petition drive. I haven’t heard of one yet, but I’d be surprised if some weren’t started. I’m on vacation Thanksgiving week, so keep an eye out for any petitions. Or start one!

At Fox, the person ultimately responsible for putting the special on the air is Peter Liguori, president of Fox Entertainment. Mike Darnell, who is in charge of the reality-TV division, is credited with acquiring the special.

You could write:

Peter Liguori
President, Fox Entertainment
Fox Broadcasting Co.
P.O. Box 900
Beverly Hills, CA 90213

http://www.stltoday.com/blogs/entertainment-tube-talk/2006/11/protesting-to-fox-over-the-simpson-special/

Davinleeds

11-16-06, 07:09 PM

Washington Notebook
Senators Attempt To Save Dish Distant Signals
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 11/16/2006

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6392431

They have already cut me off and it's not Dec 1. I called them and "we can't find your channels." Please, they knew this was coming and made locals free for three months. And I fought for years to get waviers. Back to free to air mpeg 2 sat.

fredfa

11-16-06, 07:27 PM

The Business of TV
Ad Execs Eschew Fox Sweeps Stunt
by Wayne Friedman mediapost.com Nov, 16, 2006

Media agency executives are keery -- if not outraged--about Fox's highly controversial November sweep special "O.J. Simpson: If I Did It, Here's How It Happened," which will air at the end of the month.

"I can't think of a client that would go near this," says Ira Berger, media director at The Richards Group, Dallas. "I can't see any packaged-goods advertisers buying this. If you are looking for backlash, this would be the Super Bowl of backlash."

On Tuesday, Fox--which has been reeling with double-digit rating declines this season--announced a two-hour, two-day special at the end of the November sweeps period featuring O.J. Simpson talking about his new book, "If I Did It, Here's How It Happened." He will be interviewed by Judith Regan, his publisher, who heads Regan Books. Regan Books, like the Fox network, is owned by News Corp.

Ten years ago, Simpson was cleared in the high-profile, highly charged murder trial of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. But he was found guilty in a civil case and hit with a $33 million judgment.

Ad executives say they can't imagine that Fox will gain much from the special in terms of advertising dollars, but they will gain more in other areas.

"It's going to pull up Fox ratings and create buzz," says Berger. "Fox needed to do something in the fourth quarter; they were virtually invisible."

Many in the industry say the event seems a purely staged one. Regan isn't an impartial news journalist looking to quiz Simpson. She has a financial interest in helping the book and the show succeed. "It's all about selling books and looking for the most provocative way to do it," says Berger. Media executives expect the list of advertisers to be a narrow one--perhaps movie companies or racy Internet Web sites. A Fox spokeswoman had no comment about the network's advertising plans for the show.

Fox may have to consider other issues related to the show. "It would not only have problems with advertisers, there could be an issue with Fox affiliates that might not want to take the show," adds Brad Adgate, senior vice president and corporate research director for Horizon Media.

Which is why agency executives wonder why Fox News isn't handling the interview. Instead, it is being handled by Mike Darnell, who heads Fox's reality programming. That sent media agency executives into fume mode.

"It's the lowest form for hype," says Gary Carr, senior vice president of national broadcast for TargetCast TCM. "It's an embarrassment to our business. I can't imagine anyone in their right mind buying into this. I'm ashamed for Fox doing this, after the network gained respectability in recent years. They have gone for the low blow again."

Some wonder if Fox will actually sell to national advertisers at all. Others speculate that the network is just testing the waters and will--like ABC did early this year with its "9/11" program--announce a few days before airing, that it's a commercial-free event.

http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showArticleHomePage&art_aid=51226

Davinleeds

11-16-06, 07:39 PM

It'll be watched, human nature. Just like the glove, it will intentionally not fit.

fredfa

11-16-06, 07:52 PM

How I hope you are wrong, Dave.

Davinleeds

11-16-06, 08:33 PM

The title of his book is an instigator. I'm not his fan but truthfully my opinion is skewed byCourt TV.

keenan

11-16-06, 10:21 PM

Let's start being a little fair and balanced here. The OJ crap, just like Temptation Island, was not bought by, nor will it air on Fox News.
I'm fairly certain the poster of the little poem meant FOX Network, not FOX News.

fredfa

11-16-06, 10:53 PM

I agree.

And I have read -- though not heard or seen -- that FNC's Bill O'Reilly has been outraged about the Fox interview.

fredfa

11-16-06, 11:05 PM

Critic’s Notebook
The subversive delights of “Ugly Betty”
From Maureen Ryan’s Chicago Tribune blog “The Watcher” Nov. 16, 2006

It’s a good thing Betty Suarez’s poncho is roomy.

Under that billowing bright-red garment, which Suarez famously wore in the first episode of ABC’s “Ugly Betty,” Suarez sneaked in the tools of a television revolution.

The success of the Thursday night show, one of the few real hits of the new season, has upended as many rules of television as you care to count.

It’s not just that a curvy Hispanic woman with thick eyebrows is starring in a broadcast network hit, though that is stunning. But this is a season of surprising developments. After all, the only other recent breakout character is not one from one of the glossy, expensive star vehicles that debuted in the last few months.

No, the other standout character of the fall season is a nerdy Japanese “Star Trek” fan, the lovably geeky Hiro of “Heroes.” Could it be that networks are stepping outside their comfort zones of cops, lawyers and docs and may be on the verge of offering us fun, quirky, just plain different characters? Let’s hope so.

Even if that doesn’t happen, the success of “Ugly Betty” is heartening, not just because the show is a touching dramedy with a starmaking performance by America Ferrera at its center. It’s also a thrill because the show is chock-full of things that just aren’t done on TV - or usually aren’t done well.

Until Betty and her desperately un-chic “Guadalajara” poncho swooped into the snooty offices of Meade Publishing, we rarely, if ever, saw clashes of class and culture like the one we’re seeing now between the highest echelons of Manhattan society and this lower-middle class resident of Queens - a clash in which, by the way, neither side is necessarily held up as the gold standard.

We rarely saw a chick-friendly aspirational drama in which the prize is not a guy, but respect in the workplace. And how many family dramas do we see in which characters struggle to afford their medication and talk about immigration issues that affect them directly?

“Whether it’s the Cinderella myth or the Ugly Duckling - that’s the quick way people are summing up the story, but if you watch, you realize that’s not it at all,” says Eric Mabius, who plays Betty’s boss, Mode magazine editor Daniel Meade. “Betty is redefining the entire paradigm on her terms.”

Here’s the biggest rule that “Betty” didn’t follow, to the show’s eternal credit: The show, which follows the story of Betty’s unlikely stint as the assistant to a publishing scion, didn’t try to strip away the many complicated layers that make it a delectable, unique concoction.

Usually network executives appear to have one job: To bland-ify a show so that it offends no one. The thinking is, if you remove the elements that might turn off individual constituencies, you widen a program’s potential appeal. What you usually end up with is a big bunch of non-threatening blah.

But “Betty,” if anything, went in the other direction, stacking up layers and colors and tones, and mixing comedy, camp and drama with a devil-may-care brashness.

The show is a veritable piñata full of treats: iIf you don’t like the family saga, you can enjoy the forays into the catty fashion world; if you don’t like the antics of the haute couture divas, there’s a soapy murder mystery to solve; and if you’re not into that aspect of the show, there are not one but two romances brewing for Betty.

There’s also the endlessly relatable idea of the outsider persevering in the face of snubs and obstacles. Who hasn’t felt like Betty, at one time or another?

Vanessa Williams says her four kids, who range from college age to 6 years old, all love the show - they actually persuaded the actress to continue in the role as diva fashion editor Wilhemina Slater, when she thought about dropping out after filming the pilot in New York, which is where her family lives (the show is now shot in L.A.). “They said, `Mom, this is a great role. You’ll have fun. We’ll be fine,’” Williams said.

“My eldest is actually at [the Fashion Institute of Technology] in New York; she loves the idea of it being set in the fashion world. My 6-year-old loves how I get to behave on the show - yelling, throwing things,” Williams says with a laugh.

And that cross-generational appeal has paid off with the 14.2 million viewers who have been tuning in each week. As Michael Urie, who plays Betty’s fellow assistant Marc, puts it, “There’s Queens and there’s Manhattan, and we’ve found our audience in both places.”

Part of the reason that “Ugly Betty’s” audacious mixture isn’t a disaster is because Silvio Horta, the executive producer who adapted “Betty” from the hit Colombian telenovela “Yo Soy Betty, la Fea” (“I Am Betty, the Ugly”), knows what he’s writing about. He was once a sheltered Hispanic kid in Miami whose relatives couldn’t believe he wanted to go to college in New York City.

“Any family member [I talked to], it was like, `You’re leaving? You’re going away? You’re going to New York? That’s so far. It’s crazy, you don’t need to leave!’ ” Horta recalls. “None of my cousins [left], you sort of stay behind and stay close. To move beyond that, you know - it’s different for Betty, it’s different than anybody else around her [at Mode]. There’s a real conflict and a real struggle for her.”

Betty’s conflict, between the gum-snapping, big-haired world of Queens and the often snobby world of Manhattan publishing is one that Horta could relate to from the start.

“I love the idea of doing a first-generation Latino-American story, which is sort of my experience, in trying to balance these two very different worlds,” Horta says. “And to get a real sense of this family, which is so different than this world in which she aspires to succeed, [a world] in which she so does not fit in, but by virtue of her optimism and intelligence and confidence, she is able to not only succeed but is able to effect change in others.”

Indeed, part of the show’s charm is its subversive role-reversals, which even apply to its title, which some critics dubbed controversial. Of course Betty is not ugly - perhaps just in need of a day at the spa. And as it happens, her upstanding moral code make her quite appealing - she’s much more attractive than the supposedly elite types around her, who recognize on some level that she is their superior, if not as a fashion trendsetter, then as a human being.

“She’s teaching me to regard people with sensitivity and humanity and to regard people with a consideration I was never taught growing up, and I’m teaching her how to navigate this adult world,” says Mabius of Daniel and Betty’s odd-couple relationship. “It’s like together we make a whole person.”

“Audiences really love that, me and [Wilhemina], we’re always plotting and trying to be mean, and we end up screwing it up,” Urie says. “And as much as we hate that Betty is all those things that she is, she’s always right.”

But taking on a show like this - in which class, ethnicity and gender issues collide in a campily fabulous fashion-magazine world - was a leap of faith by ABC. On the plus side, “Ugly Betty,” was a known quantity, and versions of the show were raging successes in TV markets all over the world.

“Every time the original [telenovela] was on, my mom would hurry and get off the phone, `I gotta go watch “Betty la Fea,’.” Horta recalls. “And whenever I was home it was just on. It was sort of this sensation.”

But it was difficult to get an American version of the show, which originally ran from 1999-2001 in Colombia, off the ground. The concept bounced around in the American TV-development world for years: NBC tried to make it as a half-hour comedy, and even ABC tried to make it once before but passed on that first version of the show.

Still, the creative team behind the show, which includes Ben Silverman, who successfully imported the British comedy “The Office,” and Salma Hayek, who’s currently appearing as a guest star on the show, never backed off Betty’s ethnicity or the heroine’s working-class roots.

“We really wanted to bring back to television … through emotion, through character, through comedy, conversations about race, about class, about differences and distinctions within our everyday life, and … to potentially bring Norman Lear back to a soap opera,” Silverman said at the Television Critics Association press tour in July.

Like many Hispanics, Ana Ortiz, who plays Betty’s older sister Hilda, has been waiting for American television to wake up and start depicting people from her world on TV - as more than maids and man-stealers, the kind of roles she’s most often auditioned for.

“And can I tell you - [it’s always] a maid named Maria,” she says with a rueful laugh. “They haven’t even gotten to the point where they can expand at least on the name. If I’m going to be a maid, can she at least be Blanca or Julia?”

In that context, the arrival of the script for “Ugly Betty” was an event.
“I remember when I first read the script, and I thought, `Oh, my God, this is us. This is my family,’ ” says Ana Ortiz, who comes from a tight-knit Irish-Puerto Rican family in New York. “Everybody’s in each other’s business in my family all the time. They want you to be independent and want you to grow up, but they are so super-protective at the same time.”

“I have cousins who were born and raised and married within the same four blocks,” she notes. “One thing that I love about that, is that when my little cousin walks down the street, everybody will pop their head out the door and say, `Where are you going? Does your papa know?’ I love that insulated community. On the other hand there’s something to be said for having the chutzpah to explore new things. And Betty has the best of both worlds.”

“To me, Betty is the most beautiful opportunity that’s ever come across my path to represent a whole generation of young women who don’t recognize themselves in anything they’re watching,” Ferrera told critics at TCA. “Whether it be magazines or TV or movies, they’re invisible.”

And Horta was determined that Betty’s family, which consists of Hilda, her fashion-obsessed son Justin and her illegal immigrant father, play a prominent role in the show. It was a wise decision; as with New Jersey’s Italian-American Sopranos family and the African-American clan on “Everybody Hates Chris,” the Suarezes are both rooted in their ethnicity and transcend it at the same time.

People relate “not because it’s a Hispanic family, it’s because it’s a family with problems,” Williams says. “You relate to the plight of these characters.”

That mixture of heartfelt drama and sly comedy has helped set “Betty” apart, and its close attention to Betty’s emotional journey made the show a perfect fit with ABC’s Thursday hit “Grey’s Anatomy.” Still, would “Betty” have become such a topic of water-cooler conversation without its candy-colored palette and the vibrant aesthetic touches that announce, “This is not your father’s procedural”?

“I would always say it’s [Pedro] Almodovar-esque, in that there’s a bit of heightened reality, but a real sort of grounded, emotional factor there,” Horta says of “Betty’s” distinctive look, which is dominated by the orange-and-white Mode offices, the primary colors of Betty’s sometimes outlandish outfits and the clashing patterns of the Suarezes’ Queens home.

One thing Horta says you won’t see on “Ugly Betty” is the shaky, hand-held camera that “24” helped make popular. And unlike much television fare, “Betty” is not just full of vibrant colors but also brightly lit. Just as Betty doesn’t match the usual body type and ethnicity of most female TV characters, “Ugly Betty” looks like nothing else on TV.

“It’s about the framing of the shots, the angles and these simple touches,” Horta says. “Everything is a bit askew, which gives it that heightened edge.”

“We just wanted it to have a real pop to it,” he notes.

And pop it has. “Betty,” along with another left-field show, “Heroes,” is one of the few new series to truly catch on with viewers. “Ugly Betty” is not only drawing solid ratings - against formidable fare such as “The Office” and “Survivor” - but it’s also been the inspiration for a fertile crop of blogs and Web sites devoted to the show.

Still, “Betty’s” hit status means that the show has gone into overdrive to make sure that new episodes stay in the pipeline. And given its heightened visual style and large cast, it’s a complicated show to make.

“It’s really rare to facilitate so many different story lines and people from such different backgrounds all in one show. It’s a huge undertaking,” Mabius says. “I’m looking at a script right now - they cut this episode down, but as it exists, there are 57 pages and 60 scenes. And we have eight days to shoot 60 scenes. I mean, do the math. It’s intense.”

“We haven’t had a break at all since we started,” Williams says. “We’ve been doing dual episodes on the same stages, many times we’re shooting with two different directors at the same time. Poor America, she’s like, `What episode is it?’”

The cast may be exhausted, but so far this viewer is energized by “Ugly Betty’s” potential. It has found ways to show us new facets of these characters without diminishing their ability to be funny, catty or warm. And as “Ugly Betty” goes forward, Horta promises more unpredictable story lines for the fearless, fashion-challenged young woman from Queens.

“These things that in the earlier episodes, they’re simple, in a way. They work and they resonate,” Horta says. “Betty has a heart of gold and she is the voice of reason. But as things become more complex and you’re dealing with shades of gray, what does a person do?”

All things considered, despite her heart of gold, I don’t necessarily know what Betty would do.

And that’s a beautiful thing.

• • • • • • • • • • •

This preceding story is the cornerstone of this week's "Betty"-palooza, which includes the following interviews and stories:

• Executive producer Silvio Horta
• Michael Urie, who plays Marc
• Ana Ortiz, who plays Hilda
• Vanessa Williams, who plays diva editor Wilhemina Slater
• Eric Mabius, who plays Daniel Meade
• A mini-feature on Betty's nephew Justin
• A mini-feature on "Ugly Betty" adaptations around the world
• And finally, a guide to being the perfect assistant, courtesy of Michael Urie

To check them all out, go here:

http://tempo.typepad.com/entertainment_tv/

fredfa

11-16-06, 11:16 PM

Critic’s Notebook
If O.J. show is unfit, the channel we must quit
By David Hinckley The New York Daily News November 16th, 2006

Let's all agree on this up-front: The upcoming Fox special in which O.J. Simpson discusses how he would have killed his wife, Nicole, and her friend Ronald Goldman, "if he had done it," could be the most offensive idea in television history.

There is no sense in which it is not tasteless and exploitative.

More than that, it's cynical.

It's Fox, Simpson and producer Judith Regan laughing at their own audience, fully confident that even though we know their project is off-the-charts offensive, we will watch it anyway.

So that's the challenge for us, the audience. We can't stop Regan and Simpson from making it, we can't stop Fox from broadcasting it. What we can control is whether we watch it.

The issue of offensive television content has been a constant in our lives the last few years, along with the inevitable followup question of how to respond.

While some argue for stricter regulatory controls, forcing the FCC into the futile exercise of continually drawing and redrawing lines, the truth is that the most effective content-control device is the one we hold in our own hands: the remote clicker.

It has buttons that change the channel and buttons that turn the TV off. Either is 100% effective in removing offensive content from the screen.

This larger debate has some subtleties, like how to control what the kids watch when you're not home. But none of those apply to the O.J. interviews, which are scheduled to run Nov. 27 and 29. This is a straight up-or-down call.

You watch it or you don't.

Yes or no. On or off.

It's probably worth noting that no matter what O.J. says, this won't be the most horrible thing to appear on TV.

It's not in a league with, to cite the obvious example, 9/11.

But that was a news event. Television had to show it. This special, featuring a man who had faded into the twilight of minor macabre celebrity, springs from nothing more than an expectation it will make money.

All networks have that goal, of course. It's just that Fox often seems less concerned with how.

Fox has been your go-to network, for instance, if your idea of entertainment is alligator bites. Fox once considered crashing a plane, just for fun.

Giving anyone a couple of hours of prime time to spell out a murder fantasy - in which the fantasy victims were really murdered in real life - may not strike most viewers as the noblest use of public airwaves.

But it is consistent with the concept of "anything for a buck" and oh yeah, did we mention the TV special cross-promotes a book coming out that week?

So a lot of resources went into this project, while those of us on the receiving end have just one: the clicker.

It will be interesting to see how we wield it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/ent_radio/v-pfriendly/story/471651p-396888c.html

DoubleDAZ

11-16-06, 11:17 PM

I agree.

And I have read -- though not heard or seen -- that FNC's Bill O'Reilly has been outraged about the Fox interview.He said it is a new low point in American broadcasting. He also commented that the Fox Broadcasting Network has nothing to do with the Fox News Channel.

On a personal note, I really wish I didn't like House, Prison Break, and 24 so darned much. If not for those, it would be pretty easy to boycott FOX-10 here in Phoenix.

fredfa

11-17-06, 12:05 AM

Thanks for the update Dave. My Fox favorites are House and Bones.

The BCS championship game would be hard to miss, too.

I think there is a chance -- slight, but a chance -- that calmer heads might prevail and this entire program might never air.

If advertising can't be sold, then the ratings won't count.

And if the ratings don't count and NewsCorp isn't making any money from the two hours, what is the point of taking this enormous credibility hit?

fredfa

11-17-06, 12:30 AM

TV Notebook
Rob Lowe knows political roles
By William Keck USA Today Nov. 17, 2006

BURBANK — Rob Lowe's decision to turn down the role of Grey's Anatomy's Derek "Dr. McDreamy" Shepherd, he says, was "the first time in all of my career that I picked wrong ... definitely a biggie."

But if he's lucky, Lowe may now get a shot at the McPresidency.

Sunday (10 p.m. ET/PT), he joins ABC's Brothers & Sisters as Sen. Robert McCallister, a California Republican with one eye focused on the White House and the other on Kitty Walker (Calista Flockhart).

"There was a need for someone of Rob's pedigree to match the power of Calista," says executive producer Jon Robin Baitz, who calls Lowe's performance "Kennedyesque."

Baitz says Flockhart and Lowe's chemistry is "immediate" when the senator guests on Kitty's talk show to discuss a messy divorce that is threatening his political ambitions. Having served as deputy communications director Sam Seaborn on The West Wing, Lowe says, "I always wanted to play the guy in the campaign instead of the guy behind the campaign. Sam was a big nerd who read pamphlets in his spare time. There's a maturity to this character that's totally different."

There is a similar maturity to Lowe that defies a face that has barely aged from his '80s Brat Pack years.

Lowe, 42, campaigned for pal Arnold Schwarzenegger's two successful bids for California governor. Before the world heard "the Governator" utter his famous "I love doing sequels" line, Lowe knew it was coming. "I had seen it in the advance draft and had quietly told my wife and some friends, 'Just wait — he has the greatest opening line,' "Lowe says.

To authenticate his performance as a man involved in a messy divorce, Lowe has been referencing kid brother Chad's split from Hilary Swank. "It has been unbelievably painful and yet unbelievably liberating for (Chad)," Lowe says.

"But it was only when Calista asked me how Chad was doing that I started to realize, 'Oh right — my brother's going through a divorce. I know what that is to him. Maybe I should use some of that in this.' "

Lowe has been married for 15 years to Sheryl Berkoff, with whom he has two sons, Matthew, 13, and John Owen, 11. Their secret? "Somewhere in my callow, misspent youth, I was smart enough to marry my best friend."

http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-11-16-rob-lowe_x.htm

Marcus Carr

11-17-06, 01:51 AM

Hey, they finally got a HD truck in Hawaii.

It's not an easy drive. :)

fredfa

11-17-06, 02:08 AM

TV Notebook
More ABC Comings and Goings
By Matt Roush TV Guide Critic

My only question about ABC moving Men in Trees to Thursdays after Grey's Anatomy, starting Nov. 30: Why wait so long?

The practical answer: ABC needs a little time to promote the move, and with Thanksgiving in the mix, it's probably more prudent to wait until after sweeps and the holiday to execute this change, which has been suggested for weeks by many an analyst (not to mention all those backseat amateur programmers who write into my "Ask Matt" mailbox). The upside: the likable romantic comedy of Men in Trees (which I'm now going to have to play catch-up with before it moves) is almost surely more compatible with the sexy shenanigans of Grey's than the pretentious contrivances of Six Degrees — which ABC promises to bring back. (But where? And why?) The downside: Trees' modest ratings performance on Fridays, which has kept it alive, could look disastrous on Thursdays if it doesn't grow considerably with this mammoth new lead-in. Being paired with a megahit is often a very mixed blessing. But still, this combo makes sense.

Now looking back on ABC's mutating Wednesday lineup: Can I just say that I'm glad Lost is over? Not the show itself, which I'll miss during its hiatus, but I'm happy to put this current six-episode "mini-season" behind me. I can't help but think it was a miscalculation to keep Kate, Sawyer and Jack prisoners for so long and subjecting us to endless scenes (up through the cliffhanger) of Sawyer being pummeled, tortured, abused, held at gunpoint. High melodrama at its lowest and most unpleasant. I was thrilled to see Jack taking control of the situation in the OR, with Ben's life in the balance, as he shouted on the walkie-talkie: "Kate, damn it, run!" (This to a woman in whose marriage flashback — to Firefly's Nathan Fillion, no less! — she was heard telling the U.S. Marshal, "I don't want to run anymore.") Using these episodes to introduce us to the world of the Others through the eyes of their captives wasn't a bad idea — and that jaw-dropping season-opener shot revealing the Others' village as the Oceanic plane crashes was one for the ages — but I didn't much relish the unsatisfying prospect of watching three of my favorite characters stuck in cages or in a subterranean prison for weeks on end. (Reminded me a bit of when Dynasty kept Krystle Carrington in an attic for what seemed like months, one of those signposts of the beginning of the end for that long-ago soap.)

When Lost returns, we need a reversal of fortune, and soon, to reunite these invaluable characters to the tribe they've been separated from for too long. I want to re-experience that sense of tribal community, not feel like I'm watching two or three separate shows (a feeling of dislocation that is probably exacerbated by Lost's trademark flashback device, of which I'm still a big fan).

The one undeniable positive from Lost's season so far is the introduction of Elizabeth Mitchell as Juliet. So enigmatic a femme fatale, with questionable motives in her secret allegiance with Jack against Ben (or is it just another trick). She's a keeper. So, if he survives Jack's surgery, is Ben. Through them, I hope to learn what I need to know (for now) about the Others. But not at the expense of being kept so long from the other castaways.

Without doubt, Lost is far from lost. (I'll probably defend this adventurous, one-of-a-kind show to the end.) But when it returns Feb. 7 amid all sorts of hype and hoopla, it needs to deliver the goods, and quickly, to bring us back to the show we know and love. Treading water for six weeks, because of this experimental split season, hasn't been the show's greatest moment. As I've discussed at length in the "Ask Matt" forum, maybe next season ABC will finally be ready to schedule the show 24-style, straight through, without repeat or interruption. If that means ending the show early in spring, or starting it late in the winter, so be it. Lost is too valuable, but also too fragile, an asset to risk with "mini-season" stunts like what we've just endured.

I can't wait for these next 16 episodes, because I'll be treating them as if they were the actual third season, and what we've just lived through as something of a bad nightmare (literally and otherwise). Bring it on.

http://community.tvguide.com/thread.jspa?threadID=700011557

fredfa

11-17-06, 02:13 AM

TV Notebook
Publisher: I Wanted O.J.'s Confession, but I Didn’t Pay Him
Fox News Thursday , November 16, 2006

Judith Regan, publisher of O.J. Simpson 's book "If I Did It," says she did not pay him for the rights to publish his book, in which the onetime football superstar tells how he would have killed his ex-wife if, in fact, he had done it.

"What I do know is I didn't pay him," Regan said in a statement published exclusively Thursday night on The Drudge Report. "I contracted through a third party who owns the rights, and I was told the money would go to his children. That much I could live with."

The book deal reportedly was sold to HarperCollins for $3.5 million.

The producer of a TV special FOX plans to air in conjunction with the book confirmed that Regan's statement was authentic, and said she was publishing it only on the Drudge Report and would not provide copies to other media outlets.

Regan said in the statement that she knew "from my own experience" that Simpson would be found not guilty of murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Brown, and her friend Ron Goldman.

Regan said that she knew Simpson would be acquitted because she, herself, had once been abused by a boyfriend who "manipulated, lied, and broke my heart.... And then, after all but leaving me for dead in a hospital ... he left for good."

Regan said: "I made the decision to publish this book, and to sit face to face with the killer, because I wanted him, and the men who broke my heart and your hearts, to tell the truth, to confess their sins, to do penance and to amend their lives.

Simpson was acquitted of the murders in 1995, but was later found criminally liable for the deaths in civil court in 1997. Although he was ordered to pay an estimated $38 million in damages to the Goldman family, Simpson has avoided making full restitution because California law prevents his NFL pension from being seized to satisfy the judgment. His lavish residence in Florida is similarly protected under state law.

Note: The entire Judith Regan statement is here at the drudgereport:

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1jr.htm

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,230119,00.html

HDTVChallenged

11-17-06, 02:13 AM

And I have read -- though not heard or seen -- that FNC's Bill O'Reilly has been outraged about the Fox interview.

LOL ... like it would be unheard of for one division of a media conglomerate to wallow in the mud in order for another division to pump up their ratings. How many times will FOX pull this trick before folks start catching on? :D

fredfa

11-17-06, 02:28 AM

I would seriosuly doubt that any possible effect the O.J. shows could have on Fox News Channel's ratings have had anything to do with the Fox network decision to air these shows.

The Fox network suits, trying to live down a hideous season so far, couldn't care less about any ratings boost for FNC.

HDTVChallenged

11-17-06, 02:35 AM

LOL ... perhaps I'm just getting cynical and jaded as my age marches on. ;)

fredfa

11-17-06, 02:39 AM

It is hard to fault your cynicism given the preposterous nature of this entire O.J. TV show.

dad1153

11-17-06, 02:50 AM

Judith Regan: more of my exclusive interview with former NFL great OJ Simpson after this word from Tropicana orange juice, the NFL Network, Allstate Life Insurance ('You're in good hands with OJ'), 'Bones' (Wednesdays on Fox) and 'Turistas' (opening Friday, December 4th).

fredfa

11-17-06, 02:59 AM

Washington Notebook
Senator Leahy Leads Fight to Save Dish DNS
(Sen. Patrick Leahy news release)
Leahy Introduces Bill To Preserve Satellite Service For 800,000 Rural TV Subscribers

WASHINGTON (Thursday, Nov. 16) – Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is leading a bipartisan effort to protect home satellite television customers in Vermont and across the country from losing access to some of the most popular television networks.

Leahy, the ranking Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee – and the panel’s incoming chairman for the 110th Congress – Thursday introduced the Satellite Consumer Protection Act, joined by Senators Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Wayne Allard (R-Colo.), Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.), Robert Byrd (D-W.V.), Ken Salazar (D-Colo.), Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Mark Pryor (D-Minn.) and Michael Enzi (R- Nev.). Leahy over the last decade has co-authored two laws that have expanded home satellite service to millions of viewers in Vermont and nationwide. One of the earlier Leahy initiatives has fostered local-into-local satellite service, enabling Vermonters and others to receive local channels in their home satellite program packages.

Leahy’s new bill would preserve satellite television service for roughly 800,000 EchoStar consumers around the country, and in Vermont, who are expected to lose it December 1 as a result of a federal court injunction. EchoStar is expected to suspend service to these consumers following a ruling that it violated federal law by providing distant signals to areas that did not need satellite to receive that programming.

The bill strikes a balance between consumer protection and tough enforcement against EchoStar for violating the law. The legislation requires EchoStar to deposit $20 million to be used to cover any future violations.

“This is a reasonable solution that penalizes Echostar for violating the law, while protecting the people who are the real victims of this serious problem: the consumers who are paying for these services,” said Leahy.

The bipartisan bill provides a targeted solution by permitting the service to continue under specific criteria, including

• Where local stations are not available from a satellite provider, EchoStar could bring in a distant network station if it compensates the local station.

• In areas that do not have affiliates of all four networks (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC), EchoStar could bring in a distant signal of the missing network affiliate because no local station would be harmed.

• Stations from neighboring that are considered “significantly viewed” by the Federal Communications Commission, and generally treated as local stations, could be carried, such as the Albany, N.Y., stations which serve Vermont’s Bennington County and the Boston-area stations, which serve Windham County.

• • • • • • • • • • •

Statement Of Sen. Patrick Leahy, Ranking Member, Judiciary Committee, On Introduction Of The Satellite Consumer Protection Act November 16, 2006

Today I am pleased to introduce the Satellite Consumer Protection Act of 2006, and I am proud that Senators Inouye, Snowe, Allard, Rockefeller, Byrd, Salazar, Clinton, Pryor, Roberts and Enzi are among those joining me in sponsoring this important bill. I regret the necessity of this legislation, but I am determined to protect consumers – especially consumers in rural areas such as Vermont.

This is a pro-consumer, bipartisan bill that addresses a problem that soon will face millions of Americans who subscribe to satellite TV services. I realize full well that this bill may not please the major corporations affected by this remedy, but its intent is not to help them, but to help home satellite viewers.

A federal court recently found that EchoStar willfully, flagrantly and repeatedly violated federal law, and I believe that EchoStar should be held to account for its decade of illegal activity. The situation is ultimately quite complicated, but the simplest version is this: EchoStar has been bringing distant network signals to areas that did not need satellite to provide access to that programming. But the penalty for such actions is harsh, and the court that heard the lawsuit had no choice: EchoStar will be required to stop retransmitting any distant signals. EchoStar flouted the law, but it is consumers who will suffer. Unless we pass this bill, many rural subscribers around the country will lose access to news and entertainment programming from the free, over-the-air broadcast networks.

The Satellite Consumer Protection Act is a practical, narrow, and -- most importantly -- pro-consumer solution to a problem of EchoStar’s creation. The court-issued injunction, set to take effect December 1, will prohibit EchoStar from providing any distant network stations to any of its customers. Under the Satellite Consumer Protection Act, the injunction will apply to the roughly 95 percent of the country where EchoStar provides residents their local, over-the-air stations. Our legislation would only permit EchoStar to bring in distant network stations in three situations. First, where local stations are not available from a satellite provider, EchoStar could bring in a distant network station if it compensates the local station. Second, in areas that do not have affiliates of all four networks, EchoStar could bring in a distant signal of the missing network affiliate because no local station would be harmed. Third, stations from neighboring localities that are considered “significantly viewed” by the Federal Communications Commission, and are generally treated as local stations, could be carried.

This legislation would not be complete without an enforcement provision that will truly curb EchoStar’s practice of illegally providing copyrighted content. The Satellite Consumer Protection Act therefore imposes real monetary penalties for violating the Act and requires EchoStar to put sufficient funds in escrow with the copyright office to cover any future violations.

This bipartisan bill respects the legitimate interests of broadcasters who have been harmed by EchoStar’s actions, while it serves the interests of the people who are the innocent bystanders and the real victims of this emerging problem: the consumers who are paying for these services.

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200611/111606a.html

keenan

11-17-06, 04:28 AM

On a personal note, I really wish I didn't like House, Prison Break, and 24 so darned much. If not for those, it would be pretty easy to boycott FOX-10 here in Phoenix.
Same here, I feel like I'm enabling Fox Network by watching those shows. I can't help but think that someone in that corporation would have the sense, and the power, to pull the show before it airs.

fredfa

11-17-06, 10:48 AM

Nielsen Notebook
Sweeps Week Two:
CBS Tops in Total Viewers; ABC Dominates Demo 18-49
By Marc Berman Media Week Nov. 17, 2006

Two weeks into the November 2006 sweeps, ABC and CBS remain in the winner’s circle, while the arrivals of Sunday Night Football and Heroes have, no doubt, been beneficial to NBC.

CBS is first in total viewers, down 11 percent from the comparable year-ago period, while ABC dominates among adults 18-49 with a two-tenth of a rating point (or 5 percent) advantage over second-place NBC, according to Nielsen Media Research data. CBS is third in the demo, with a loss of 16 percent year-to-year, while growing NBC is up by 15 percent in total viewers and 21 percent among adults 18-49.

Fox ranks fourth in both categories, with minor losses, while last-place The CW is down from both The WB and UPN in total viewers (off 3 and 8 percent, respectively) and close to year-ago levels in both categories. Given that The CW has combined the best programming from the two former networks, this is not a positive by any means.

What follows are the final national ratings for the first two weeks of the November 2006 sweeps (Nov. 2-15, 2006) versus the comparable two-week period:

Total Viewers:
CBS: 12.95 million (-11)
ABC: 12.35 (+ 7)
NBC: 10.83 (+15)
Fox: 6.96 (- 5)
CW: 3.50 (- 3 from the WB, - 8 from UPN)

Adults 18-49:
ABC: 4.2 rating/11 share (- 2)
NBC: 4.0/11 (+21)
CBS: 3.8/10 (-16)
Fox: 2.8/ 7 (-10)
CW: 1.5/ 4 (no change from the WB, - 6 from UPN)

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003409446

fredfa

11-17-06, 11:01 AM

Thursday’s metered market over-night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

11-17-06, 11:12 AM

TV Sports
Whoa, Nellie, it doesn't get any bigger than this
By Larry Stewart Los Angeles Times Staff Writer November 17, 2006

"There will be a lot of money, marbles and chalk on the table," Keith Jackson said Thursday from his home in Sherman Oaks, where on Saturday he will be glued to his television set, joining college football fans across the nation.

You may have heard that there are a couple of significant games on ABC HD that day. At 12:30 p.m. (PT) No. 1 Ohio State plays host to No. 2 Michigan. Then at 5 p.m. (PT) No. 4 USC plays host to No. 17 California, which could knock the Trojans out of the national championship picture.

Jackson, who before retiring after last season had been announcing college football games almost since the inception of the forward pass, says he can't remember a bigger regular-season day.

"It's got it all," he said. "One game is for a national championship berth, the other for at least a conference championship and the Rose Bowl."

Interestingly, Jackson, the longtime voice of college football for ABC, will be honored by NBC Saturday. Part of an interview he taped at his home with Jim Lampley will be shown during halftime of Notre Dame's home game against Army, which will be on NBC at 11:30 a.m. PT.

"I don't think I'll see it," Jackson said. "I'll be watching Michigan-Ohio State."

So will a lot of other people.

No worries. The entire interview will be available on NBCSports.com after the edited portion airs.

The announcing team for Michigan-Ohio State team will be Brent Musburger, Kirk Herbstreit and Bob Davie. Announcing the Cal-USC game will be Brad Nessler, Bob Griese and Paul Maguire.

Maguire, who this season has broken from tradition and worked from places outside the broadcast booth, will call Saturday's game from the sidelines on the cart that carries the camera up and down the field.

As for Michigan-Ohio State, Herbstreit is pretty familiar with that rivalry.

He is from Centerville, Ohio, a suburb of Dayton, and played quarterback for Ohio State from 1989 to '93. His senior year, he was co-captain. His father Jim was a co-captain in 1960 and also coached at Ohio State under Woody Hayes.

In 1993, the younger Herbstreit passed for 271 yards in a 13-13 tie with Michigan.

"I have been a fan of the rivalry my entire life, since I was breathing," he said. "It sounds sick, but all I've lived for my entire life is watching that game."

If that doesn't sound sick, this might:

"I used to go to bed at night when I was in high school, when I started to realize I was going to play at a pretty high level of football in college, and it was the middle of the Cold War when nuclear bombs were a serious threat. I used to go to bed praying to hold off on nuclear bombs until I got a chance to play in the Ohio State-Michigan game."

Herbstreit also said, "To now see this season come down to this — the winner going to the championship game — is beyond exciting for the fans of the two teams. I can't remember a game this big, with this much at stake, and with the whole college football community on the edge of their seats waiting to see who wins the game."

But don't think Herbstreit will be rooting for his alma mater.

"When I get up in the booth, I'm there to evaluate the game," he said. "I'm looking at how two teams are trying to move the ball down the field. I'm not looking at what school I happened to attend."

Besides, he said, he has ties to Michigan. His father coached under Bo Schembechler at Miami of Ohio before Schembechler moved to Michigan in 1969. Herbstreit calls Schembechler a family friend.

As for the Cal-USC game, Herbstreit sees that as possibly the other national championship semifinal.

"Without question, if USC beats Cal, Notre Dame and UCLA — done. USC goes to the national championship, in my mind," he said.

Fox having second thoughts

Fox has experimented with doing its NFL studio show at game sites this season, but it might turn out to be a one-year experiment.

A source said the final two regular-season shows would originate from the Fox studios in Los Angeles, with Joe Buck serving as host. Dick Stockton will take Buck's play-by-play spot on the No. 1 announcing team with Troy Aikman.

Fox Sports spokesman Dan Bell would confirm only that such a scenario is being considered.

The expense of taking the show on the road, plus dealing with security issues, apparently hasn't paid off. The average rating of 3.9 for the pregame show is even with last year's, while the average rating of 2.7 for CBS' "The NFL Today" is 17% higher than the 2.3 at this point last year.

And twice this season, most recently Nov. 5, the CBS show beat the Fox show in the ratings.

It appears the loss of host James Brown to CBS was more of a blow than Fox thought it would be.

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-sp-tvcol17nov17,0,87313,print.story?coll=cl-tv-features

keenan

11-17-06, 11:15 AM

Go Bears!!!

fredfa

11-17-06, 11:16 AM

Washington Notebook
Martin Approved for Second Term Leading FCC
By Ira Teinowitz Television Week November 17, 2006

The U.S. Senate (Thursday) night unanimously confirmed Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin J. Martin for a second five-year term on the FCC.

Mr. Martin has been on the FCC since July 3, 2001 and became the agency's chairman on March 18, 2005.

Mr. Martin leads the FCC as it faces significant challenges. The commission is reviewing media-ownership rules and is expected to face significantly increased scrutiny from the newly elected Democratic Congress on issues including the transition to digital TV and the public interest obligations of broadcasters. Lawmakers and regulators may also take on the issue of so-called Net neutrality, which would ensure that Internet service providers don't charge content companies different rates.

Before joining the FCC, Mr. Martin was a special assistant to President George W. Bush for economic policy. He had served on the Bush-Cheney transition team and was deputy general counsel for the Bush campaign. Before that, he served as an advisor to FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth.

Mr. Martin has also worked in the Office of the Independent Counsel and practiced law as an associate at the Washington, D.C. firm of Wiley, Rein & Fielding.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11091

flint350

11-17-06, 11:30 AM

How many times will FOX pull this trick before folks start catching on?....perhaps I'm just getting cynical and jaded as my age marches on.

Yes, apparently you are.

It is hard to fault your cynicism given the preposterous nature of this entire O.J. TV show.

No, it isn't IMO. I detest the OJ show idea and think it is a huge mistake for Fox the entertainment network. But the references here like the O'Reilly comment and the snickering links to Fox News Channel are suspect. Why is it so difficult to differentiate between the FNC and the entertainment channel of Fox? Are they so thoroughly wedded (and obviously disliked) in your minds that you automatically assume whatever appears on the entertainment channel must, therefore, be supported by or connected to the news division? Does that also go for the other networks then? If this showed up on NBC (and with their ratings, I'm almost surprised they didn't think of it first), would MSNBC come under similar criticism?

It appears when the other networks differentiate their news and entertainment units, it's acceptable. However, this example of Fox's stupidity (entertainment based) is quickly linked to FNC as well. Yep, if it's on the regular network, O'Reilly's supposed outrage over it is merely a trick to "pump up the ratings" of the other side of the house. I'm no particular fan of O'Reilly and hardly, if ever, watch his show and didn't see his comment. But I do watch FNC (as well as the 'other guys') and can separate the two. I think it's quite a leap in logic to assume that this O'Reilly statement is a blatant effort to "pump up the ratings".

And remember - I think the show is despicable, no matter the network. My only point is the portrayal of FNC, which had nothing to do with this piece of garbage to my knowledge, yet is getting its usual beating simply because its an easy target.

fredfa

11-17-06, 11:31 AM

TV Sports
George Michael to Drop Anchor Chores
“Sports Machine” to end in March
By John Maynard Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, November 17

George Michael, the dean of local sports broadcasters, who's been with WRC (Channel 4) since 1980, will leave the sports anchor desk early next year, the station announced yesterday.

Michael said he rejected a new contract after he learned that some of his staff members would be laid off as part of larger moves by parent company NBC Universal.

"NBC made me an extremely, extremely beyond-my-wildest-dreams offer to stay and sign a new deal," Michael, 67, said by phone yesterday. But he added: "If I have to lay somebody off . . . I have to take the first bullet. It's that simple."

Michael's last day as a daily anchor will be March 1, although he will continue to host weekend sports panel shows. "George Michael Sports Machine," which went into national syndication in 1984, will go off the air in March.

One source at the station was not surprised by Michael's decision. "He has a very loyal team and he's not going to put up with any short-circuiting of his staff," said the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he still works for WRC.

Last month, NBC Universal announced that 700 jobs would be cut nationally and $750 million trimmed from its budget. Last week the network news division laid off about 30 employees, including about 15 "Dateline" staffers, some of whom worked in Washington.

At WRC, more than half of the sports staff's 20 members are being let go, including senior producer Joe Schreiber, who's been with the station for 23 years. Michael, who's worked with Schreiber at Super Bowls, World Series and NBA Finals, called him "the best sports producer in America. He's not a good producer -- he's the best."

Schreiber said he understands the layoffs because "it's the business." But, he said: "The regretful thing is that we were still doing extremely well in the ratings."

WRC's general manager, Michael Jack, would not comment yesterday because station policy is not to discuss personnel matters. Vickie Burns, the station's vice president of news, did not return a phone call.

The announcement comes less than a month after it was reported that technology reporter I.J. Hudson, a 21-year veteran of the station, would leave at the end of the year. Over the summer, longtime sports anchor Wally Bruckner also announced his departure from WRC.

In what he calls a unique deal with the station, Michael will continue to host the panel shows "Redskins Report" (with former Redskins Sonny Jurgensen and John Riggins and The Washington Post's Michael Wilbon) and "Full Court Press" (which features local journalists). Michael also will continue his live Monday interviews with the Redskins' coaching staff.

"We are thrilled that he will remain a part of the WRC-TV family and continue to host many of our high-profile sports shows," Burns said in a statement.

Michael's departure from the desk will mark the breakup of Washington's longest-serving and often top-rated news team; Michael, Jim Vance, Doreen Gentzler and weatherman Bob Ryan have been together since 1989.

Michael said he is not considering a position with another station, explaining: "I already turned down a generous offer from Channel 4 -- why would I do it anywhere else?" He also said he would never again do a day-to-day sportscast.

Michael announced his plans to leave the anchor desk at the conclusion of yesterday's 6 p.m. newscast, saying, "When there's a rumor in Washington, you'd better address it."

Recent on-air hires Lindsay Czarniak and Dan Hellie will remain with WRC, but the station has not indicated who will replace Michael.

Michael introduced the local, late-night "George Michael's Sports Final" in 1980; the highlights show evolved four years later into the syndicated "Sports Machine."

From early on, Michael made liberal use of the highlights reel. As sportswriter Norman Chad wrote in The Washington Post in 1985: "He's the only guy in town who can show you five minutes of tape in a four-minute sportscast."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/16/AR2006111600669_pf.html

cherry ghost

11-17-06, 11:37 AM

Has anyone seen anything more official than this concerning Veronica Mars getting picked up?

http://sepinwall.blogspot.com/2006/11/veronica-mars-gets-full-season-order.html

keenan

11-17-06, 11:43 AM

And remember - I think the show is despicable, no matter the network. My only point is the portrayal of FNC, which had nothing to do with this piece of garbage to my knowledge, yet is getting its usual beating simply because its an easy target.
Who's beating on Fox News? Are you referring to the poem I lifted from Goodman's column? Although I cannot speak for it's creator, I already qualified it by saying I'm certain they meant Fox Network and not Fox News itself.

fredfa

11-17-06, 11:43 AM

cherry ghost: I haven't heard anything like this announced officially, although there was word a few days ago of a three-episode order.

But Alan Sepinwall of the Newark Star-Ledger is very careful and prizes accuracy.

So if "VM" executive producer Rob Thomas tells him there has been a seven-episode pickup you can take it to the bank.

flint350

11-17-06, 11:47 AM

Who's beating on Fox News? Are you referring to the poem I lifted from Goodman's column? Although I cannot speak for it's creator, I already qualified it by saying I'm certain they meant Fox Network and not Fox News itself.

No, I wasn't referring to you. Did you not read the quoted posts in my post? Therein lies the rub.

keenan

11-17-06, 11:47 AM

fredfa

11-17-06, 11:48 AM

The TV Column
Vast Audience for 'Dancing' Leaves ABC Calling for More
By Lisa de Moraes The Washington Post Friday, November 17, 2006

Emmitt Smith's waltz past Mario Lopez in ballroom dancing competition has scored the biggest audience of any television broadcast so far this season.

Which is very sweet, really.

Nearly 28 million watched Wednesday's hour-and-change finale of "Dancing With the Stars" at the end of which the three-time Super Bowl champ was crowned best amateur ballroom dancer. That's the show's biggest audience ever.

The series's penultimate episode on Tuesday and Wednesday's finale performed so well, ABC now claims the two most-watched broadcasts on TV this season.

So strong was this third edition of the dance competition, the network has decided to broadcast another round this TV season.

Speaking this week at a TV industry event in New York, ABC's scheduling guru Jeff Bader said the network hopes to bring back "Dancing" in March -- around the time "American Idol" has winnowed its wannabes down to the 12 finalists.

He told attendees ABC is still trying to figure out whether to put "Dancing" on against Fox's ratings "tsunami" or schedule it in non-"Idol" time slots, according to published reports. Good luck on that, given how his counterpart at Fox, Preston Beckman, loves to use "Idol" like a heat-seeking missile.

Wednesday night, Smith took home the Cheesetastic Disco Ball Trophy after 10 grueling weeks of mamboing, sambaing and pasodobling for the show's three judges and the voting viewers, who clearly were smitten with the charming Mr. Smith from the get-go.

During the first half of the finale, when Smith and Lopez were performing one last time for the crowd, about 26 million viewers were watching.

In the second half-hour, when this edition's first eliminated contestant, Tucker Carlson, reprised his impression of the rusty Tin Man, and Sara Evans -- who abruptly left the competition when she filed for divorce from her Republican operative husband -- was kicking up her cowboy-booted heels to "These Boots Are Made for Walking" and, we're guessing, hoping her soon-to-be-ex was getting the "one of these days these boots are gonna walk all over you" message, the audience swelled to more than 29 million viewers.

The show ran two minutes past the hour -- which translates to one more ad break at "Dancing With the Stars" prices for ABC. So by the time Smith was crowned winner of the Cheesetastic Disco Ball Trophy, about 32 million were tuned in.

"Dancing" topped the combined audiences of CBS, NBC and Fox in the Wednesday hour by about 4 million viewers and delivered ABC's biggest non-sports audience in the time period in nearly seven years.

Meanwhile, Sarah Ferguson, the duchess of York, has told celebrity suck-up show "Inside Edition" she hopes she's invited to be one of the celebs for the next round of competition.

"I'd like to go on 'Dancing With the Stars,' " she said in an interview taped to air last night, the Associated Press reported. She said she was turned on to the romantic tango dance style while visiting Buenos Aires.

Grievously, Ferguson seems destined for disappointment. She is, after all, the spokeswoman for Weight Watchers and "Dancing" is sponsored by competitor Slim-Fast.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/16/AR2006111601739_pf.html

keenan

11-17-06, 11:55 AM

No, I wasn't referring to you. Did you not read the quoted posts in my post? Therein lies the rub.
Okay, read them and I see what you're saying, OTOH, I think HDTVChallenged supposition is not really that farfetched given the players involved. To me, Bill O'Reilly is entertainment as opposed to news, even though he's on FNC, so essentially they're both in the entertainment division.

cherry ghost

11-17-06, 11:57 AM

fredfa

11-17-06, 11:59 AM

Thursday’s updated fast national over night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

rebkell

11-17-06, 12:10 PM

I've got a little peeve about ABC, why don't they indicate to the providers of guide data that those next day repeats of Grey's Anatomy are actually repeats, and not new episodes? It's a little annoying to see the show listed as an upcoming recording the day after I've already recorded. Maybe it's specific to TiVo, but I thought Tivo considered anything shown twice within a 30 day period to be a repeat anyway?

I wonder if ratings established from DVR data are skewed because of that.

While we're peeving, why is it that the Thursday showing takes 61 minutes, but they seem able to get the same show on Friday in 60 minutes. They make sure it runs into the next hour, even with dual tuner DVR's, it's difficult to catch the end of Grey's and the start of ER and Shark, ER seems to have caught on and I've noticed they start at 10:01 a lot, but I still don't understand how Thursday's Grey's has to run over while the repeat on Friday doesn't.

fredfa

11-17-06, 12:11 PM

TV Notebook
“Vanished” goes online

Broadcasting and Cable reports that Fox will not air the remaining four episodes of “Vanished” on the network, but will make them available online.

fredfa

11-17-06, 12:18 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
No Thursday juice for NBC's '30 Rock'
Flagging comedy pulls a 2.3 rating in adults 18-49
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Nov. 17, 2006

A new night did little to help NBC’s struggling new comedy “30 Rock.”

In its supersized Thursday premiere last night, and with the benefit of a decent “Office” lead-in, “Rock” averaged a disappointing 2.3 adults 18-49 average, according to Nielsen overnights. Final ratings may vary slightly, as fast nationals measure timeslot and not actual program data, and "Rock" bled through several timeslots.

The show, which aired from 9:20 to 10:01 p.m., lost nearly half of “The Office’s” 4.3, and drew only 5 million total viewers.

Granted, it aired against some of the toughest competition on television in ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy” and CBS’s “CSI,” both of which were up from the previous week.

But “Rock” was below NBC’s modest 3.8 average for “Deal or No Deal” in the 9:30 timeslot last week. And it was slightly below the show’s season-to-date 2.4 average for four episodes in the Wednesday 8 p.m. timeslot.

Yet NBC probably won’t write off “Rock” just yet. In addition to being written, created by and starring network golden girl Tina Fey, the show still hasn’t aired with its new Thursday lead-in.

NBC will premiere “Scrubs” on Nov. 30 at 9 p.m., pairing the dryly humored sitcom with the similarly biting “Rock.” If “Rock” can’t improve then, it may be gone by Christmas.

Meanwhile, thanks to a strong “CSI,” CBS tied ABC for the first time this season among adults 18-49 on a Thursday night, despite the improved performance of ABC’s Barbara Walters special in the 10 p.m. timeslot, temporarily taking the place of yanked drama “Six Degrees.”

ABC and CBS each had a 5.9 average rating and a 15 share. NBC was third at 4.2/11, Fox fourth at 1.8/5, the CW fifth at 1.7/4 and Univision sixth at 1.6/4.

CBS began the night in the lead with a 5.4 average during the 8 p.m. hour for “Survivor.” NBC was second with a 4.0 for “My Name is Earl” and the first half of “The Office,” ABC third with a 3.9 for “Ugly Betty,” and Univision and CW tied for fourth at 2.0, Univision for “La Fea Mas Bella” and CW for “Smallville.” That left Fox sixth that hour with a 1.9 for “’Til Death,” which many speculate will move to Sunday in the coming weeks.

ABC took the lead at 9 p.m. with an 8.8 average for “Grey’s Anatomy,” the night’s top-rated show in the demo, 4 percent better than last week. CBS came in second that hour with a 7.9 for “CSI,” up 16 percent over last week, with NBC third with a 3.0 for the last 20 minutes of “Office” and a 40-minute “30 Rock,” Fox fourth with a 1.7 for “The O.C.,” Univision fifth with a 1.5 for “Mundo de Fieras” and CW sixth with a 1.3 for “Supernatural.”

NBC took its turn in the lead during the 10 p.m. hour with a 5.5 average for “ER.” ABC was second with a 4.9 for the Walters special “30 Mistakes in 30 Years,” CBS third with a 4.4 for “Shark” and Univision fourth with a 1.3 for “Aqui y Ahora.”

Among households, CBS finished the night on top with an 11.3 average rating and an 18 share. ABC was second at 10.5/16, NBC third at 5.9/9, Fox fourth at 2.7/4, CW fifth at 2.5/4 and Univision sixth at 2.0/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_8634.asp

keenan

11-17-06, 12:20 PM

While we're peeving, why is it that the Thursday showing takes 61 minutes, but they seem able to get the same show on Friday in 60 minutes. They make sure it runs into the next hour, even with dual tuner DVR's, it's difficult to catch the end of Grey's and the start of ER and Shark, ER seems to have caught on and I've noticed they start at 10:01 a lot, but I still don't understand how Thursday's Grey's has to run over while the repeat on Friday doesn't.
They sell more ads on the Thursday airing, biggest night of the week for ad sales if I recall correctly.

fredfa

11-17-06, 12:27 PM

TV Sports
Sunday’s race is finale for NBC coverage
By Barry Jackson The Miami Herald Nov. 17, 2006

Sunday's Homestead race marks not only the finale of the NASCAR season but also the final race for NBC after six years of mixed returns.

Though the sport's popularity increased since NBC took over the second-half-of-the-season package in 2001, that never translated into profits for the network. And ratings are off for all rights-holders this season.

''NBC never made any money and I feel badly for it,'' NBC analyst Benny Parsons said. 'If you can't make money. . . you say, `See-ya.' ''

NBC and TNT are paying are combined $200 million annually under terms of the current deal, which essentially expires after Sunday's race. NBC declined to match the $270 million-a-year offer by ABC/ESPN, which next year will carry 17 NASCAR races and the Busch Series. ABC will air all of the 10 Chase for the Cup races in the next contract.

Fox, meanwhile, renewed its deal for the first 13 Nextel Cup races for $208 million annually. Beginning next year, Fox will get the Daytona 500 every year instead of alternating it with NBC. And TNT paid $80 million to keep six races next season.

NBC made the decision to get out of NASCAR last fall, and ratings have declined since then. This year, Fox's ratings were down eight percent, TNT seven percent, and NBC 10 percent through early November.

Ratings for 29 of the first 32 NASCAR races declined from a year ago. And the sport has struggled to build sizable audiences in several major markets, including New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

''One problem that's causing the downward spike is the product,'' Parsons said. ``NASCAR is trying to get a car that's less dependent on aerodynamics and more dependent on mechanical grip. The leader of the race has a huge advantage now. It's so difficult to pass.

``If they go around the race-track nose to tail and don't pass anyone, I could go on a freeway and watch that. In my opinion, passing is racing.''

Still, Parsons said he believes NASCAR ratings will rebound. ''We went through the same thing in 2000,'' he said.

``As the season was winding down, the ratings were going down. Fox, NBC and TNT paid a lot of money to our sport. In 2001, the ratings came back and they had been up every year except this one.''

Parsons said today's NBC finale will be ``emotional. I've been working with a lot of these people for 18 years, plus the people from NBC we've been working so closely with for six years.''

PARSONS RECOVERS

Parsons said he believes he's ''all clear'' in his battle with lung cancer but won't know for sure until he has another Pet-scan in a couple of weeks.

''When I had the last scan, the oncologist was 99 percent sure it was nothing but scar tissue,'' he said. ``I'm taking his word for it.''

Parsons, 65, was diagnosed July 13. He had two major risk factors: He smoked for 20 years, before quitting in 1978. And in the 1960s, while working in a garage, he maintained a fleet of cabs whose ``breaks were 100 percent asbestos.''

He went for tests in July after experiencing shortness of breath while exercising. ''I never suspected lung cancer,'' he said. ``That floored me.''

Parsons had 12 chemotherapy treatments and 33 radiation treatments - all of which he concluded in October. Despite his ordeal, he missed only four races.

''The radiation tires you unbelievably,'' he said. ``It takes your appetite and it seems to affect the taste buds that you don't want to eat or drink.

``After a dozen treatments, the radiation started burning my esophagus. It was difficult to swallow.''

Parsons, who won 21 races in his career, (will be part of NASCAR coverage) with TNT next year.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/16015797.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

steverobertson

11-17-06, 02:21 PM

TV Notebook
“Vanished” goes online

Broadcasting and Cable reports that Fox will not air the remaining four episodes of “Vanished” on the network, but will make them available online.

Well that sucks I guess I will cancel that season pass

fredfa

11-17-06, 02:24 PM

A process I just completed the day before yesterday. I thought the show had some interesting possibilities. But then I am a Victor Garber fan.

fredfa

11-17-06, 02:55 PM

TV Notebook
News and Notes
From Maureen Ryan’s Chicago Tribune blog “The Watcher” November 17, 2006
Oprah's visit to 'Grey's Anatomy': We'll have to wait 'til 3 p.m. (CT)

What happened to Oprah’s set visit to “Grey’s Anatomy”?

That was my first question Friday morning, as I sat down to inhale this morning's delicious-sounding edition of Oprah Winfrey’s chat show. A press release Thursday had said that the daytime diva was paying a visit to "Grey's" Los Angeles set, and that Oprah was sitting down to talk to all 12 cast members and getting them to “answer [her] most burning questions.”

But I flipped on the tube 9 a.m Friday morning, the show's usual Chicago air time, to find a repeat of the Oprah show unveiling the Project Red charity campaign. I called Oprah’s people to get the scoop.

A Harpo spokeswoman said that Oprah's "Grey's" set visit will air at 3 p.m. today, Friday, on WLS-Ch. 7.

Fans of Oprah’s show will recall that this is not the first “Grey’s”-Oprah meetup: Several cast members from the show visited Chicago for a bit of gossip and grilling last season.

In other “Grey’s” news, I bring to your attention a Defcon 5 VCR/DVR alert: Orlando Sentinel TV critic Hal Boedeker points out that next week’s edition of the show will run 70 minutes, from 8 p.m. to 9:10 p.m. Central time. A special edition of “Primetime” will follow the doctor extravaganza.

'Veronica Mars' to get most of a full season

There’s good-ish news for “Veronica Mars.”

Fans of the CW show had been waiting to hear if it would get the “back nine,” or an order for additional episodes that will fill out the third-season roster to a full 22 episodes.

Well, the show got a “back seven,” meaning that, in addition to the 13 episodes the CW already has ordered, seven more have been ordered, bringing the Season 3 grand total (so far) to 20 episodes. Even a “Veronica Mars” insider called the “back seven” order “puzzling,” but also “better than none.” Word. Anyway, I’m glad “Veronica Mars” will get most of a full third season.

By the way, I’m allegedly getting a copy of the ninth episode of the season, in which the Hearst College rapist is revealed, at some point soon. If I do get it, I won’t reveal who the culprit is (that would just be wrong), but I’ll try to post something about it – behind a “click here” wall, and yes, there will be a spoiler alert on the post.

'Weeds' grows a bit more

“Weeds,” Showtime’s sassy comedy-drama about a pot dealer in the suburbs, has been picked up for a third season. That makes two good Showtime series coming back next year: “Dexter” and “Weeds.” “Brotherhood” is coming back too. It wasn’t my thing, but I know some folks really love it.

'Vanished' flees to the Web, and no break for 'Prison Break'

Fox has ordered additional episodes of “Standoff” and “’Til Death,” but, not surprisingly, it’s dropped “Vanished” from its schedule. The last few episodes of the kidnapping drama will be parked online at www.myspace.com/fox. Episodes will be posted four consecutive Fridays until Dec. 8. “Justice” will now air 7 p.m. Fridays on Fox.

Another Fox note: Back to back “House” episodes will air Dec. 11 and Dec. 18. Given that most series are in repeats during December, I’d assume those “House” outings will be repeats.

A final Fox note: MediaWeek reports that the network is leaning toward running “Prison Break” without a 4-month break this season. There will be breaks for the holidays and other special programming, but after that, “it will run straight through,” a Fox executive said.

Returns for 'Reba' and 'King of Queens'

The four questions that turned up in my mailbox regularly this fall concerned the returns of “Medium,” “King of Queens,” “Crossing Jordan” and “Reba.” Well, “Medium” is back, it returned to NBC Wednesday. Now we have news of “Reba” and “King of Queens.” “Reba” will return to the CW 6 p.m. CT Sunday.

“King of Queens” returns to CBS 7 p.m. CT Dec. 6 and 7 p.m. CT Dec. 13 with two episodes. One fresh episode will air 7 p.m. CT Dec. 20 and at the same time Dec. 27. Seven additional episodes will air in 2007 on a time and day to be determined.

As for "Crossing Jordan," it is coming back, but no date has been set. It'll likely return in the new year.

A new chapter in the 'Babylon 5' saga

“Babylon 5” creator J. Michael Straczynski has begun production on “Babylon 5: The Lost Tales,” a direct-to-video release.

The DVD, according to a Warner Home Video press release, “will include two new ‘Babylon 5’ stories collectively entitled ‘Voices of the Dark’ in one film, plus exclusive behind the scenes content. The stories will be written and directed by executive producer and original ‘Babylon 5’ creator J. Michael Straczynski. Executive producer Doug Netter also returns in that role. Actors from the original series that have signed on to participate in the project include Bruce Boxleitner (President John Sheridan), Tracy Scoggins (Captain Elizabeth Lochley) and Peter Woodward (Galen).”

It looks as though original “Babylon 5” cast member Mira Furlan is not part of this project. Maybe she’s too busy doing wacky stuff on that “Lost” island.

http://tempo.typepad.com/entertainment_tv/

fredfa

11-17-06, 03:12 PM

TV Notebook
Fall TV's hits and turkeys
By Aaron Barnhart Kansas City Star in his blog “TV Barn” Friday, November 17, 2006

This week, the Fox hostage-negotiator drama “Standoff” will do something that many other new fall shows this week won't do: air a new episode.

It won't be an especially good episode. It certainly didn't change my opinion of “Standoff,” whose two leads give both the FBI and sexual tension a bad name. And yet, it is still on network TV, two months after the regular season began.

Other shows were not so lucky. Viewers tuning in for the next installment in “Six Degrees,” what few were left anyway, found a “Desperate Housewives” rerun substituted at the last minute. “Kidnapped” was downgraded from Wednesdays to Saturdays, until NBC finally concluded it couldn't find an audience if it had a Sherpa. Wednesday was especially cruel, with only one of six new shows that debuted on that night still there.

Yes, I did say in September that the quality of this season's crop was well above average. But I also wondered out loud where viewers would find the time for all these fine new shows. Now, with the November ratings sweep half over, it's become clear that some had it and some didn't. Here's how they fared.

Note: As usual, all times are Central.

WINNERS

“Heroes” (8 p.m. Mondays, NBC). A page-turner from the start, this fantasy serial structured like a comic book and filled with fresh, relatable, everyday superheroes was destined for greatness. It did not disappoint, soaring to No. 1 among all new shows.

“Jericho” (7 p.m. Wednesday, CBS). It's been hard for CBS to grow hits on this night, but an apocalyptic drama set on the high plains of Kansas has delivered an impressive yield. “Jericho” has gotten better by the week, with one of the best new characters on TV in Mr. Hawkins (Lennie James), the secretive agent who seemed to know about the coming attacks.

“Ugly Betty” (7 p.m. Thursdays, ABC). The fall's most pleasant surprise: A show stuck in an impossible time period charms its way into viewers' living rooms. The Colombian import has ripened nicely this fall, with Salma Hayek (a producer on the show) a welcome addition in a guest role this month.

“30 Rock” (8 p.m. Thursdays, NBC, beginning Nov. 30). Once treated like a second banana to “Studio 60,” the Tina Fey-led sitcom has earned a starring role, recently upgrading to the network's storied Thursday night lineup. While most critics rave about NBC's Emmy-winning “The Office,” I'll take the more conventional “30 Rock” any day, with its rapid-fire pacing and a terrific tandem in Fey and Alec Baldwin as her fatuous boss.

“Friday Night Lights” (7 p.m. Tuesdays, NBC). With the network committing to more episodes last week and the full faith of critics still behind it, I'm putting the high school football drama in the W column. The slow start, I think, is because viewers had to adjust to something that was sold like the feel-good “Hoosiers” but is moodier and more complex. (Episodes are online at NBCRewind.com.)

“Shark” (9 p.m. Thursdays, CBS). It's been billed as the James Woods hour, but worth noting is how nicely his relationship with the knockout D.A. (Jeri Ryan) has evolved.

“Men in Trees” (9 p.m. Thursdays, ABC, beginning Nov. 30). See, I told you Anne Heche could act. And with megahit “Grey's Anatomy” as its new lead-in, this dramedy about a mixed-up gal in manly Alaska may finally find its audience.

“Brothers and Sisters” (9 p.m. Sundays, ABC). Rachel Griffiths has emerged as the surprise star of this huge ensemble soap. (Why is Sally Field always whining?) Parked behind “Desperate Housewives,” this can't-miss show hasn't.

LOSERS

“Smith,” “Justice” and “The Nine.” One was about outlaws, another was about victims, the third about lawyers. And among them there wasn't a single character to root for. You wanted to hang a big poster in the production trailers where these shows were made: It's the likeability, stupid. Likeable characters are what separate hits from duds. But it seems not everyone in the TV business has learned that.

“Twenty Good Years” and “Happy Hour.” The long-hoped-for revival of the sitcom isn't going to happen so long as networks keep putting DOA comedies like these on the air.

“Runaway.” This once-promising serial about a family on the lam ran away and hid on the CW's lineup. Replacing “Everwood” with this dud typifies what CW executives have done wrong with their new network.

“Vanished” remaining shows will air online.

TOO SOON TO TELL

“The Class” (7:30 p.m. Mondays, CBS) and “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip” (9 p.m. Mondays, NBC). These two shows have the full support of their networks after two months, and I don't know why. Neither has done much in the ratings (though “Studio 60,” according to industry reports, will soon get a new time slot where it won't be steamrolled by “CSI: Miami” ). All I know is that I want about half the cast on each show to just go away. Yes, I'm talking about you, Matthew Perry of “Studio 60” … and take Annoying Evangelical Woman and your wafer-thin backstory with you.

“Help Me Help You” (8:30 p.m. Tuesdays, ABC). “Dancing With the Stars” helped this comedy, starring Ted Danson as a shrink who's a fink, to a big helping of audience. But we won't know its true fate until early 2007 when it's paired with “The Knights of Prosperity” (my pick as the funniest new show of the year).

“Til Death” (7 p.m. Thursdays, Fox) full episodes at Fox.com) and “The Game” (8:30 p.m. Mondays, CW). I liked these shows when I screened them. They had appealing actors and good writing. Unfortunately, I haven't seen them since -- and, according to the Nielsens, neither have you.

http://blogs.kansascity.com/tvbarn/2006/11/fall_tvs_hits_a.html#more

fredfa

11-17-06, 03:19 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Time for TiVo changes
Leaving the bank, in studio or not, back to Betty, heroically. Got that?
By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle in his TV blog “The Bastard Machine” Nov. 17, 2006

Yep, it's Feed the Machine time again (we got a little wobbly there for a bit, what with work and all) and now it's not unlike asking the dealer for a whole new hand. We're flip-flopping on shows like mad. Currently, we have dropped "The Nine" from the TiVo. Yep, we're out of the bank.

And that two-part "Studio 60" has really scarred me. If and when I go back, things better be looking up. Other changes - shifting "My Name Is Earl," "The Office" and "30 Rock" (improving steadily) to the Home Office TiVo, aka HOT, which means it's not the prime bedroom real estate with the luxury thread counts, multiple pillows and free-flowing red.

But that's OK. Mrs. Cranky Pants wanted "Ugly Betty" back. And I also added "Heroes" in there (don't ask - I'd screwed the whole thing up and had to ask NBC for back episodes, which it has failed to ship ever so promptly as promised...David Gardner are you listening?).

Anyway, we also have a humongous TiNo problem that needs addressing. But that only brings up a harsher truth:

I'm not going to watch a lot of those shows. I may never, in fact, go back. "Jericho" - not only did I try, but I retried. "Shark" and "Friday Night Lights" and "Brothers & Sisters"? I don't know. I've got no mo' to get them watched.

I'll be honest with you. Right now I'm mostly interested in watching "Dexter" and "Battlestar Galactica" and ever so precious little else. It comes in waves. Sometimes excited, sometimes really over being excited. Hard to get worked up for "The Class."

My current goal is to give a more concerted effort to newbies "Help Me Help You" (don't ask right now) and "30 Rock," with additional renewed vigor for "The New Adventures of Old Christine," "How I Married Your Mother," "Everybody Hates Chris," "Scrubs," "The Simpsons," "South Park" and some stuff on Oxygen and Sundance which I'll get into later. A shift in priorities.

Which also could be temporary

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/indexn?blogid=24

fredfa

11-17-06, 03:26 PM

TV Notebook
Monk Alert! (Tonight!)
Does Father Know Best? Dan Hedaya Previews a Monky Christmas
by Raven Snook TV Guide Nov. 17, 2006

Although TV lovers sometimes have trouble coming up with his name, they always recognize his face. As one of Hollywood's most prolific character actors, Dan Hedaya has been working steadily since the late '70s, playing a hirsute assortment of cops, lawyers, cheating or cuckolded husbands and, in the underrated Nixon-era comedy Dick, a U.S. president. He adds another eccentric character to his résumé when he guests as Adrian's long-lost truck-driver dad on USA's hit crimedy Monk (Nov. 17, at 10 pm/ET).

TVGuide.com: I was thrilled when I heard that you were going to play Adrian's dad. But then I started to wonder if perhaps you're too young for the part.
Dan Hedaya: I had that thought as well. I'm not old enough to be his father, really. I would have had to have been married at 11. But I don't think it interferes. Viewers can suspend their disbelief.

TVGuide.com: I know that you and Tony Shalhoub have worked together before.
Hedaya: Only in one movie, Civil Action.

TVGuide.com: Actually, you were in two more pictures together: A Life Less Ordinary and Searching for Bobby Fischer.
Hedaya: Look at that! You just told me something I didn't know. That's fascinating. Sometimes you work with somebody, and you don’t even know because you're not in any scenes together.

TVGuide.com: Did Shalhoub personally invite you to be on Monk?
Hedaya: No, [the producers] just made an offer, and I read the story and liked it very much. During a lunch break, I said to Tony, "I'm curious to know, how come you asked me to do this?" He looked at me and said, "What do you mean? We just wanted you!" I said, "Thank you!" There are 2,000 actors they could have picked from. I was happy they chose me.

TVGuide.com: Were you a fan of the show?
Hedaya: I don't watch a great deal of TV. I'm an artist, so I spend a lot of time at night painting. I had watched Monk a number of times, but I can't say that I did so religiously, as it seems many people do. But I do think Tony's an extraordinarily gifted fellow, and he's phenomenal on the show.

TVGuide.com: Do you think you might come back in the future?
Hedaya: They've talked to me about it. I think if I am invited back, it will somehow involve my other son, Ambrose [played by John Turturro]. I would love to return, because I had a wonderful time.

TVGuide.com: You've played so many memorable parts, from Carla's two-timing ex on Cheers to an offbeat lawyer on ER to Amy Sedaris' father in the Strangers with Candy movie. What role are you best known for?
Hedaya: I would say, because of the ubiquity of Cheers, Nick Tortelli. Cheers is probably shown somewhere at any given moment in time. In San Francisco, I think it repeats four times a day. I'm not kidding. I was once in Denmark walking around and somebody ran over to me screaming, "Sam's bar! Sam's bar!" People also recognize me from Clueless [as Alicia Silverstone's father]. I have never seen anything that has such a wide range of appeal as that movie, and it's going on I don't know how many years now.

TVGuide.com: What about your role as a murderous husband in Blood Simple?
Hedaya: That attracts more of a movie-buff audience. It was a groundbreaking film. It was the first Coen Brothers movie, and it has an iconic standing. Following that, there was a boom in independent movies. I feel lucky and honored to have been a part of so many projects that are part of the culture. I don't know how it all happened. I really don't.

TVGuide.com: In Hollywood years, you started your career rather late in life. You didn't begin working regularly until you were in your thirties. What did you do beforehand?
Hedaya: I was a New York City teacher for about seven years, until I made the decision to try to make a living as an actor.

TVGuide.com: Was that what you'd always wanted to do?
Hedaya: No. I had no idea. I did plays in college, but I really didn't know what the hell I was doing. Then one day, when I was still working as a teacher, I was walking down the street and ran into an old friend who said, "You know I'm taking an acting class. It's great, it's so much fun. Come on, Tuesday nights." If I hadn't run into her....

TVGuide.com: What would you be doing?
Hedaya: I'd be dead, maybe. [Laughs] I don't know what I'd be doing. It's mysterious really, because nobody in my family is remotely interested in the arts. I can't explain it. It was fate or destiny or luck.

http://tvguide.com/News-Views/Interviews-Features/Article/default.aspx?posting={8750BB96-2AEC-40FB-BF7D-B6F36071AA44}

jandron

11-17-06, 03:26 PM

Does anyone have hard information about NBC's January Schedule? I'm particularly interested in the fate of Raines, because my son is a staff writer on the show (So be kind!) My wife and I went to LA to watch the filming of the episode he wrote and I was very impressed (of course, with the writing) but also the acting, direction and production value. From what I understand, they have re-cast and re-shot much of the pilot, so anyone's take on the show from seeing the pilot my no longer be valid. It's going to be a show that will get better as it goes along. And of course I hope everyone will give it a shot.

But what I still don't know is, when it's going to be on.

AAF

11-17-06, 03:48 PM

The OJ thing.

When I first heard about it I was disgusted. It's apparently a reaction shared by many. Is that reaction exclusive to those of us who believe he's guilty? What about those (fools) who think he's innocent? Are they equally disgusted - if confused?

Isn't this reaction pretty hypocritical?

TV is full of crimes of the week turned into entertainment and profit. Made for TV movies are rushed to air. TV crime serial clones cover our viewing week teasing us with "ripped from the headlines" excitement. News personalities breathlessly compete like street corner prostitutes to secure an "exclusive" interview with the latest murderer or serial killer from behind bars.

But OJ, oh we draw the line at OJ.

fredfa

11-17-06, 04:36 PM

TV Q&A
Ask Matt
(from the Ask Matt column at TVGuide.com Friday, November 17, 2006
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: I'd never watched CSI until Quentin Tarantino directed the finale a couple of years ago, and I've only watched sporadically since then. I've never been a big procedural fan, but this season I find myself addicted to this show. Season 7 seems a little late to jump on the CSI bandwagon, but the stories this year have been fantastic: Grissom's stress and fatigue issues, Sara and Grissom's elusive relationship, Greg's attack and the legal fallout, Catherine's father being shot and, most compelling of all, the scale-model serial-killer plot. This show has become a character drama with teeth. The balance of serial and episodic elements is delicate and efficient. Despite all the hype over Grey's Anatomy, CSI seems to be at the top of its game. I haven't heard much about the new creative direction of the show. Any thoughts on why CSI is flying under the radar? And why has it gotten so much more compelling this season?— Cody

Matt Roush: I mostly agree, especially about the serial killer who keeps leaving behind creepy crime-scene miniatures. That's the niftiest serial-killer story line this side of Showtime's can't-miss Dexter. I also liked the Greg story line, which was also pretty disturbing. The original CSI is still unquestionably the best CSI. Even so, shows like this are awfully easy to take for granted. Grey's Anatomy offers many more personal angles to care (and to argue) about. Just to show the range of mail I get each week, here's a look at CSI from a very different point of view. This comes from J.L.:

"The Nov. 9 episode [which reintroduced the miniature-making serial killer and revisited Greg's legal woes] fit the overall trend for CSI this season: boring! With each CSI episode (at least the last three or four), I find myself experiencing the 'Ally McBeal Season 3 syndrome,' in which I wonder, 'Why did I just waste an hour watching that?' I quit watching Ally McBeal and suspect the same thing will happen with CSI if things don't improve in the next few episodes. The dynamics of the show have changed so much with Grissom and Sara, and in a negative way. The producers supposedly are being subtle, but even if there are no bedroom scenes or overt physicality, having those two together in the vast majority of scenes is not subtle. In fact, it has ruined the entire dynamic of the show. The steep decline in ratings this season emphasizes this fact, though it is also due to the competition from Grey's Anatomy. It is also unbelievable that Grissom no longer has any substantive contact with Catherine. It's idiotic, considering the chemistry they have together. Keeping Grissom and Catherine separated is the most confusing and destructive aspect to the debacle the show has become. Sadly, CSI is over."

Interesting rant, but it's like we're watching two entirely different shows. Then again, I've never been among those fans who watch CSI in order to obsess over the character relationships or over who gets more screen time. (I guess it is a fact that since Catherine's traumas in the season opener, she hasn't been quite as prominent. I frankly hadn't noticed.) The reality of the situation is that the Grey's move to Thursdays has taken a bite out of CSI's numbers, but they're still pretty evenly matched (if not in the demos). Shows as huge as CSI and Grey's are also huge targets. That doesn't mean they're actually slipping.

Question: Here's a good question for you. Now that Neil Patrick Harris has come out as gay, will it affect how his character is written on How I Met Your Mother? Or do you think it will affect how viewers see him? After all, Barney is a player who loves women! — Rick W.

Matt Roush: I don't think it changes a thing, except (I would hope) some people's attitudes and preconceptions about actors and their roles. It's all pretend, dontcha know. Anyone who cares knows, for instance, that Patrick Dempsey has a wife and kids and isn't really chasing Meredith/Ellen Pompeo, but we accept the fantasy. Neil Patrick Harris is a terrific young character actor, and in the years before Mother he was doing some outstanding work in musical theater. He's doing a great job as Barney, who, with his suits, style and attitude, is a fresh twist on the standard womanizer. His being gay shouldn't affect either the roles he gets or the way we see him in those roles. What we may be seeing here is a generational shift where something like this simply doesn't, or shouldn't, matter. Of course some people won't be able to get over it. Their loss.

By sheer coincidence, here comes more on the subject.

Question: What is all the hubbub about Harriet on Studio 60 bashing gays, when Sarah Paulson is gay? Not that I knew that before I saw some info about her today on the Internet, but I'm surprised 1) that she would play so much against type and even tackle the big issues the actress tends to avoid in her personal life, and 2) that more people don't know this fact about her. Is this the reason why there is a spark lacking between Harriet and Matt Albie, or why we have been left without a kiss between the two of them? Will NBC go through all the motions on their show-within-a-show to address the issues, but literally gag her when it comes to talking to the public? Since we have seen T.R. Knight and Neil Patrick Harris recently outing themselves, should we expect "NBS" to get on the train and make one of their stars officially come out so they can stay in the headlines? I mean, CBS and ABC have already jumped on the bandwagon, NBC can't be that far behind! — Brett C.

Matt Roush: Can't really tell if you're trying to be sarcastic or clever here, or what you're trying to say, but I would think the reason Sarah Paulson's sexuality has stayed under the radar is because, quite frankly, it's no one's business. To my knowledge, she has never tried to hide it or her relationship with revered stage actress Cherry Jones. (When Jones won her Tony for the play Doubt, she gave a shout-out to her "Laura Wingfield," referring to Paulson, who was then starring in a Broadway revival of The Glass Menagerie.) I don't know if they're still a couple. I don't do gossip. If the chemistry between the Harriet and Matt characters is lacking, I wouldn't put the blame on anyone's sexual orientation, but more on the fact that the show has a way to go to make almost any of these characters come truly alive yet. This all smacks rather distastefully of a witch hunt, which is rather ironic, given the recent Studio 60 story line. And I would think that for a gay or straight performer, to be given a role like Harriet — who is committed to her faith and to her career and finds herself at some very uneasy crossroads as she tries to reconcile the two — would be a gift.

And here, amazingly, is more on the subject.

Question: Aaron Sorkin has had some great things to say about gay rights on his shows in the past (probably best and most succinctly on The West Wing with President Bartlet's famous tirade against homophobes, which challenged them on the very scriptures they use to attack gays). But I have to ask why Sorkin spends two Studio 60 episodes in a row preaching back and forth on same-sex marriage and gay rights, when he has a show set in the entertainment world in West Hollywood, of all places, without a single gay or lesbian character in the main cast? That's incredibly unrealistic for the setting, kind of like if HBO's The Wire depicted Baltimore as populated only by white, blonde-haired Swedes. Sorkin can't come up with a central gay or lesbian character in West Hollywood? Give me a break. Matt, you've kind of noted the problem with Studio 60 in general, as opposed to Sorkin's Sports Night and The West Wing — which is that Sorkin let his usually smart talkiness devolve into obvious preachiness that yammers on too much when it ought to shut up a little more and "show" the fun, romance, tension and dynamics of making a late-night comedy show. Sorkin's still in West Wing mode, where major political issues realistically change every week, but I imagine the conflicts within an SNL show are more recurring and evolving, and it doesn't feel like Sorkin has adjusted to this change in setting. Wouldn't it be better to deal with Harriet's ambiguous feelings about homosexuality by letting her regularly interact with a gay or lesbian colleague, instead of having her get attacked by convenient one-time-only "gay street toughs" and then talking endlessly about it for two episodes? This method might also help to address the tendency to perceive comedies as "liberal" even though they frequently play on homophobic humor. — Don C.

Matt Roush: Whew. One thing to keep in mind: As Studio 60 continues to evolve, who's to say that no one in the cast and crew is gay? At least one NBC exec assures me the show is going to be focusing much more on character from here on out. Yes, the show is set amid Hollywood's gay Ground Zero, so it is probably a bit of an oversight. But if Sorkin were to bring in a gay mouthpiece to address concerns such as yours, that might look like the same sort of clumsy preachiness that is causing some problems for those of us who'd really like to embrace the show more fully.

Question: Is there still hope for Veronica Mars getting the full 22-episode pickup? I've just become a die-hard fan, and I can't lose it so soon!— Gayle

Matt Roush: There's definitely hope. If not for a full 22, then pretty close. I've been led to believe that the show may take a short break in the spring to give one of the CW's mid-season backups a tryout (possibly Kevin Williamson's Hidden Palms serial). But we'll still probably get two more mystery arcs before it's over. I'm not quite sure what's taking them so long to make the call, but I'm not losing sleep over it.

Question: The reason I find Grey's Anatomy to be in such a slump this year is because for the first time, I really do not like the majority of the characters. I'm not a fan of Derek and Meredith, so that's nothing new, but I've always enjoyed watching all the rest of the ensemble. But now we see Burke and Cristina recklessly endangering patients' lives; George has become incredibly whiny; and Izzie, man, where do I begin? Quite frankly, I have no sympathy for Izzie after the Denny story line. She was incredibly out of line, and I can't suspend my disbelief enough to think that all of these excellent doctors believe that Izzie should, or even can, be a good doctor. I especially can't stand the fact that Bailey — who is still one of the characters I love without reservation — is apparently taking most of the blame for Izzie's horrendous actions. Not to mention the fact that I was looking forward to seeing Mark "McSteamy" Sloan come in as a love interest for Addison, only to see the character turn into an unrepentant, practically soulless "man whore." The real shame is that the acting quality hasn't gone down a notch, but the "rootability" factor, something so important when it comes to soapy shows like this, has gone down a lot.— Mardia

Matt Roush: OK, at least this is a reasonable argument (as opposed to the "I don't get what all the fuss is about, the show sucks" variety of mail I sometimes get), even though I generally disagree with it. For one, Bailey having to answer for Izzie's mistake isn't fair, but it isn't meant to be (to us, anyway). One of the most memorable moments of the season so far was Bailey's reaction to being wiped off the chart for Burke's (really Cristina's) surgery. Heartbreaking. Chandra Wilson really can do no wrong. The story line that asks us to forgive Izzie and give her another chance is clearly a risky one. But what was the alternative? Write her out? I don't think so. It's always the risk when you do an extreme season finale. Extricating characters from their terrible decisions and actions comes with long-running episodic TV. You either accept it, or you don't. I have to agree with the McSteamy gripe. He really is a bastard, and not as cute as he (or maybe the show) thinks he is. Still, I find plenty to root for, even when the characters are maddening, which they're meant to be.

And here, exercising my equal-time prerogative, is a rationalization from Jake:

"As a huge Grey's Anatomy fan who has been extremely satisfied with Season 3, I feel the need to respond to the question about its supposed 'slump' addressed in recent columns. I too have heard people who have been disappointed in it lately, but I don't get it either. I think people lose sight of the fact that in life, you have to take pause after a crisis and decide where you're going to go from here. The LVAD-wire-cutting, Burke-shooting, prom-hosting, Derek-and-Meredith-doing season finale was a crisis if I've ever seen one, so the characters have to take their pause now. They're not like us, having had the luxury of a full summer to react to all of this; they're still smack in the middle of it and trying to get out. So they've got to slow down a bit, take pause and then move in one direction or the other. It is not a lesser show than it was last year; it's just slightly different. All this talk about a slump really boils down to people wanting it to be exactly like it was before. But if they hadn't taken pause, I expect there would be people complaining about that, too. My mother, who is a doctor, has already expressed disappointment that they ever let Izzie back in the program at all. But again, I think the season has been fine: logical, real, human and a lot of fun."

For me, the operative word (so to speak) in all of this is "fun." I can't think of an hour of TV in any given week when I enjoy myself more than when watching Grey's Anatomy.

Question: Brothers & Sisters has far exceeded any expectations I had for the show. I'd never cared about Sally Field before, and I've now fallen in love with her. Rachel Griffiths is the main reason I hope to never see another second of Six Feet Under, and now I'm surprised to have fallen in love with her as well. But the person I really love is Calista Flockhart, and I'm shocked that while everyone seems to have varying opinions about this show, everyone does seem to dislike her character and/or the way Flockhart portrays her. Ally McBeal is still my very favorite show ever, and while she was the reason I tuned in to Brothers & Sisters in the first place, I was reluctant to see her in a different role. I'm thrilled to discover how much I truly do enjoy having the opportunity to watch her again every week. The scene in last Sunday's episode, in which she breaks down while talking to Justin about 9/11, reminded me of everything I love about her as an actress. It's really starting to bother me that so many other people think she's the weak link of the show! Do you dislike her because of the character, or simply the way the actress presents her?— Alana M.

Matt Roush: It's the character, not the actress, that has bothered me, but I'm even softening on that as the show continues to find its way. (What I really don't buy is that someone as moderately conservative as Kitty would ever get a TV show on which only rabid ideologues of either wing can be found.) The scene in which she describes the horrors of 9/11 to her brother was unquestionably Calista's best work yet in the series, but her scenes with Sally Field are almost always treasures (most notably, the scene where she put her mother's back against the wall where all the kids' heights had been charted for years). Seeing the Walkers watch the events of 9/11 unfold on TV and remember it years later is something I've never seen in a TV drama before. I was very moved by that and am anxious to watch the conclusion this Sunday.

Question: I am growing to like Brothers & Sisters, especially now that Treat Williams, an Everwood favorite, has been added to the cast. I find the pairing of him and Sally Field on screen together very interesting. However, I recently heard that Betty Buckley was the original mother in the series and even did a pilot for the show. It is not that I don't like Sally Field, but I have always loved Betty Buckley. I am curious to see if you think the show would be as successful if Buckley were in it rather than the very popular Field. Sally Field has been doing TV spots in recent years, but it would have been great to see Betty Buckley on television.— Maya S.

Matt Roush: I have nothing against Betty Buckley — she was the best Norma Desmond ever in the stage version of Sunset Boulevard, and her recordings are a knockout. I only saw a few clips from the original pilot, when she was in the mother role, but I can't second-guess the producers on this one. Sally Field exudes such humor and warmth in the character of Nora that I can't and wouldn't want to imagine anyone else in the role. She's a key, very promotable asset, so I do believe they made the right call for the short- and long-term health of the show.

Question: What is the deal with Fox? They completely botched the reshowing of 24 last summer. And now they are messing with Justice? While I'll agree that it isn't the greatest show ever produced, I do like the whole premise of showing the trial, the verdict and then what really happened. Why is Fox taking it off the schedule until December? It doesn't seem like Fox has so many other hit shows. I mean, how many nights a week can you watch House? Thanks for letting me vent.— Melissa

Matt Roush: These are always dark months for Fox — that excruciating period when we're waiting for 24 and American Idol to return. None of Fox's new shows popped, but when Justice failed in its second time period, with a fairly powerful lead-in, Prison Break, it was doomed. Much as I enjoyed Victor Garber, it also didn't help that the show was in many ways as generic as its title. Bottom line: Justice is expected to burn off more, if not all, of its episodes in December. But the show wasn't renewed past the initial 13-episode order. So if it does come back briefly, enjoy it while you can.

Question: Perhaps you can explain something to me. CBS canceled Smith because, while it started out strong enough, it lost viewers every week thereafter. But NBC renews Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip even though, like Smith, it started out strong but has bled viewers with each subsequent episode. Huh? The situations were identical, yet the results were very different. What's up with that?— Craig W.

Matt Roush: Apples and oranges, my friend. You can compare the ratings situations, but the shows are not at all alike. And the networks that each show airs (aired) on are in such different places. Smith was a departure for CBS (being about the bad guys instead of the good guys), and it aires in one of the network's few troubled time periods. (I'm not sure 3 LBS is going to fare much better as its replacement.) Several execs have gone on record saying that, given where they saw that show heading creatively, they didn't believe it had a chance to reverse the sliding ratings trend. In other words, they gave up on it. NBC has nowhere near as stable and strong a schedule as CBS, and can ill afford to cut bait on something it believes in. We debate and argue about Studio 60 a lot in this column, but it's still one of the more fascinating, even promising, shows of the new season. I'm glad it's getting the full season, and soon enough a new time period, to prove itself. It still may not get renewed for next fall, but this was the right call for now, despite ratings evidence to the contrary.

http://www.tvguide.com/News-Views/Columnists/Ask-Matt/Default.aspx#01heroes

harley1

11-17-06, 04:36 PM

Sorry if this has posted

O'Reilly Tries to Loofah Away Fox Stench

Bill O'Reilly got his falafels in a bunch last night over news that O.J. Simpson will explain precisely how he didn't-but-might butcher his ex-wife and her friend—on a Fox prime-time special. Said the frequently flabbergasted superpundit:

Here's a man many believe did kill those two Americans, Nicole Brown Simpson being mother of his two children. Yet Simpson is participating in a project that is exploiting the murders. Shamefully, the Fox Broadcasting Unit is set to carry the program, which is simply indefensible, and a low point in American culture. For the record, Fox Broadcasting has nothing to do with the Fox News Channel."

O' really? That last part must have come as shocking news to O'Reilly's boss, Fox News Channel chief Roger Ailes, who also chairs Fox Television Stations, the group behind the forthcoming "low point in American culture." The shared "Fox" moniker is no coincidence, either. Fox Broadcasting and the Fox News Channel are both owned by Australian overlord and News Corp. founder and chief Rupert Murdoch. And the Fox Broadcasting Corporation—the people who program prime time for the Fox network—regularly air Fox News-produced programming, from coverage of presidential speeches to O'Reilly's special "documentaries" about people who hate children and Jesus.

In other words, Fox News Channel was conceived, launched, and continues to be run by the man who is responsible for running the selfsame stations that will, shamefully, broadcast Simpson's fantasy about killing "those two Americans" to millions of other Americans.

Radar contacted spokespeople for both Fox News Channel and Fox Television Stations via e-mail for comment. Conveniently they were the same person: Brian Lewis, who said, "Roger has absolutely nothing to do with the programs Fox Broadcasting Corporation broadcasts"—on the television stations for which Ailes is ultimately responsible.

HarperCollins, the publishing house that is paying Simpson a reported $3.5 million for the book in which he fully fleshes out his all-too-real murder scenario, is also owned by Murdoch's News Corp. While O'Reilly excoriated Simpson's publisher and brainstormed legal options against it with guest litigator Sunny Hostin—she said she would seek to freeze HarperCollins's assets if she were representing Goldman's family—he never mentioned it by name, or pointed out that it's also owned by the people who cut his paychecks.

Surely, Judith Regan, who will be conducting the interview with O.J. and whose imprint at HarperCollins is publishing the Simpson book, has nothing to do with Fox News Channel, though. Just ask Fox News bloviator Sean Hannity, whose books Regan publishes. Or Roger Ailes himself, who once gave Regan a show—Judith Regan Tonight—on the Fox News Channel.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2006/11/bill-oreilly-quite-naturally-got.php

fredfa

11-17-06, 04:38 PM

jandron

11-17-06, 04:52 PM

Regarding OJ

I can't control what others watch or think about. But OJ only has influence over me if I choose to pay attention. I moved on years ago.

fredfa

11-17-06, 05:26 PM

I agree.

I suspect the ratings will be lower than many expect.

PJO1966

11-17-06, 05:51 PM

fredfa, has there been any word on when Rome is returning to HBO? I had thought it was coming in mid-November, but here we are and there's been no advertising. Have you seen anything? I can't find any word on hbo.com.

PJO1966

11-17-06, 05:54 PM

fredfa

11-17-06, 06:23 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Decades later, Monk's dad is back
By Diane Werts Newsday Staff Writer November 17, 2006

Mr. Monk plays Santa. And Mr. Monk gets to be an elf.

Wait. Two Monks?

That actually makes three. John Turturro guested on "Monk" last year as Tony Shalhoub's equally compulsive brother. Now Dan Hedaya shows up as their dad, driving into town 39 years after waving goodbye when he went to pick up Chinese food.

This can't be fun. But it could be hilarious.

So it's at least amusing, as "Monk" so often is, making you smile where you'd hoped to laugh, making you titter when you want to howl. This much-watched USA mystery/comedy hour is good, yes. But you get the feeling that, with Shalhoub's Emmy-winning talent, it's stalled thisfar from being great.

Tonight's new Christmas episode is a case in point, using the holiday not as a rich focal point but as a device to make Monk act out of character. Hedaya (Carla's squirrely "Cheers" ex) arrives as a long-haul trucker hauled in on tickets while cruising through San Francisco, where he asks his estranged sleuth son to bail him out. As dad leaves their awkward reunion heading toward his west Texas home, he suggests a ride-along to his resentful progeny, who impulsively (problem one) agrees, hopping into dad's less than pristine truck (problem two) for a meandering run through the Southwest desert.

Along the way, grudges will be revealed, regrets will be aired and son Monk will reliably clean up things, both literally and figuratively. Father and son make stops along the way for charity toy deliveries on behalf of the shady truck company co-owner (Brian Kerwin), in a set-up that grows progressively more implausible. The family relationship carries more authentic weight, but hardly as much as it might. Shalhoub pouts how dad never taught him to ride a bike and discovers the existence of yet another Monk.

At least dad isn't three-of-a-kind with the obsessive-compulsive thing. A la "Frasier," he's the regular-guy reverse of his sons' tandem prissiness. Turturro's Ambrose is regularly referenced in tonight's episode, which leads us to believe more Monk-men adventures are on the way.

That's OK. We just wish it were terrific.

(Last year's "Monk's" Christmas episode, "Mr. Monk and the Secret Santa," repeats on USA tomorrow at 10 p.m. ET.)

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/ny-ettel4977707nov17,0,5016693,print.story?coll=ny-television-headlines

burger23

11-17-06, 06:33 PM

A process I just completed the day before yesterday. I thought the show had some interesting possibilities. But then I am a Victor Garber fan. I think you got your shows mixed up- Garber, also a favorite of mine even though it seems to me that he over-acts his character, stars in Justice, not Vanished.

fredfa

11-17-06, 06:46 PM

burger23

11-17-06, 06:57 PM

I did, get mixed up, which is something which happnes to me often, as I am sure you are aware!

Actually I was referring to the fact that "Justice" has just been pulled -- permanently -- from the Fox schedule, with the remaining four episodes only to be shown online. Actually my experience with you is just the opposite- you are almost always RIGHT ON! Sorry, I missed the post that Justice had also been moved to online only. Bummer...oh, well...

fredfa

11-17-06, 07:37 PM

thasnks for the compliment, burger23, but one reason I post so many different viewpoints is that I don't want what I think or believe to be the primary point of view here.

I like to give information and let people make their own decisions.

foxeng

11-17-06, 07:49 PM

O' really? That last part must have come as shocking news to O'Reilly's boss, Fox News Channel chief Roger Ailes, who also chairs Fox Television Stations, the group behind the forthcoming "low point in American culture." The shared "Fox" moniker is no coincidence, either. Fox Broadcasting and the Fox News Channel are both owned by Australian overlord and News Corp. founder and chief Rupert Murdoch. And the Fox Broadcasting Corporation—the people who program prime time for the Fox network—regularly air Fox News-produced programming, from coverage of presidential speeches to O'Reilly's special "documentaries" about people who hate children and Jesus.

I don't know who wrote this article, but they obviously have no clue what is what. FOX News Channel is part of the news division. FOX owned and operated stations are owned by FOX Televisions Inc. FOX Network is owned by FOX Broadcasting Company. These are THREE separate companies that are all owned by News Corporation. Just like General Electric owns NBC Universal, and oh yeah, the manufacturing company that makes GE appliances. So I guess those GE microwave ovens are the reason NBC is in the shape it is in.

It just happens that Roger Ailes is over the news division and the stations group. A gentleman named Peter Liquori runs FOX Broadcasting (the network). The network treats the stations and the news division just like any other company, meaning they don't play favorites with other FOX properties. Peter Liquori can't tell FNC or the stations group what to program out beyond the network nor can Roger Ailes tell Peter Liquori what to program on the network. Sheesh. These people need to get a clue.

cocoon

11-17-06, 08:17 PM

The OJ thing.

Isn't this reaction pretty hypocritical?

TV is full of crimes of the week turned into entertainment and profit. Made for TV movies are rushed to air. TV crime serial clones cover our viewing week teasing us with "ripped from the headlines" excitement. News personalities breathlessly compete like street corner prostitutes to secure an "exclusive" interview with the latest murderer or serial killer from behind bars.

But OJ, oh we draw the line at OJ.

Thats my view on the subject also and why I just can not get outraged about it. Tonights Law and Order or upcoming episode is about the Amish school massacre for crying out loud!

fredfa

11-17-06, 08:24 PM

TV Notebook
Clear! 'ER' gets a jolt of new life this season
Forget life support, the long-running medical drama is feeling fine
By Martin Miller Los Angeles Times Staff Writer November 19, 2006

It’s only one thin and sinewy story thread out of hundreds stitched into the body of one of television's longest-running and most successful prime-time dramas. In this Thursday's "ER," a stampeding holiday shopper doesn't get the designer handbag she sought, but does leave with a soccer ball-sized ornamental star lodged in her right side.

Along with local anesthesia, the shopper receives a sniping lecture from a nurse at Chicago's County General whose consumerism-run-wild rant serves as a veritable siren call to a Type A doctor. The gallows humor is an "ER" storyline staple, one which highlights one of the top-rated show's most persistent undercurrents — everyone, including on occasion a star, dies.

The show tied for the most Emmy nominations in television history may also hold the record for its highest body count. Nearly every week, at least one patient is killed off. The more mundane or freakishly random, the better. That's life on "ER," the founding principle of which was to offer up a documentarian's view of a teaching hospital in a major urban area. Even the show's doctors, who have been felled by brain cancer, roadside bombs and plummeting helicopters, are not immune from fatal calamity.

Everyone dies. That is, except the show itself. In its 13th season, "ER" has amazingly defied television's cruel actuarial tables, which if anything in recent years have become even crueler. "ER" should have long since joined "Chicago Hope" and "City of Angels" in the medical show graveyard, but instead it's acting like the teenager it is: vital, robust and fond of railing about the issues of the day. It's a car crash with a social conscience — some critics might say a bleeding heart — but one in which a sizable audience isn't ready to let go quietly into that good Thursday night.

"ER" is a reliable source of comfort food in a television and entertainment diet that is choking on hundreds of choices. And the show — even given its bloody and chaotic make-believe environment — might be a balm to the ever-changing bloody and chaotic real world.

"With the state of affairs within the country, I think we're a place that feels safe for people," said John Stamos, who became a show regular this season as a Gulf War paramedic who wants to become a doctor. "For a lot of people, it's like coming back home."

"We've been declared dead four or five times now," said executive producer John Wells. "Initially, we really had to fight against this idea that audiences wouldn't want grimy medicine. But I think 'ER' has shown they don't want some sanitized version. They want the truth of it."

For Wells, a revived "ER" continues to animate a prolific and stellar TV career that includes work on such shows as "China Beach" and "The West Wing." As one of the program's original executive producers and a frequent director, Wells can take special joy in its recent, perhaps mysterious, reentry into the American conversation these days. His highly touted, hugely expensive crime drama "Smith," starring Ray Liotta and Virginia Madsen, was canceled by CBS after just three episodes earlier this year.

The death watch

LAST season, it appeared that "ER" was once again nearing its literal end. And once again those rumors proved to be greatly exaggerated. Until just last month, NBC had planned to place the show on a three-month hiatus beginning in January to showcase a new drama called "The Black Donnellys" in the highly coveted Thursday at 10 p.m. time slot.

Certainly, NBC's plans were not good news for a show that has amassed 22 Emmy Awards and 117 Emmy nominations, tying it with "Cheers" as the all-time leading nominee in any genre.

"We really felt like we were being put out to pasture," said David Zabel, a former staff writer who became one of the show's executive producers and now runs the show on a day-to-day basis.

To some, such a move was long overdue. Some critics were beginning to wonder if the medical drama was going to surpass the "Jaws" attraction at Universal Studio Tours for shark jumping. The Web's "Television Without Pity" stopped recapping the show in May 2005, explaining: "Doug Ross left. Carol left. Mark Greene died. And now Carter's gone…. It's time to pronounce this one dead. Wait, is that a pulse? No. No, it's not."

But, thanks in part to riveting cliffhangers that closed last season and opened this one, the show's pulse continued to beat as strong as that of an endurance athlete. This season the show usually ranks first in its time slot with original episodes, averaging around 13.9 million viewers (compared to 13.8 million last year).

That may not sound like much of a victory, but it is. Last year, the show's lead-in was "The Apprentice" and despite losing it this season, it's gained ground in a climate where merely holding it is considered a triumph. Indeed, on the strength of its strong performance, not only did NBC ditch the "ER" hiatus plan, but it also has ordered an extra Christmas episode.

Ask someone connected to "ER" what's behind their winning their time slot again, they'll rattle off a number of things. Consistently smart writing, skilled acting and an ongoing enthusiasm for the work. The show, despite a cast turnover that perhaps is only eclipsed by that of "Saturday Night Live," has always been top-notch, and audiences are merely rediscovering it.

But what most observers believe is fueling the rejuvenation is that, to paraphrase the Nietzsche-inspired warrior cliché, that which doesn't kill TV drama makes it stronger. When ABC announced last year it was moving its powerhouse "Grey's Anatomy" to television's most fiercely competitive night, more than a few blood pressures in the "ER" camp went skyrocketing.

"First, I'd been really shocked that we went as long as we did as the only successful medical show. Basically we had a 10-year period where we had the playing field to ourselves," said Wells. "But when I heard 'Grey's' was moving to Thursdays, I thought that would be the end for us. It's a big hit show and who is going to want to watch two big medical shows on the same night?"

But "Grey's Anatomy," not to mention CBS' 9 p.m. juggernaut "CSI," only attracted more people inside Thursday's television tent. With CBS' decision to shift its hit "Without a Trace" from Thursdays to Sundays, that left "ER" to face down newcomer CBS' "Shark" (whose star James Woods once guest starred as an ALS-afflicted science professor on "ER") and, for a time, ABC's "Six Degrees."

So far, "ER" seems to be winning that battle. "Six Degrees" was bumped earlier this month from ABC's schedule in favor of the Anne Heche comedy "Men in Trees," which moves from Friday nights to Thursdays beginning Nov. 30. (ABC says "Six Degrees" will return in January.)

" 'Grey's' has been a great lead-in for 'ER,' " joked Kevin Reilly, the president of NBC Entertainment. "What you're seeing this year is the audience doesn't like the new flavors being offered by our competitors. They're finding the old flavor is pretty damn good."

Of course, "ER" has always served up new flavors for viewers. None of the original major cast members remain from the first season. The show has thrived despite enduring the loss of more than a dozen main stars in its ensemble cast. The most life-threatening was when George Clooney, TV's McDreamy of the '90s, left after the fifth season.

"People were extremely nervous when George was leaving. They thought this would be it for the show," said Laura Innes, who began portraying Dr. Kerry Weaver in the second season, making her the show's senior major cast member. "But when we survived that, everybody kind of said, 'Oh, maybe this is a different kind of beast.' "

Turning to the next generation

THE revolving door of big-name exits forced the show to evolve or die, and that as much as anything may be responsible for its longevity.

The departure of the likes of Anthony Edwards, Julianna Margulies, Eriq La Salle and Noah Wyle ultimately enlivened the show's storytelling palette, allowing for new plotlines involving Goran Visnjic, Maura Tierney, Mekhi Phifer, Linda Cardellini and Parminder Nagra.

A major story line that closed last season and opened this one revolved around Cardellini, who plays a tough-minded single mom and ER nurse. She and her son were abducted at gunpoint by her ex-husband, and she was later raped. Afterward, she could have escaped with her son while her ex slept. Instead she shot him dead.

"I couldn't believe how unanimous [the support] was that I killed him. People were thrilled," said Cardellini, who was 18 years old and just moving to Los Angeles to become an actress when "ER" originally began. "It makes me happy because it means people are following my character's story and relating to her."

In re-staffing its emergency room, the show's producers have chosen to mirror the ethnic and racial diversity of medical staffs today. This decision was in stark contrast to the original Michael Crichton script, written for the movies in the early 1970s, where all the characters were white and male.

"It's not just a social service to diversity," said Zabel. "It's a way to avoid getting stuck in the same old characters. If the show still had its original cast, I think it would have died on the vine years ago."

The show's latest, and some might say hottest, attraction is television veteran Stamos, who plays Tony Gates. The actor's good looks aren't going to go to waste.

"They brought me on to play these romantic arcs on the show," said Stamos, who has been exploring Nagra's anatomy. "I'm there to shake things up."

With all the turnover, it's easy to overlook the show's one stalwart performer, and its heart and soul. "The key is to realize the show's main character is the hospital," said Innes, who parlayed what originally was supposed to be a six-episode run into a 12-year starring role and frequent turns in the director's chair.

The show's performers are, of course, delighted to be on radar screens again and drawing media attention. On the other hand, they reject the implication that the show's ratings dipped because the show was somehow less interesting.

"We've all been laughing about it lately. Suddenly, people are saying, 'Oh my God, "ER" is a great show,' " said Visnjic, who despite starring in his eighth season as Dr. Luka Kovac is often regarded as a newcomer. "But we're like, we've been here all the time and the show has always been good."

In 1994, "ER" took over the time slot once occupied by "Hill Street Blues" and "L.A. Law," and made the most of it. In its second season, it commanded an average audience of 32 million viewers.

Like other traditional media such as radio and newspapers, television has seen its audiences numbers eroded by a slew of tech-driven competitors such as cable, computers and iPods.

Last month, NBC Universal announced plans to cut 5% of its workforce and to scale back on its more expensive scripted shows in favor of cheaper reality-based programming in its 8 to 9 p.m. time slot. Industry observers predict the other networks will soon face similar belt-tightening decisions as well.

"It's like the reverse of what's happening in sports," said Wells. "It'd be like to win the pole vault today, you only had to cross the bar a third of what it was 20 years ago. We're all wondering where the bottom is or what the definition of the bottom is."

But on the show's Warner Bros. set, the prop master and special effects crew are more concerned with the impaled holiday shopper's right side.

They dutifully refuel the blood and ooze between multiple takes, and touch up the actress' prosthetic for the proper gory effect. Despite all the drama, the shopper is going to be all right, just like the show.

"Hey, at this level, as long as they want to produce them," said Reilly, "we'll keep making them."

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-ca-er19nov19,0,5908320,print.story?coll=cl-tvent

tkmedia2

11-17-06, 09:10 PM

some ramblings...

Glad to see "Always Sunny" getting a third season, so what summer 07? I love this show yet some episodes I just cringe and cannot watch. I remember an episode... I turned off the TV 3x because of it. Each time returned to the show and ended up with an outcome I did not expect. But some situations are so "Bad" they are amazing good. I also like the way the gang always "screws" Charlie. haha!:D

Nice to see Veronica getting almost a full order.

Raines, nice to see the pilot with the curly hair girl from Fox's Reunion.

tkmedia2

11-17-06, 09:12 PM

from seattle pi blog
The Pick-Up Game: At long last, "Veronica Mars"!!!!!
Posted by Melanie McFarland at November 17, 2006 4:00 p.m.

Took The CW long enough, didn't it?

But it's true, our dear "Veronica Mars" will see a mostly full third season. Though Rob Thomas confirmed the news to another TV blog last night -- you know, one of those that updates more than once in a moon cycle -- the network has picked it up for another seven episodes, bringing its third season total to 20.

While that means it doesn't get a full 22-episode season, seven more hours is better than The CW pulling the plug after 13. But that also means the network is losing its patience with the Mars family's mysteries, so if you want to see another season, better get your friends to tune in Tuesday at 9.

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/tv/archives/108841.asp

fredfa

11-17-06, 09:37 PM

Thanks, Tony!

fredfa

11-18-06, 12:02 AM

Obituary
VHS, 30, dies of loneliness
The home-entertainment format lived a fruitful life
By Diane Garrett Variety

After a long illness, the groundbreaking home-entertainment format VHS has died of natural causes in the United States. The format was 30 years old.

No services are planned.

The format had been expected to survive until January, but high-def formats and next-generation vidgame consoles hastened its final decline.

"It's pretty much over," concurred Buena Vista Home Entertainment general manager North America Lori MacPherson on Tuesday.

VHS is survived by a child, DVD, and by Tivo, VOD and DirecTV. It was preceded in death by Betamax, Divx, mini-discs and laserdiscs.

Although it had been ailing, the format's death became official in this, the video biz's all-important fourth quarter. Retailers decided to pull the plug, saying there was no longer shelf space.

As a tribute to the late, great VHS, Toys 'R' Us will continue to carry a few titles like "Barney," and some dollar video chains will still handle cassettes for those who cannot deal with the death of the format.

Born Vertical Helical Scan to parent JVC of Japan, the tape had a difficult childhood as it was forced to compete with Sony's Betamax format.

After its youthful Betamax battles, the longer-playing VHS tapes eventually became the format of choice for millions of consumers. VHS enjoyed a lucrative career, transforming the way people watched movies and changing the economics of the film biz. VHS hit its peak with "The Lion King," which sold more than 30 million vidcassettes Stateside.

The format flourished until DVDs launched in 1997. After a fruitful career, VHS tapes started to retire from center stage in 2003 when DVDs became more popular for the first time.

Since their retirement, VHS tapes have made occasional appearances in children's entertainment and as a format for collectors seeking titles not released on DVD. VHS continued to make as much as $300 million a year until this year, when studios stopped manufacturing the tapes.

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117953955&categoryid=20

VisionOn

11-18-06, 04:22 AM

it's not dead in my house. I still record to VHS for low priority stuff when the DVR is busy. It's cheap and easy and one tape will give you 8 hours recording time over and over again.

harley1

11-18-06, 09:40 AM

O.J. Deal Leaves Sour Taste in Many Mouths

By William Booth and Lisa de Moraes
Washington Post Staff Writers

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 17 -- An angry wave of criticism swept through the publishing and broadcast worlds Friday over the coming Fox television interview tied to the promotion of a book by O.J. Simpson, in which he describes how he would have murdered his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman -- if he'd done it.

The two-part, two-hour TV interview is scheduled to be aired on the Fox network Nov. 27 and 29 and was conducted by hard-charging and controversial publisher Judith Regan. The show will run before the Nov. 30 release date of Simpson's pseudo-confessional tome, "If I Did It," a book published by ReganBooks, a division of HarperCollins, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.

The outrage that has been brewing all week seemed to boil over in recent days as members of the public, television station executives and fellow publishers criticized the book and the taped interview.

Geoff Shandler, editor in chief of Little, Brown, said yesterday, "It's so outrageous and flamboyant and audacious that part of you almost laughs while the other part of you wants to puke."

It was just one example of the kind of fire that Regan has drawn, and that has had some wondering if the envelope-pushing publisher had finally pushed too far.

On Thursday, Regan issued a rambling, eight-page statement in which she said she was motivated not by notoriety or money but by a kind of ersatz revenge and desire to have Simpson confess his crimes (which he reportedly is careful not to do). Regan also said she was compelled by her own history of domestic abuse -- "like Nicole Brown, I believed with all my heart," she said, "and then got punched in the face. Literally."

Media companies that own Fox stations are mulling this weekend whether to direct their stations to run or to preempt the Simpson interview, scheduled to air on the final Monday and Wednesday of the November sweeps ratings period, when ratings are closely watched and future ad rates are tabulated based on those numbers.

On Friday, at least two broadcasters directed their Fox-affiliated stations to preempt the Simpson broadcasts. One of them, California-based Pappas Telecasting Co., owns Fox stations in Fresno, Calif.; Sioux City, Iowa; and Omaha and Lincoln, Neb.

"Our company feels very strongly that there is no beneficial interest to the airing of this program except to O.J. Simpson, and we have no desire to benefit O.J. Simpson," said Pappas's Mike Angellos. He added that his station had been deluged with complaints from the public.

The other broadcaster, LIN TV Corp., owns Fox-affiliated stations in Norfolk; Providence, R.I.; Mobile, Ala.; and Toledo.

"After careful consideration regarding the nature of the show, as well as the feedback we received from the viewers of Northeast Wisconsin, we determined that this programming was not serving the local public interest," WLUK-TV General Manager Jay Zollar said on the station's Web site yesterday.

(Washington's Fox station, WTTG, Channel 5, is owned and operated by the network.)

A Fox spokesman contacted Friday declined to comment regarding the special.

Simpson is no stranger to public outrage. But it appears that much of the condemnation was directed at Fox and Regan, with questions about who will ultimately profit from the deaths of two people whose throats were slashed in Brentwood, Calif., on the night of June 12, 1994.

Regan, 53, has long been a source of gossip, envy and disdain among her colleagues and competitors. She got her start in publishing as a reporter for the National Enquirer, and is now an industry powerhouse.

"Who else has the combination of nerve, foresight and soullessness to publish a book by O.J. Simpson," Sara Nelson, editor of Publishers Weekly, wrote in an online editorial.

"Judith Regan is a very smart and very savvy publisher," Nelson said later in an interview. "But this is just different. This is just . . . " She searched for a word. "This is just really awful."

Publishing companies routinely print books that people find in bad taste, but Regan pushes the envelope -- with profitable results. Her catalogue for ReganBooks, in which a sexy image of the publisher herself sometimes graces the cover, details graphic adult novels and other pulp, such as the memoirs of porn star Jenna Jameson, alongside serious novels by writers such as Jess Walter, who was a finalist for this year's National Book Award for fiction.

The left has decried Regan's political books, but she publishes on both sides of the aisle -- offering "Herding Cats" by Trent Lott, the Republican senator from Mississippi, and "The Case for Hillary," from Democratic Party stalwart Susan Estrich.

The cover of Simpson's book features a picture of the former National Football League star. The portion of the title "I Did It" is in blood-red ink and the word "If" is in white. As of Friday evening, the book was ranked No. 22 on Amazon's bestseller list, though it will not be released until the end of the month. Amazon users tagged the product with the words "shameful," "disgusting," "murderer" and "pathetic."

Regan did not return phone calls on Friday, nor did her publicist. HarperCollins would not comment on the book. In her statement, Regan said she secured the book deal after being approached by a "third party" representing Simpson, whom she did not reveal. "What I do know is I didn't pay him. I contracted through a third party who owns the rights, and I was told the money would go to his children. That much I could live with," Regan said. "What I wanted was closure, not money."

The National Enquirer reported that Regan paid $3.5 million for the Simpson book. In so-called trial of the century, Simpson was found not guilty in criminal court; but he was found responsible for the deaths in a civil trial and was ordered to pay the Brown and Goldman families $33.5 million, only a fraction of which has been paid.

Simpson lives in Florida, where his home is protected from seizure, and he receives a pension from the NFL worth about $400,000 a year.

Regan said she wanted to do the TV interview, which she characterizes as "a confession," herself. Because he was acquitted in court, Simpson cannot be tried again for the same crimes.

"I had never met him and never spoken with him until the day I interviewed him. And I was ready," Regan said. "The men who lied and cheated and beat me -- they were all there in the room. And the people who denied it, they were there, too. And though it might sound a little strange, Nicole and Ron were in my heart. And for them, I wanted him to confess his sins, to do penance and to amend his life. Amen."

Regan further described herself as a victim when she said the media "have all but called for my death for publishing his book and for interviewing him," something she called a double standard.

Regan continued, "A death, I might add, not called for when Katie Couric interviewed him; not called for when Barbara Walters had an exclusive with the Menendez brothers, who killed their parents in cold blood . . . not called for when '60 Minutes' interviewed Timothy McVeigh, who murdered hundreds in Oklahoma City."

She characterized the Simpson trial, for better or worse, as "a seminal moment in American history," as it was a perfect tabloid mystery double murder, with its crosscurrents of violence, celebrity, racism, wealth, police corruption and the media.

However accurate that may be, families of the victims were furious.

Nicole Simpson's sister, Denise Brown, who chairs a foundation to fight domestic violence, said in a statement: "It's unfortunate that Simpson has decided to reawaken a nightmare that we . . . worked so hard to move beyond. We hope Ms. Regan takes full accountability for promoting the wrongdoing of criminals and leveraging this forum and the actions of Simpson to commercialize abuse."

On Friday, a number of Fox station managers were wondering what to do with the Simpson special.

"I think everybody thought Fox was beyond this, beyond those days of 'When Animals Attack' and all that kind of stuff," said a disgusted general manager of a top 50 Fox station who did not want to be named.

The GM said he would bet that as soon as one big station-owning company rejects the Simpson show, "other owners will follow."

Among the more creative ways of dealing with a public relations disaster, a Fox station in Seattle has promised that if it airs the interview, it will not sell any local ads. Instead it will help tape public service announcements for local organizations that aid victims of domestic abuse, which will run in place of local ads.

Staff writer Bob Thompson contributed to this repor

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/17/AR2006111700533.html

dad1153

11-18-06, 09:44 AM

Obituary
VHS, 30, dies of loneliness
The home-entertainment format lived a fruitful life
By Diane Garrett Variety

Yep, VHS is ideal for TV shows that don't demand enticing video quality to be enjoyed and are to a certain degree disposable. I tape mostly a handful of standout or special episodes of gameshows on GSN (a particularly funny 'Newlywed Game,' a perfect win on 'Card Sharks,' Lucille Ball & Charles Nelson Reilly on 'Body Language,' a mystery guest appearance on 'What's My Line?,' etc.) on VHS, along with a few 'Price Is Right' shows here and there. I also tape 'Conan O'Brien' and 'Jimmy Kimmel' on VHS so I can watch them at work in the morning during breakfast. All on SP 120m speed of course (EP makes the picture unwatchable). Plus I still have a ton of stuff on VHS (seasons of HBO's 'Dream On' and 'Larry Sanders' not yet released on DVD, the English dub of Japanese anime 'Sailor Moon' when it aired in syndication here back in 1995-96, lots of HBO Championship Boxing bouts, about 200 'Late Night with David Letterman' shows from NBC, etc.) that I haven't had the time or inclination to transfer yet to DVD.

Heck, back from 1987-1989 I taped over eighty hours of a local variety/gameshow in my homeland of El Salvador which I kept when I moved to the States in 1989. This was unusual because back in the mid-80's VCR penetration in El Salvador was minimal to non-existent (I got my VCR from my father who immigrated to NY in the mid-80's) since the country was (and still is) a dirt-poor third-world banana republic. When I went back to visit my homeland in 1994 I got in touch with the host/producer of the TV show I taped and asked if there was any way I could have access to the library of archived shows so I could see some of the shows I missed back in the late 80's. He told me that the station wouldn't put money for archiving the 3/4" U-Matic masters so all the show's previous seven-year run was lost when the masters were recycled for use. I volunteered my VHS collection to the guy (you can imagine how pleasantly shocked he was that shows he thought were lost to history suddenly re-appeared) and he transferred them all to U-Matic 3/4" (the format of choice at the time, 1994, for a poor third-world TV station). The quality is crap because back in '87, at the tender age of 14, I figured 6 hours of recording were better than 2. But for a third-world TV show the fact that I managed to save 80 hrs. of it is a small miracle that continues to be enjoyed when the show's anniversary specials come on every year. :rolleyes:

When I want to preserve a tape for posterity though (the 'Stargate' twins and new 'Battlestar Galactica' on Sci-Fi for instance) of course it first goes into the DVR, then into the trusty Panny DVD-R recorder I bought in 2001 that is still going strong and hasn't clunked on me yet. VHS isn't dead to me yet, just relegated to back-up when everything else (DVR, DVD-R, etc.) fails, is full or isn't need to keep the essence of the disposable entertainment being taped on it.

TeeJay1952

11-18-06, 10:30 AM

In regard to VHS:
I have 2 working in tandem to pick off what I am not viewing. I get a backlog of around 30 6 hour tapes that I watch when repeats break out. I love the idea of being able to call shows out by name that a DVR would provide but I would be devastated if a hard drive failed or a reboot of the DVR lost 100 hours of shows. If a tape goes bad I lose at most 6 hours. I know I could build a RAID array with redundancy but it seems like alot of trouble when another VCR is so easy. What do you guys do about "hardware failure"?

fredfa

11-18-06, 10:37 AM

harley1, thanks for the post.

We are beginning to see a major backlash against Fox and any affiliate station crazy enough to carry these shows. Personally, I still hold out hope that someone high up at Fox will see that this is not just a three-day orgy of media frenzy but the tip of the iceberg of true national revulsion.

Obviously this was beyond tasteless and a simply horrid idea. Perhaps now the golden child of tastelessness, Mike Darnell, might be shown the door -- even by Fox.

If I were the producer of "House" or "Bones" (or any other Fox shows I would strongly protest having Simpson promos placed in my program. Anything about this incredibly thoughtless, arrogant and utlimately stupid idea contaminates not just Fox, but as many writers have said, the entire television industry.

dad1153 -- your thoughts and insights never fail to amaze me. It wasn't until recently you mentioned you came to this country in 1989. From your writing and your knowledge (and affection for) of the American culture it seems almost impossible.

Of course the Variety "obituary" was more than a bit tongue in cheek. Heck, I missed it when it first ran Wednesday. But I thought it was interesting enough to post anyway. It did bring back a flood of memories for me -- like recording the Indiana State (Larry Bird) vs. Michigan State (Magic Johnson) NCAA Final. But nothing, of course, as important as your taping back in El Salvador.

(In fairness, it should be noted that TV stations and networks here in the States did the same thing with old shows. Kinescopes of 50s treasures were simply thrown out and many, many shows (including years of Johnny Carson) were taped over in the interest of "economy".)

And it reminded me I really have to figure out how to work my own DVD recorder. Many thanks for your thoughts.

fredfa

11-18-06, 11:38 AM

TV Sports
X marks the big game
However Ohio State vs. Michigan plays out, Fox can hardly miss
By Barry Horn Dallas News Sports Media Columnist Saturday, November 18, 2006

A Big Ten things to remember about today's college football "Game of The Year" when top-ranked Ohio State hosts No. 2 Michigan at 2:30 p.m. (CT) on ABC:

I No one will be paying more attention to the remainder of the season than Fox, which doesn't have a single game on its schedule the rest of 2006. It does, however, have the BCS National Championship Game on Jan. 8. The six top-ranked BCS teams – Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Florida, Notre Dame and Rutgers – are all ratings magnets. The Ohio State-Michigan winner against USC would make Fox the giddiest. Ohio State-Notre Dame would be ratings gold. Don't be quick to dismiss Rutgers, the state university of New Jersey, which is nestled between New York and Philadelphia, the No. 1 and No. 4 television markets in the country. As for the possibility of another Ohio State-Michigan game, rematches are like reruns. They're not artistically appetizing to TV types.

II ABC inquired about moving the game to its Saturday prime-time slot but, like Texas-Oklahoma earlier this season, there was no interest from the schools.

III If Ohio State-Michigan wouldn't come to them, ABC's prime-time crew – Brent Musburger, Bob Davie and Kirk Herbstreit – will work during the afternoon this week.

IV According to Wikipedia, Musburger's middle name is not "Hyperbole." Then again, you can't always trust what you read on that Web site.

V Herbstreit, who played quarterback at Ohio State, says some of his best friends are Michigan fans, and he would never bleed scarlet on the job. "I take my job a little more seriously than I do where I went to school," he said via conference call earlier this week. " ... When I get into a booth and evaluate a game, I'm not looking at which school I happened to attend. I'm looking at two teams trying to move the ball down the field, and I will have no problem saying what is happening and why it's happening. That's my job."

VI Then again, Herbstreit isn't exactly rational on the subject of Ohio State-Michigan: "It was in the middle of the Cold War when nuclear bombs were a serious threat. I used to go to bed praying to hold off on nuclear bombs until I got a chance to play in the Ohio State-Michigan game."

VII The game can't be that important. ABC has expanded its pregame show by only a half hour to 60 minutes. TV law: No game can be deemed truly significant unless the pregame show equals or surpasses the time it takes to broadcast the actual event.

VIII Odds are that ABC will be unable to resist the urge to work at least one reference to Dancing With the Stars into the broadcast.

IX ABC/ESPN is billing today as "Judgment Day." Given the off-the-field peccadilloes of some student-athletes, "guilty" or "not guilty" verdicts play a large role every week of the college season.

X NBC pays homage to long-time ABC college football voice Keith Jackson at halftime of its Army-Notre Dame game, which kicks off at 1:30 p.m. The highlight is a taped interview with Jim Lampley. "I don't think I'll see it," Jackson told his hometown Los Angeles Times. "I'll be watching Michigan-Ohio State."

Quick hits

Numbers game: Final national rating for Sunday afternoon's MLS Cup Championship at Pizza Hut Park broadcast by ABC was a microscopic 0.8. Usually, the site of a championship game can be counted on to boost ratings. But Dallas-Fort Worth scored an even tinier 0.6 for WFAA (Channel 8). Meanwhile, Cowboys at Cardinals scored a 29.4 for KDFW (Channel 4). Put another way, the Cowboys attracted 700,000 homes, the MLS title game, 14,000.

60 Minutes: If you stay with CBS after Sunday's late game, you can catch Joe Namath talking about his last three years of sobriety. Namath tells Bob Simon he's "glad" his infamous drunken sideline interview with Suzy Kolber happened. It made him understand the depth of his problem and forced him to get help.

End of an era: George Michael has decided to end the 23-year run of his syndicated Sports Machine come March. The show, whose roots were in local Washington television, served as an early blueprint for SportsCenter. Michael, a Sunday night staple on KXAS (Channel 5), told the Associated Press that he made the decision to retire rather than be involved in corporate-mandated downsizing. "I told them that if I have to lay anyone off, if I have to get rid of any of my staff, then I'm going to take the first bullet," Michael said.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/columnists/bhorn/stories/111806dnspohorn.315e2f5.html

keenan

11-18-06, 12:59 PM

O.J. Deal Leaves Sour Taste in Many Mouths

By William Booth and Lisa de Moraes
Washington Post Staff Writers

The show will run before the Nov. 30 release date of Simpson's pseudo-confessional tome, "If I Did It," a book published by ReganBooks, a division of HarperCollins, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.

lol...I wasn't aware of this connection before this article(I did not read all of them, just a few) but it does seem to prove that News Corp will sink to even lower lows in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

fredfa

11-18-06, 01:11 PM

This deal certainly has shown us how important synergy is!

(And makes the Alec Baldwin character in "30 Rock" even more amusing.)

fredfa

11-18-06, 01:20 PM

Friday’s updated fast national over night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

keenan

11-18-06, 02:32 PM

This deal certainly has shown us how important synergy is!

(And makes the Alec Baldwin character in "30 Rock" even more amusing.)
Yes it does, and it even adds more foundation to HDTVChallenged's comment about entertainer Bill O'Rielly being "outraged" about the interview. This thing stinks from top to bottom. Maybe FOX can do a reality show called "Death Row Confessions" where the condemned tell how they "would have" killed their victims if they were the ones that actually did the killing, probably be a huge hit. :rolleyes:

fredfa

11-18-06, 03:45 PM

Commentary
The Inside Media Column
O.J. sewer leads right to Murdoch
By Tim Rutten Los Angeles Times November 18, 2006

America’s popular culture lost its sense of shame so long ago that it's a little hard to recall precisely what that emotion felt like.

Every once in a while, though, a small shiver of compunction runs through our collective nervous system, like phantom pain in the stump of some carelessly amputated limb.

That's what occurred this week when the Fox television network announced that it would air a two-part interview with O.J. Simpson as part of the publicity campaign promoting a new book, "If I Did It," in which he offers a hypothetical account of how he might have killed his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Lyle Goldman outside her Brentwood condominium in 1994. Just in case you've spent the last 12 years in a Carthusian monastery or on the dark side of the moon, Simpson was acquitted on murder charges but was subsequently held civilly liable for both deaths and ordered to pay an as-yet-uncollected $33.5-million judgment to the victims' families.

"If I Did It" is the product of the former football star's collaboration with an unnamed ghost writer and will be published at the end of this month by ReganBooks, the euphonious shock-and-schlock imprint Judith Regan runs for the HarperCollins publishing house. Fox, ReganBooks and HarperCollins all have something important in common: They're owned by the predatory Australian-born media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, who has devoted his life to making money by making sure that news and entertainment are as coarse and vulgar as can be imagined in as many places as possible.

In fact, if there is a single compelling argument for restrictive immigration policies, Murdoch is it. It is one of history's inexplicable perversities that this avaricious antipodean has been welcomed into this country while honest Mexican workingmen are walled out.

Part of Murdoch's dark genius is that he never settles for having things both ways when he can have them every way there's a buck to be made. Thus, while Regan and various Fox broadcasting spokesmen were shrilly defending the book and interview, a couple of the stars on Murdoch's cable news network were in full-throated denunciation mode.

Fox News' biggest draw, Bill O'Reilly, called the project "simply indefensible and a low point in American culture," then went on to note piously, "For the record, Fox Broadcasting has nothing to do with the Fox News Channel."

Nothing, except for the fact that both are personally run by the same Murdoch functionary, Roger Ailes.

Meanwhile, Fox News' Geraldo Rivera had this to say about the book and interview: "I think it's disgusting. I think he's a murdering liar. I think he's demonstrating that he made a fool of the jury in Los Angeles and all of the black community across the country that supported him. This sleazy, low-down murdering dog who killed his ex-wife, the mother of his children as they slept upstairs…. I think it really is the most appalling thing I've ever seen."

Pretty strong stuff, especially when it comes from a guy with the gag reflex of a turkey buzzard.

So let's see here … Judith Regan publishes Simpson's book. To whet the buying public's appetite for it, Regan herself interviews Simpson and the results are aired on Fox Broadcasting during the sweeps week, which is critical to the network's advertising. To build buzz and controversy, which means audience, the commentators on Fox News denounce the whole thing as a cultural low point, something they'd recognize more easily than most. Keep in mind that both networks report to Ailes, who once created a talk show for Regan. Ailes, Regan, O'Reilly and Rivera all work for Murdoch, who ultimately profits from both the outrage and the outraged.

This is the sort of thing that keeps conspiracy theorists up at night, but there's a more practical result. According to publishing sources, the first printing of "If I Did It" is 400,000 copies, and all this week advance orders on the Amazon.com list soared.

Everybody in this whole unsavory arrangement is satisfied except Regan, who mysteriously seems taken aback by criticism of her decision to publish this gruesome book. As she told the New York Times on Thursday, "The book is his confession. I would have no interest in publishing anything but that." However, as Edward Wyatt reported Friday, Simpson inconveniently refused to confess and "did not say directly in the book or the interview that he killed" his ex-wife or Goldman. "Rather, he spoke about the murders in the hypothetical sense, a stance that admits nothing and could be viewed as a denial."

Regan, however, doesn't believe any of that matters because … come on, guess … and, no, it's not because she's in rehab — it's because she's a victim herself! That's right, domestic abuse. In a rambling, semi-hysterical statement distributed Friday, Regan said she was unsurprised by Simpson's acquittal because she was disbelieved when battered by her husband more than 20 years ago. According to the publisher, he was "tall, dark and handsome. A great athlete. A brilliant mind. He was even a doctor, with an M.D. after his name and a degree that came with an oath: 'First do no harm.' He was one of the brightest men I'd ever met. And he could charm anyone. He charmed me. We had a child. And then he knocked me out, with a blow to my head, and sent me to the hospital. He manipulated, lied and broke my heart."

Simpson's acquittal, Regan insisted, was "a seminal moment in American history" and, recalling her own experience going to confession as a Catholic schoolgirl, said that she "made the decision to publish this book and to sit face to face with the killer, because I wanted him, and the men who broke my heart and your hearts, to tell the truth, to confess their sins, to do penance and to amend their lives. Amen."

Really.

Like shame, the indispensability of privacy is one of the things that's often hard to recall these days. But even now, sacramental confession is done in private and held as an inviolable confidence. Priests give absolution, not multimillion-dollar advances, and they don't plan on profiting from the exercise.

Regan says that when she "sat face to face with the killer, I wanted him to confess, to release us all from the wound of the conviction that was lost on that fall day in October of 1995.

"For the girl who was left in the gutter, I wanted to make it right."

The only gutter at issue here is the one where Judith Regan does business and, when you consider all the help she's getting from the rest of Rupert Murdoch's minions, it's a very crowded sewer.

http://www.calendarlive.com/printedition/calendar/cl-et-rutten18nov18,0,5199613,print.story?coll=cl-calendar

flint350

11-18-06, 03:47 PM

...FOX News Channel is part of the news division. FOX owned and operated stations are owned by FOX Televisions Inc. FOX Network is owned by FOX Broadcasting Company. These are THREE separate companies...

...The network treats the stations and the news division just like any other company, meaning they don't play favorites with other FOX properties....These people need to get a clue.

Wasting your time foxeng. The Fox haters out there and in here (not the OJ show haters - Fox itself) are more interested in dreaming up conspiracies based solely on their own opinions, rather than examining actual facts and applying them fairly. It's likely best to ignore those so inclined since they can't be reasoned with, facts or not. That's my approach from now on in this forum as well - don't take the bait and enter the discussion when trashing Fox is the sport. There's no winning argument or reasonable discussion when people see conspiracies everywhere and assume they know what someone is really thinking and conspiring to do despite their emphatic statements to the contrary.

fredfa

11-18-06, 03:49 PM

...Maybe FOX can do a reality show called "Death Row Confessions" where the condemned tell how they "would have" killed their victims if they were the ones that actually did the killing, probably be a huge hit. :rolleyes:

please, Please, PLEASE! don't give Mike Darnell and his Fox keepers any ideas.

foxeng

11-18-06, 04:50 PM

Wasting your time foxeng. The Fox haters out there and in here (not the OJ show haters - Fox itself) are more interested in dreaming up conspiracies based solely on their own opinions, rather than examining actual facts and applying them fairly. It's likely best to ignore those so inclined since they can't be reasoned with, facts or not. That's my approach from now on in this forum as well - don't take the bait and enter the discussion when trashing Fox is the sport. There's no winning argument or reasonable discussion when people see conspiracies everywhere and assume they know what someone is really thinking and conspiring to do despite their emphatic statements to the contrary.

I know why mess up a good story with the truth, but when something is so blatantly wrong and is passed on as gospel, you have to respond because as Robert Wuhl says "when the legend becomes fact, print the legend."

fredfa

11-18-06, 05:15 PM

Obviously many in the media don't take the time to understand how Fox actually works.

Roger Ailes (and I have lauded him numerous times in this thread) has nothing to do with the Fox network.

Nothing.

And I would expect, could he speak freely, he would also say he thinks the O.J. special is atrocious.

dad1153

11-18-06, 05:27 PM

I'm sure Ailes could book himself on his own network's talk shows to condemn the Fox Network OJ show if he thought it'd get his cable net a ratings boost. This is, after all, a man that gave himself a talk show back in 1994 when 'America's Talking' (the cable talk network that Ailes wanted to morph into a Fox News-like opinion-driven newschannel but NBC wouldn't let him; 'AT' became MSNBC sometime in 1995) debuted. Ironically entertainment reporter Bill Mcatee (!), who moved to Fox News when Ailes created it for Murdoch in 1996 (after Ailes left 'America's Talking' when NBC News took over it), was the winner of a national talk show search contest Ailes organized to get 'America's Talking' some publicity when it launched. The big Friday night premiere when McCatee (!) was crowned the winner of his own talk show 'America's Talking' got a microscopic rating. Why? Because that same night 90% of the country was watching either the NBA Playoffs on NBC or OJ Simpson running away from cops during the infamous slow speed chase on the Ford Bronco on every TV channel in the world. In fact, didn't NBC News interrupt the Playoffs (the Knicks were playing I think) and then showed the NBA game and the slow speed chase on a split-screen for a few minutes before switching back to the game for good? :o

Geraldo was on the air at the time on his relatively-new CNBC talk show. He grabbed the OJ story by the you-know-what and rode it to fame, ratings and fortune along with John Gibson as the courthouse reporter stationed in front of Camp OJ every day. Of course now Gibson and Geraldo both work for Ailes over at Fox and have turned hostile to liberals and/or Dem positions. Gibson, who used to come across as a nice guy, has mutated into a right-wing nutcase sandwiched between the extremes of Sean Hannity and Michael Savage (yes, I'm being sarcastic).

It's a zestpool out there I tell you, and in one way or another these men (Gibson, Geraldo, Ailes, the eventual founders of Court TV, etc.) profited and/or benefited from the OJ trial. Just ask all the unemployed soap opera actors and personnel who were out of work because of the precipitous drop in daytime viewership for their shows whenever the Simpson trial was live on TV. These talking heads' manufactured-for-cable-news temper tantrums on cue to keep the OJ interview in the minds of viewers is as slick and phony as OJ trying to not put on the glove in front of the jury. :rolleyes:

foxeng

11-18-06, 06:11 PM

Of course now Gibson and Geraldo both work for Ailes over at Fox and have turned hostile to liberals and/or Dem positions. Gibson, who used to come across as a nice guy, has mutated into a right-wing nutcase sandwiched between the extremes of Sean Hannity and Michael Savage (yes, I'm being sarcastic).

Since we are on the "truth bandwagon" here dad, let's get some of the facts straight for future generations. ;)

Gibson has said on many occasions in public he is a Republican and on his radio show, he is as right as you can get. Geraldo on the other hand came to FOX because NBC wouldn't allow him to go after UBL after 9/11 and FOX would and did. He is still as much of a lefty as ever, still standing up for Bill Clinton and supporting Michael Jackson and most every other left cause. I like watching him and O'Reilly go at it every week on O'Reilly's show. Makes good TV!! :D

Oh and the name is Bill McCuddy, no MCatee.

fredfa

11-18-06, 06:40 PM

In fairness, dad1153, the Ailes talk show on America's Talking was a very fair show -- liberals as well as conservatives, artists, show people, all happily appeared and engaged in civil and interesting discussion.

AT morphed into MSNBC in June, 1996, and NBC wanted to keep Ailes (after all he, Jack O'Reilly and Chet Collier built the NBC cable brand to a far higher value than it had before their arrival) but GE/NBC did insist on a corporate structure which would have made him get 30 Rock's approval for literally every decision.

And you can see how well that network-by-committee decision has worked for both MSNBC and CNBC (and CNN as well) in the decade since he left.

Speaking of those who made a living with the O.J. trial, please don't forget all the hard newsies at CNN. That is where Nancy Grace made her name.

John Gibson, by the way, was the correspondent covering the trial for AT.

taz291819

11-18-06, 07:01 PM

from seattle pi blog
The Pick-Up Game: At long last, "Veronica Mars"!!!!!
Posted by Melanie McFarland at November 17, 2006 4:00 p.m.

Took The CW long enough, didn't it?

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/tv/archives/108841.asp

Finally, some good news in this section!

Sorry, just a little friendly ribbing over all the O.J./Fox responses.

taz291819

11-18-06, 07:11 PM

Slightly on subject, I consider myself a middle-man, and watch FoxNews, CNN, and MSNBC.

It's been a while since I've watched much, but here's my ranking:

Fox News: I like the way they just do the news, though O'Reilly gets on my nerves sometimes (he didn't always rub me the wrong way, but now he does....Reminds me of Rick and Bubba).

CNN: Well, they have Robin Meade, and she does the news perfectly, with great personality. (Like I said, it's been a while, she may not even work for CNN anymore).

MSNBC: Imus in the Morning. That guy is hilarious! He can really piss me off sometimes, but as we all know, he does it on purpose (reminds me of John Boy and Billy).

fredfa

11-19-06, 01:37 AM

Critic’s Notebook
TV Comedy's Not Dead; It's Just Different
By Roger Catlin Hartford Courant TV Critic November 19 2006

Originally, television might have caught on because of a comedy show hosted by Milton Berle.

Since then, playing it for laughs has always been one of TV's most reliable staples.

A half-century ago, the No. 1 show was a sitcom, "I Love Lucy." Forty years back, six of the Top 10 shows were sitcoms, while two others were comedy/variety shows. Three of the top four shows 30 years ago were comedies (with "Happy Days" and "Laverne & Shirley" No. 1 and 2). Two decades ago, seven of the Top 10 shows were comedies, topped by "The Cosby Show." Even 10 years ago, six of the Top 10 shows were sitcoms, a list that included "Seinfeld," "Friends" and "Frasier."

But the state of comedy on broadcast TV today is no laughing matter.

When last week's ratings came out, not only was there no sitcom in the Top 10, there wasn't one in the Top 20.

"Two and a Half Men," the CBS comedy with Charlie Sheen, which has been usually the sole sitcom in the Top 20, was bumped to No. 21 in a week stuffed with reality shows and sporting events.

The next highest in the ratings was its companion, "The New Adventures of Old Christine," coming in at No. 26.

ABC's "Help Me Help You" can boast that it's the top-rated new comedy of the season. But its ranking at No. 40, with 10.3 million viewers, was due largely to having the good luck of being placed after "Dancing With the Stars" (No. 4, with 19.9 million viewers).

Of the two-dozen new shows unveiled by networks this fall, just seven were comedies - the fewest anyone can remember.

Of those, three were held for later release, only one of which ("Big Day" Nov. 28 on ABC) comes anytime soon. Two new sitcoms are already gone.

What's happened? Is America not laughing? Are shows like "Leave It to Beaver" simply passé? Or are people just getting their jokes elsewhere these days?

One change is that networks have expanded the definition of the TV comedy to include 60-minute serials with humorous moments, not just 30-minute sitcoms.

ABC submitted "Desperate Housewives" for Emmy Awards as a comedy in its first season, and four of its actresses took all but one of the slots for nominations for best actress in a comedy (though only one could win).

And if you believe "Desperate Housewives" is indeed a comedy, then - voilà! - the No. 1 show on TV is a comedy.

There have been other network explanations.

About the time shows like "The Osbournes" and "The Simple Life" were hits, some suggested that brand of "reality show" represented the new look of comedy on TV (though no such shows have survived on broadcast TV).

Two fall shows are about a comedy show very much like "Saturday Night Live," but only one of them, "30 Rock," is an actual comedy; the other, "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," is a drama set in that world. But the glimpses of sketches in both shows, tellingly, are not particularly funny.

The comedies that make it to the air these days are quite different from those in the past.

The traditional "multi-camera" sitcom usually was shot in a studio before an audience, which is encouraged to laugh (and when they don't, canned laughs are added later). The only comedy produced that way this season - NBC's "Twenty Good Years" - has already been canceled.

Mostly, new comedies show influence from HBO offerings such as "Curb Your Enthusiasm," "Sex and the City" and "Entourage." They are "single-camera" comedies, shot like a movie, with no audience in sight and no laughter - live or canned.

Ted Danson, who starred in one of the most popular multi-camera sitcoms in TV history, "Cheers," and got a taste of the new style through recurring appearances on "Curb Your Enthusiasm," says he's happy to be doing "Help Me Help You" as a single-camera comedy.

"I hear a laugh track now, and I just go..." He starts rolling his eyes.

"That's a tough medium," Danson says of the old style of sitcoms. "If you are not genuinely, over-the-top, hugely funny, that laugh track just beats the crap out of you. Because everyone [at home] is going, 'I don't know if that was that funny.'

"This is more like a film," he says. "I'm really looking forward to that gentler, more behavioral kind of funny - not jokes."

Another cast member on "Help Me Help You," Jere Burns, says not only is the laughter artificial, so are the traditional sitcom's play-like trappings of one basic setting and always staying indoors.

"The closer you get to comedy [being like] reality, the harder it is to go back to the superficiality of the laugh track and the proscenium and the lack of being outside," Burns says.

Part of that is the effect of reality shows that follow people around wherever they go.

"Everything is so intimate," he says, "that it made the whole convention of four-camera hard for people."

The exception, Burns says, are shows that are what he calls "brilliantly crafted - the way `Cheers' was and the way `Seinfeld' was."

HBO, which had been pioneering the single-camera comedy dating back to "The Larry Sanders Show" (1992) and "Dream On" (1990), tried to go in the other direction this summer by returning to the multi-camera sitcom format in a show so retro it almost seemed experimental.

"Lucky Louie" was based on the comedy of creator and star Louis C.K., much in the way "Everybody Loves Raymond" was based on the comedy of Ray Romano. But since Louis C.K.'s comedy is raunchy, so was the sitcom, with the result being rough language, flashes of nudity and simulated sex in front of the studio audience.

"HBO often does well when it goes where other people aren't," executive Chris Enders says. "There were a lot of stories written over the last couple of years about the death of the ... multi-camera sitcom. So we thought, wouldn't it be fun to try one?"

The experiment didn't really work. Critics skewered the show, which averaged about 4 million viewers in its 12-episode summer run. This fall, HBO announced there wouldn't be a second season.

Broadcast executives say they didn't ban multi-camera comedies.

But Stephen McPherson, president of ABC Entertainment, says, "We certainly went out there and said we want to break the mold. We feel like the same old-same old is not working - the traditional three-camera, couch-in-the-middle sitcom just didn't seem to be breaking out at all."

Besides, he added, "There weren't great voices. There weren't the Roseanne and the Tim Allen voices behind those kinds of shows."

He says a number of multi-camera sitcoms were and are in development, along with single-camera comedies, such as the one he held back because he wants it to get more attention, "The Knights of Prosperity."

And like the lull before "Cosby" came around, the popularity of comedy may return.

"Five years ago people said drama was dead, and now I think it's the golden age of drama in broadcast television," McPherson says.

It's important for people to take chances, he says, "just like when we were kind of down and out and took chances with serialized shows. I think it's a time where you need to take chances to hopefully find the next thing that breaks out."

Some have been looking to the Internet, where bits of filmed humor and viral video on sites such as YouTube have proven real competition for TV comedy. As a result, some networks are experimenting with their own Internet comedy sites. NBC just started its own site, DotComedy, where it offers raunchy and cutting edge new bits as well as classic sitcoms, including, yes, "Leave It to Beaver."

http://www.ctnow.com/tv/hce-comedy.artnov19,0,7898963,print.story?coll=hce-headlines-tv-top

harley1

11-19-06, 10:27 AM

Affiliates find Simpson scary

BY MARISA GUTHRIE and RICHARD HUFF
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS

O.J. Simpson's televised "confession" is too "disgusting" to air for some Fox affiliates.
Fox affiliates in Green Bay, Wis.; Omaha; Providence, R.I.; Fresno, Calif., and elsewhere have told Fox Broadcasting honchos they won't broadcast the controversial sit-down with the soiled gridiron great.

"We were deluged with calls and e-mails from outraged viewers who thought it was disgusting that this program was going to be aired," said Mike Angelos, vice president of corporate communications at Pappas Broadcasting, which owns four Fox affiliates bailing out of the show.

"We feel the program has no beneficial interest other than to O.J. Simpson and we have no desire to benefit O.J. Simpson," Angelos added.

Officials at Tribune Broadcasting, which has six Fox stations, were mulling the decision this weekend, said Richard Graziano, vice president and general manager of WTIC-TV in Hartford. Officials may see a tape of the show before deciding, he said.

"Many of the general managers haven't expressed a keen interest in running it," Graziano told the Daily News. "It's a tough one. I don't know what Fox is thinking," he said. "Anyone I've talked to seemed a little shocked by this."

Lin Broadcasting, which has five Fox affiliates, has backed out of the show as well. "We don't feel it's appropriate for northeast Wisconsin," said Jay Zollar, general manager of Lin-owned WLUK-TV in Green Bay. "We've gotten a significant amount of community ... [and] advertiser reaction."

Viewer backlash is also coming with unsolicited negative advertiser reaction in some markets.

For instance, in Green Bay, Zollar said he's got a list of nearly 30 advertisers who have called saying they want no part of Simpson's show. Some clients, Zollar said, don't even want to be on the air in the same week for fear of being tainted by Simpson blow-back.

"I don't think advertisers are lining up for this," said Brad Adgate, research director at Horizon Media. "A lot of advertisers have different thresholds for content. In this particular instance I wouldn't think there would be a lot of advertisers who would want to have their message associated with this."

Ultimately, the show may draw big ratings but little advertising, said Bill Carroll, vice president and director of programming for Katz Television Group. "Everyone seems to be appalled," he said. "But when you ask someone, 'Are you going to watch?' the answer in a coy sort of way is, 'Well probably.'"

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/472516p-397614c.html

fredfa

11-19-06, 11:49 AM

Critic’s Notebook
“Criminal Minds” leads CBS' soph surge
Ensemble drama challenges “Lost” for auds
By Rick Kissell Variety.com Nov. 19, 2006

While most attention was paid this fall to which first-year shows smoked or choked, it's worth noting that several second-year CBS skeins have blossomed nicely.

No net has discovered more new hits over the past five years than CBS. And no net has done a better job making sure these skeins didn't veer off track.

Credit the Eye's current department for strong soph-season starts for "Criminal Minds," "Ghost Whisperer," "How I Met Your Mother" and "Close to Home."

Contrast this with skeins back for a second fall season on rival nets. While Fox's "Bones" looks solid and is up slightly in some categories, others including NBC's "My Name Is Earl" and Fox's "Prison Break," while remaining hits, have lost a step or two.

For CBS, the biggest standout has been "Criminal Minds," an ensemble drama about an FBI team solving the crimes of serial killers.

After getting trounced by ABC's "Lost" last season, "Criminal Minds" has surged by 23% in adults 18-49 this fall (4.8 rating vs. 3.9) to place a solid second to the Alphabet skein, which is down 13% (6.8 vs. 7.8), according to Nielsen.

"Criminal Minds" has also recently overtaken "Lost" in total viewers -- thanks to an advantage among viewers 50-plus -- with the Eye entry now pulling in 16.8 million. It's recently cracked the weekly top 10 in this category.

Some "Lost" fans have jumped ship this season amid criticisms its mythology asks many more questions than it answers. And CBS was ready to suck them in with "Criminal Minds," another of the net's procedurals that tidy up all loose ends in one episode.

"Criminal Minds" figures to get a chance to grow even more now that "Lost" is off the air until February.

Of course, Fox's "American Idol" will again be the show to beat Wednesdays at 9 come January, but much like "NCIS" on Tuesday, the Eye now appears to have a skein that can more than keep the lights on against tough competish.

On Friday, psychic drama "Ghost Whisperer" has moved to the head of its class at 8 p.m., rising 10% year to year in 18-49 (3.3 vs. 3.0) despite facing tough gameshow competish on NBC.

Its sked companion, lead-out "Close to Home," also has had a good second season. It is down a tick in 18-49 (3.0 vs. 3.1) and up in total viewers, with its 11.5 million making it the night's most popular program.

Credit the smart cast addition of David James Elliott, who previously starred in the same hour for CBS on "JAG."

"Home" also makes for a nice bridge between "Ghost" and the No. 1 show at 10, "Numbers," as CBS has been the clear No. 1 net on Friday.

And on Monday, "How I Met Your Mother" has become one of the few comedy successes on any net in recent years, coming within a tick of its rookie average (3.5 vs. 3.6) despite being asked to anchor the night at 8 after following the popular "King of Queens" at 8:30 last season.

This has increased its value to CBS, because the net can try out new laffers in the higher-watched 8:30 slot, which serves as a hammock between "Mother" and TV's top comedy, "Two and a Half Men" at 9.

Another plus for "Mother" is that it recently has stood as the highest-rated laffer on CBS among adults under 35. Net has been aiming younger in comedy, and "Mother" has struck a chord with the hard-to-reach 18-34 crowd.

This isn't the first time CBS shows gained steam after ho-hum initial seasons. In recent years, "Cold Case," "Without a Trace" and "NCIS," among others, have all hit series highs in their second, third or fourth seasons.

Indeed, when it comes to knowing how to make the most of an asset following its rookie season, the Eye seems to have it over its rivals.

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117954187&categoryid=14

fredfa

11-19-06, 01:00 PM

Saturday’s updated fast national over night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

11-19-06, 02:11 PM

The December 2 HD college football schedule has been updated.

When the BCS rankings are announced later in the day they will be added.

fredfa

11-19-06, 02:21 PM

The Business of TV
Coming Up, Transition at 30 Rock
By Richard Siklos and Bill Carter The New York Times November 19, 2006
(Lorne Manly contributed reporting.

Universal City, Calif.—“Freeway!” Bob Wright yells, pointing like a five-star general out the window of his Lincoln Town Car as it approaches the on-ramp to the 101. Wearing a Panama hat and blue blazer, Mr. Wright, NBC Universal’s chairman and chief executive, is barking at a chase car full of corporate underlings who have made the mistake of slowing things down by using side streets instead of the highway to visit the set of NBC’s new prime-time hit, “Heroes.”

Arriving at the “Heroes” studio on Sunset Boulevard a few minutes later, Mr. Wright’s driver hurriedly tells a security guard that he has NBC’s boss in the back seat. With nary an identification check, the gate rises and the limo breezes through. On the set, Mr. Wright’s demeanor is friendly and unrushed, more that of a father visiting his children at work than that of a demanding über-boss from New York.

Visiting creative people at work, Mr. Wright says, is something he does not do as much as he would like. “I live in a world where I have so many bits and pieces of information,” he says. “And sometimes you go out on a set and all of a sudden some otherwise extraneous pieces of info come together.”

Generating a much-to-do-and-little-time-to-get-it-done vibe, Mr. Wright has fine-tuned his balancing act — one part commandant, one part paternalistic persuader — during his more than 20 years as NBC’s steward. From managing the morning, evening and late-night news wars, broadcasting umpteen Olympics and presiding over the heyday and decline of “Must See TV,” to navigating the rise of cable television and buying a major Hollywood movie studio, “Bob” has been as synonymous with his corporate home as any executive in the media game.

Mr. Wright may not be issuing directives for much longer. At 63, he is a decade or two younger than rivals like Rupert Murdoch of the News Corporation and Sumner M. Redstone of Viacom. Unlike them, Mr. Wright does not control his own destiny — he is an executive employee of General Electric, NBC’s corporate parent.

His boss, G.E.’s chief executive, Jeffrey R. Immelt, is preparing for big changes at a time when immense strategic and competitive challenges abound. Mr. Immelt, amid a swirl of speculation inside and outside G.E., is leaning toward the appointment of Jeff Zucker, the 41-year-old head of NBC Universal’s television business, to succeed Mr. Wright — possibly as soon as early next year.

Although G.E., the world’s largest conglomerate, has no set retirement policy, few executives stay there beyond 65. “Bob’s done his job extremely well for a long period of time,” Mr. Immelt said in an interview, “and he’s getting close to retirement.”

THE twilight of Mr. Wright’s run atop the media giant he created is curiously characterized by the same questions he faced in his early years: In a fast-changing media world, does the company have the assets to succeed? Can G.E.’s corporate formality succeed over the long haul in such a creative and freewheeling business? Or is G.E. simply steeling itself to finally sell NBC Universal outright?

Mr. Wright is such a large presence at NBC Universal that it is hard for many to imagine the place without him. Indeed, analysts and media insiders are raising fresh questions about Mr. Zucker’s suitability to assume the reins from Mr. Wright, particularly after the sudden departures of two of Mr. Zucker’s top deputies last week for chief executive jobs elsewhere.

“It’s an inflection point now for the company in terms of its leadership and its operational performance,” said Nicholas P. Heymann of Prudential Securities. Of the coming post-Wright era, he says: “Those are big shoes to fill.”

Bob Wright in action hardly looks like someone on the brink of retirement. Before he hands off the keys to his office at “30 Rock” — as the new meta-comedy mocking NBC’s corporate masters in Rockefeller Center is called — he says he wants nothing less than to restore the network’s faded prime-time glory, reverse its earnings slump, conquer the Internet, continue to grow its cable network business, vastly expand its presence overseas and defeat film piracy.

When asked whether he wants to discuss his career plans, Mr. Wright sharply replies “no!” and then laughs. “Listen, I stay here because I enjoy it,” he says. “And I also feel a certain sense of obligation.”

Mr. Immelt said Mr. Wright’s retirement would happen soon but refrained from specifying a time frame; Mr. Wright, for his part, says he feels that nothing is imminent.

“My time will come when I’m not needed to do this and I don’t want to do it,” he said. “It isn’t right now. That’s all I can tell you.”

Mr. Wright gives every appearance of remaining hands-on. As NBC’s top 60 global executives gathered for a “leadership council” meeting last month in Universal City, he conducted detailed reviews of the company’s theme park and film businesses. He and Mr. Zucker had just unveiled the third major reorganization of the business since 2004, and he talked about reasons behind $750 million in budget cuts and the elimination of 700 jobs.

Inviting two reporters along to the closed-door meeting, Mr. Wright also played host during a studio tour that revealed the sometimes painstaking task of making Hollywood magic: On the set of the comedy picture “Evan Almighty,” about two dozen people tried to film a live rabbit against a blue screen to help stock a scene in which the full complement of passengers on Noah’s ark make an appearance.

Mr. Wright then set out in a golf cart for a drive down Wisteria Lane, the fabled home of the ABC hit “Desperate Housewives,” which is filmed on the Universal lot and serves as a constant reminder of NBC’s own prime-time stumbles. Asked how much rent the show pays, he joked, “Not enough.” As he lunched on fish later at the studio commissary, he perked up when Ron Meyer, the president of Universal Studios, brought over an energetic Tom Cruise from the next booth for a brief schmooze.

Such pleasantries aside, Mr. Wright’s main reason for being in Hollywood was much less glamorous. The leadership meetings were a dry run for a presentation that the whole group would deliver to Mr. Immelt at G.E. headquarters in Fairfield, Conn., the next week at an annual rite known as “Session II.”

There was plenty of confidence but little self-congratulation in Burbank. In its third-quarter financial results, G.E. reported that NBC Universal’s overall operating earnings had declined by 10 percent, to $542 million, on revenue of $3.9 billion. It was the fourth consecutive quarter of year-over-year earnings declines for NBC Universal, all while publicly traded rivals like the News Corporation and the Walt Disney Company have seen their stocks soar on rising profits. Over all, NBC Universal, the smallest of G.E.’s six operating units, accounted for less than 10 percent of the industrial leviathan’s profit and revenue.

The film studio, the host of the event, had just posted its worst financial performance in eight years under various owners. Universal had also endured a couple of high-profile bruises: it lost out to Paramount on buying Steven Spielberg’s DreamWorks SKG and then suffered the loss of Stacy Snider, Mr. Meyer’s second in command, to DreamWorks.

“Bob has a brilliant understanding of our business, but he’s not a cheerleader,” said Mr. Meyer, who has promised that next year’s movie slate will show a vast improvement. “He sees the facts and he makes you eat those facts.”

Part of the challenge any executive faces in running a media conglomerate is understanding the difference between a down year in a cyclical business and a fundamental long-term threat. To drive this point home for his minions during the two-day meeting, Mr. Wright invited a top executive from G.E.’s media lending business to brief them on the global changes confronting the parent company’s finance arm, GE Capital. In 1987, the G.E. executive noted, less than 15 percent of GE Capital’s income came from outside the United States; by last year, international business represented more than half the company’s pretax earnings — or more than $5 billion.

Mr. Wright believes that this is a parable not only for NBC’s ambitions overseas, but also for its newfound resolve to figure out how to make serious money on the Internet before the Web undermines the economics of traditional television. “When an organization gets really realistic, that’s actually exciting,” he says.

Only the legendary broadcaster Frank Stanton of CBS led a television network company longer than Bob Wright has — and that was in an era, ending in the early 1970s, when being a television executive meant having a license to print money. Mr. Wright joined NBC in 1986, fresh from G.E.’s financial services division, and was pooh-poohed by some within the company as little more than an interloping suit with little devotion to the business.

Mr. Wright, then 43, had no illusions about the waning prospects of advertiser-supported broadcast TV. One of his strengths, analysts say, is an ability to see around strategic corners; colleagues say he also tends to find dark shadows lurking there.

“We tease him from time to time about the glass being half empty for him,” said Tom Brokaw, the former “NBC Nightly News” anchor.

Although NBC churned out about $500 million in profit when Mr. Wright came aboard in 1986, he told veteran executives there that they were heading for irrelevance because of the coming tide of cable television. And then he set out to push NBC into the engulfing wave.

HIS early years were rough going, mainly because NBC’s network fortunes quickly waned. Rumors that G.E. intended to sell the network were part of the daily hum in the media (as they have been again in recent years). But with the infusion of hits like “Seinfeld,” “Friends” and “E.R.” in the early 1990s, the NBC network came back stronger than ever, even as Mr. Wright was expanding its cable holdings with channels like CNBC and MSNBC.

Mr. Wright seemed able to deftly meld the analytical and process-obsessed G.E. way of doing business with the creative whims of the media world. He could talk fluently about Six Sigma “lean” reviews — G.E.-speak for reducing corporate waste — while maintaining close relations with some of NBC’s most important talents like Johnny Carson, Conan O’Brien and Brian Williams. Mr. Wright even demonstrated an occasional flair for identifying future stars and hits, as in his early advocacy for the struggling Mr. O’Brien and for the comedy “Will and Grace.”

The high point for Mr. Wright came in 2003, when NBC’s earnings peaked at $800 million. Then the hits began to dry up. In 2005, the revenue that the network snagged during the annual “upfront” period — in which advertisers buy time for the next TV season based on how good the shows look — fell by about $1 billion, or roughly a third.

At the same time, Mr. Wright was finally realizing his ambition of reducing the company’s exposure to network TV. Following the start-ups of the cable news channels, he pursued an ambitious diversification plan that included buying the Spanish-language network Telemundo, the Bravo channel and a big stake in the former Paxson Communications. But an online foray, called NBCi, deflated with the dot-com bubble.

In 2003, Mr. Wright scored what appeared to be a major corporate coup when NBC acquired the film and TV assets of Vivendi Universal for $14 billion, which resulted in Vivendi owning 20 percent of the combined company. By adding the Universal studios, theme parks and the cable channels USA Network and Sci-Fi Channel, Mr. Wright further expanded NBC’s cable holdings and gave it more monthly subscription fees and ad revenue.

After finishing last in prime time among the big networks in 2005, NBC spread the word that the poor showing was bad for public relations and morale. But NBC Universal as a whole barely felt the financial pain. After all, prime time, which represented more than 50 percent of NBC’s earnings in the early 1990s, now accounts for only 13 percent.

But for all his efforts to move beyond network television, Mr. Wright concedes that NBC Universal’s weakening financial performance over this last year stemmed largely from prime time. “It’s a large-enough issue that you can’t overcome it with ordinary growth from the rest of the business,” he lamented.

As it tries to revive its television operations, NBC Universal has issued the edict that the network would focus less on scripted programming — a hallmark of NBC’s past success — and more on reality shows in the once-lucrative 8 p.m. hour. That may be tricky for the network. Although NBC has had its share of success with shows like “Deal or No Deal” and “The Apprentice,” Mr. Wright said that reality TV was “not something that entertainment people come to naturally.”

Patience at the top of the food chain also seems to be wearing thin. Mr. Immelt said that ABC, the top-rated broadcast network, generated about $400 million in profit last year. That is roughly half of what NBC banked in its best years — a very tangible reminder of how television economics have changed. “I’ve got to plan on us restoring market share in prime time at NBC,” Mr. Immelt added in an interview. In terms of meeting his targets of 10 percent to 15 percent annual profit growth in the business, Mr. Immelt said that coming in first was “not enough anymore.”

Prime time also matters because NBC’s slide occurred on Mr. Zucker’s watch. Mr. Zucker, whom analysts and the G.E. brass once routinely regarded as a wunderkind, has come under more critical scrutiny. His challenges may also be compounded by the departures last week of Randy Falco and David Zaslav, two highly regarded deputies. Mr. Falco is the new chief executive of AOL, while Mr. Zaslav is becoming the chief executive of Discovery Communications.

Some media executives and analysts said in interviews that while they respected Mr. Zucker’s intellect and talents as a producer and manager, they questioned whether he possessed Mr. Wright’s overall business savvy and an ability to dazzle Wall Street. Mr. Heymann, the Prudential analyst, says he does not think it is “predetermined” that Mr. Zucker will get the nod.

Still, Mr. Zucker does have fans. “Jeff Zucker would be a good and logical choice to succeed Bob Wright in our view,” said William Drewry, a media analyst at Credit Suisse. And there is also speculation that at least one G.E. executive may parachute into a senior operational role at NBC to backstop Mr. Zucker.

For his part, Mr. Zucker says that his 20 years working for G.E. have given him a real-world business education. “It’s true that I was not classically trained in business,” he said. “My whole career I have done the creative and then been asked to handle the business.”

Mr. Zucker was the chosen one at NBC almost from the time he joined the network in 1986 as an Olympics researcher (in the same month that Mr. Wright came to the network). He impressed virtually everyone he worked with, and was running the “Today” show, NBC’s most important franchise, five years later. He was only 26.

Mr. Zucker’s performance with “Today” — which contributes as much as $600 million in advertising each year — led Mr. Wright to break conventions and put him in charge of entertainment. Mr. Zucker had not been exposed to comedy scripts or casting calls; ultimately, he did not embrace Hollywood and it did not embrace him.

He was credited with keeping NBC on top as long as possible by retaining hits like “Friends” for two years longer than expected. He also invented a “supersizing” strategy that relied on stretching out the running time of NBC’s hit shows. It was a policy that all of NBC’s competitors first derided and then copied.

But NBC’s lineup finally sputtered, and it dropped from first place to last. Yet rather than having his career derailed, Mr. Zucker was promoted last year and now oversees two-thirds of NBC Universal’s business.

Outside of prime time, NBC’s television business, particularly its cable channels, has had greater success on Mr. Zucker’s watch. On the network side, NBC’s late-night fare dominates the ratings; the “Today” show is as strong as it has been in recent years, even with the loss of its former co-host, Katie Couric; and Brian Williams is back to No. 1 in evening news. USA Network is the top-rated cable channel of any kind this season. USA and CNBC — with its highly affluent target audience — generate more profit than any of the other NBC businesses.

The fortunes of prime time have also begun to turn with the success of “Heroes,” this season’s only breakout show on any network. NBC has also finally found some programs to fit its longstanding profile as the network of the well-educated and affluent. “The Office,” “My Name Is Earl” and the Sunday NFL package all snare lots of younger male viewers with college degrees and high incomes. So far this season, NBC’s ratings have catapulted to second place among 18- to 34-year-old viewers, from fourth place a year ago.

But NBC still does not have anything like the ratings colossus that is Fox’s “American Idol” — as Mr. Wright often ruefully notes. “It’s unbelievable that one company would have the two winners of the lottery,” he says, referring to the megapopular audition show and Mr. Murdoch’s wily purchase of the social networking site MySpace.

THE Internet and the sweeping transition from analog to digital media may be Mr. Wright’s final and perhaps most vexing challenge — one that he, his top executives, and many others in the media business were late to pursue and make no claim to having figured out. One session at last month’s leadership council meeting was devoted to exploring the economics of YouTube and how it was that Google could justify paying $1.65 billion for it.

A staunch crusader against piracy, Mr. Wright is wary of YouTube, a Web site where users post favorite video clips. He sees it as a major usurper of copyrights and thus its new owner, Google, potentially as “a legitimate defendant.” At the same time, the Goog-Tube deal may portend the upheaval facing traditional television.

To meet his online challenges, Mr. Wright named Beth Comstock last year to head all of NBC Universal’s digital efforts. Ms. Comstock, 46, joined NBC in 1986 as a publicist and worked directly for Mr. Wright before G.E. promoted her into its own corporate ranks. Before returning to NBC to take on the Internet, she was G.E.’s chief marketing officer. Her return to the 52nd floor of Rockefeller Center set off speculation that she was being placed in competition against Mr. Zucker, rumors that NBC executives denied. “We may have considered her for a different job initially but I wanted to get her in the mix,” Mr. Immelt said.

Ms. Comstock’s arrival caused a stir partly because her new role cut across all divisions of the company. “I thrive in ambiguity, and this job is filled with ambiguity,” she said in an interview.

Mr. Wright notes that digital became “hotter than a pistol” at NBC after Ms. Comstock arrived, particularly after it spent $600 million to buy the online business iVillage. Ms. Comstock has been pursuing any digital strategy that shows promise — including a new fund with GE Capital to invest in tech start-ups. “She’s a solid citizen and a keeper and should be a very big person here over time,” Mr. Wright said.

Where Mr. Zucker is concerned, Mr. Immelt says, essentially, that even though he does look outside the company for senior candidates, the chief executive’s job is Mr. Zucker’s to lose. “I am today and have been a Jeff Zucker fan,” he said. “I don’t want to put any sharper edge on that other than to say that Jeff is a talented executive.”

Implicit in Mr. Immelt’s statement is another — that, for the foreseeable future, G.E. plans to hang on to NBC Universal. “We still view it as an industry that is capable of solid growth,” he said. Some analysts, including Mr. Heymann of Prudential, say that the financial prospects of NBC are improving and that G.E. would not sell it before it cashes in on the Olympics and coverage of the presidential election in 2008.

Mr. Wright has survived and even thrived at the center of swirling changes in media over the last two decades, standing as both a supporter of the clout left over from the dominant days of the broadcast networks and an unflagging advocate for adaptation and change. Somehow, amid the media wars, he has even found time, with his wife, Suzanne, to start a charity to battle autism.

One twist in what appears to be his looming departure is that plenty of analysts agree with him that NBC Universal’s financial turnaround is at hand. But with so many uncertainties to wrestle with — chief among them the digital upheaval that is turning all media on its head — there may not be enough runway left for him to prove that his company is not past its prime.

Cue Mr. Wright. “I think this is the probably the most exciting phase since I’ve been around,” he said. “We have made some progress, but you want to do so much so quickly.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/19/business/yourmoney/19wright.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

fredfa

11-19-06, 06:02 PM

Nielsen Notebook
Net's Eye on crime
'CSI' closes in on 'Grey's'
By Rick Kissell Variety.com Nov. 19, 2006

After taking some jabs to the solar plexus earlier this fall, CBS vet "CSI" is fighting back in its heavyweight tussle with "Grey's Anatomy."

On Thursday, the Eye's crime drama pulled to within less than 1 ratings point of the Alphabet's medical skein among young adults and opened up a wider advantage among total viewers, helping CBS post its first 18-49 victory this season on a night that it has ruled in recent years.

According to Nielsen nationals, "CSI" (8.0 rating/19 share in adults 18-49, 24.11 million viewers overall) was within shouting distance of ABC's "Grey's Anatomy" in 18-49 (8.7/21, 20.92m), with the dramas tied for the 25-54 lead (9.7/21). "Grey's" had won the first seven head-to-head firstrun battles with "CSI" by at least 1½ ratings points in 18-49.

For "CSI," the 8.0 rating in 18-49 matched its season high, while it also drew its largest overall aud of the fall -- though the show is still off by more than 20% vs. last year, when the competish was much softer.

And "Grey's" remains a juggernaut for ABC, most weeks tripling or quadrupling what the net delivered on the key night last season.

A likely factor in the week-to-week gains for both "CSI" and "Grey's" was NBC's weak-performing comedy "30 Rock" (2.4/6 in 18-49, 5.19m), which was making its Thursday bow after a less-than-stellar brief run on Wednesdays. From 9:30 to 10, the 2.3 demo rating for "30 Rock" was a 39% dropoff from "Deal or No Deal" in the time period the prior week (3.8).

CBS also led the night's opening hour with "Survivor: Cook Islands" (5.3/14 in 18-49, 15.35m), which rebounded from its season low of a week earlier. NBC's super-sized episodes of "My Name Is Earl" (3.9/11 in 18-49, 9.12m) and "The Office" (4.2/10, 8.43m) finished second, slightly ahead of ABC's "Ugly Betty" (3.9/11 in 18-49, 12.95m).

"Betty" has softened in recent weeks after a hot start, but it remains a big upgrade in the hour for ABC.

At 10, NBC's "ER" remained on top in demos (5.5/15 in 18-49, 12.52m) despite a third-place finish in total viewers. Chipping away at its demo lead were ABC's Barbara Walters spec "30 Mistakes in 30 Years" (4.8/13 in 18-49, 12.91m) and CBS drama "Shark" (4.4/12 in 18-49, 15.24m), with the first-year Eye drama hitting season highs.

At Fox, " 'Til Death" (1.8/5 in 18-49, 4.55m) and "The OC" (1.7/4, 3.77m) both rose a bit week to week, but the net remains well behind its rivals.

For the night, CBS held a narrow advantage over ABC in adults 18-49 (5.9 rating/15 share to 5.8/15), with the Eye winning more easily in both adults 25-54 (7.3/17 to 6.7/16) and total viewers (18.3 million to 15.6 million).

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117954248&categoryid=14

fredfa

11-19-06, 06:19 PM

Saturday's HD college football schedule has been updated with BCS rankings and team records at the top of the first post in the thread

fredfa

11-19-06, 06:30 PM

TV Sports
Pregame Analysis, Punctuated by Screams
By Richard Sandomir The New York Times Nov.19, 2006

COLUMBUS, Ohio, Nov. 18 — The idea seemed ridiculous.

Tell thousands of boisterous Ohio State fans to shut up, even for a few minutes, five and a half hours before the Buckeyes played Michigan on Saturday, in an all-consuming Big Ten matchup of the nation’s top two teams.

The request came from Chris Fowler, the host of “College GameDay,” ESPN’s football preview program, which encourages fans at a different campus every Saturday morning to howl, sing, shout, bellow, scream and emote as loudly as they can for two hours. Some fans use “GameDay” as an excuse to curse in full throat, especially at the analyst Lee Corso.

Fowler stood on the 28-by-32-foot stage and turned to the crowd. The program was to start with several minutes about Bo Schembechler, the former Michigan coach who died Friday.

Fowler spoke through a screen that protected him, Corso and the analyst Kirk Herbstreit from beer cans and other missiles that might be tossed from their audience.

Fowler asked the crowd for restraint in what was part pep talk, part lesson in manners.

“Let your passion for this rivalry take a back seat out of respect for Coach Schembechler,” he said.

He then invoked the late Buckeyes coach Woody Hayes, the cantankerous mentor to Schembechler, who was once an assistant to Hayes. “Woody would have wanted it,” Fowler said.

The plea worked. Sort of. The rear of the crowd ignored it and kept chanting, “O-H! I-O!”

A giant screen near the set then showed Desmond Howard, a “GameDay” contributor and former Michigan receiver who won the 1991 Heisman Trophy, discussing the Schembechler legacy.

Some fans who minutes earlier had tried to hush the shouting transgressors suddenly booed Howard, who is as popular in Columbus as Al Franken is in Bill O’Reilly’s kitchen.

“Go home, Desmond!” they sang. “Go home, Desmond!”

The few minutes with a reduced decibel level made Saturday’s “GameDay” a rarity. More popular than at any point in its 20-year history, “GameDay” is a fairly conventional pregame program mixed with 5,000 to 10,000 intense fans, nearly all loud and excited, some drunk, some sleep deprived.

“I tell people when the circus comes to town, the freaks come out,” said Lee Fitting, the producer of “GameDay.”

He added, “They’re a big factor in what makes the show unique, gives it its energy and spontaneity.”

The freaks in the grass-and-concrete expanse behind the set had painted their faces scarlet and gray. They carried signs, some of which were confiscated by security; some fans smashed one another’s signs. Some wore plastic headgear designed to look like Ohio Stadium. Others wore orange helmets distributed by Home Depot, the program’s primary sponsor. All were shielded from the commentators by at least a dozen off-duty state highway patrol officers.

Male cheerleaders on the ground about 10 feet below the set lifted the females into camera range, giving the effect of young women bobbing into view at different intervals, as if they were floating by.

One fan beyond college age held aloft his hooded effigy of Michigan quarterback Chad Henne wearing droopy maize-colored pants.

Two Ohio State students, Mike Bramlish and Dominic Skinner, had painted their faces and wore shoulder pads accented with gray spikes, their homage to the Buckeyes linebacker James Laurinaitis. His father, Joe, a former professional wrestler known as the Animal, inspired the shoulder gear.

“We do this for every home game,” Bramlish said, his face a canvas of Ohio State colors and Animal makeup designs. Being able to show off on “GameDay,” he added, “just brings the fans more national attention.”

ESPN nearly canceled “GameDay” in the early 1990s, but the decision was reversed after the program started traveling. Eventually, the chemistry between the commentators and campus crazies became too irresistible for ESPN to keep the show off the road.

For a decade, the Fowler-Herbstreit-Corso partnership has provided continuity. Fowler is the strong-willed anchor, one of the best in the business; Herbstreit is the handsome former Buckeyes quarterback whose presence makes snapshot-shooting women shriek and men shout “Her-bie!”; and Corso is the antic former Indiana coach who loves to bait fans into hating him.

“I don’t like it being called a traveling circus or that we’re rock stars,” Fowler said. “But we’re here because we have a passionate feel for what’s going to unfold in the games that day. And it’s a showcase for the people behind us as much as anyone else. It doesn’t look like anything else on TV.”

He added: “We’re doing a performance — we’re playing to them to get them involved. They’re not just a backdrop; their reactions are a little taste of what it’s going to feel like for a visiting team.”

The program encourages fans to be as loud as possible so their decibel level can be measured in a feature sponsored by Energizer. The enormous horde is surveyed by three cameras, including one mounted on a 30-foot-long arm that swoops down on screaming, gesturing fans.

Like any show in the pregame genre, “GameDay” requires great planning, which can be undone by events like Schembechler’s death.

Still, the most anticipated part of the program is the last minute or so, when Corso chooses which team will win the game played on the campus “GameDay” is visiting. Normally, a prediction is a de rigueur element of pregame productions, but for the past 10 years, Corso has punctuated his selection in the final seconds by wearing the mascot head or helmet of the team he favors.

“For the kids watching,” Fitting said, “we could do nothing but the headgear and they’d go crazy.”

On Friday, Corso knew his choice would be Michigan; he gleefully whistled the Wolverines’ fight song.

“It’s serious business when you put the head on,” he said. “The first time I put it on, everyone went crazy.”

On Saturday, he and Howard drove to the Ohio State campus.

“You’ve got to give them a Heisman pose,” Corso said.

“I’ve done a few too many here,” Howard said.

“Do it,” Corso said. “I’ll do it next to you.”

During the final commercial break before “GameDay” ended at noon Eastern time, Michael Corcoran crawled underneath the desk on the set, squeezing between Herbstreit and Corso’s legs. He held a cardboard box containing the blue and maize Michigan helmet.

“It’s a tight squeeze in there,” said Corcoran, who is 5 feet 9 inches. “It’s just part of my job, but I tell all my friends it’s the climax of the show.”

When it was Corso’s moment, Corcoran handed him the helmet, which he pushed over his gray hair. “This is for Bo!” said Corso, now posing like the Heisman Trophy.

Thousands booed, as he had expected.

“He’s a rabble rouser,” said Sergio Tostado, an Ohio State junior, who seemed more disappointed that cameras never put him on the air.

“I feel a bit safer when he picks against us,” said Ryan Kogge, who is also a junior. “He’s old. He’s getting confused.”

Hours later, Corso, surrounded by a cordon of state troopers, plowed his way from the set to the stadium. Just outside the stadium, he picked up a “Go Bucks” placard from the sidewalk, waved it triumphantly to fans who now cheered him, then ripped it into shreds. Again, he was booed.

Then he walked straight onto the field. He explained that the vitriol he invited was not true hatred, but good-natured passion.

But one lesson he has learned about reacting to the passionate fans who curse him, sometimes vilely, is this: “Never turn around.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/19/sports/ncaafootball/19gameday.html?pagewanted=print

fredfa

11-19-06, 07:55 PM

TV Sports
Ohio State, Mich. run up ratings
By Paul J. Gough The Hollywood Reporter Nov 20, 2006

NEW YORK -- Saturday afternoon's Michigan-Ohio State thriller drew the largest audience for a regular-season college football game since 1993, ABC said Sunday.

The battle between the No. 1 and No. 2 teams -- both undefeated until Saturday -- averaged 21.8 million viewers on ABC, according to preliminary estimates released Sunday afternoon by Nielsen Media Research. Ohio State was leading most of the game but held on against a late-game charge by Michigan to win 42-39 at home.

It was the largest audience for any regular-season college football game since Nov. 13, 1993, when the Florida State-Notre Dame game averaged 22 million viewers. And it far outweighed Ohio State's previous game on ABC, when it beat then-second-ranked Texas.

ESPN said that the Michigan-Ohio State game would appear on ESPN Classic in primetime Wednesday, Nov. 22, as well as ESPNU several times during Thanksgiving Week. The game is available via iTunes as well.

http://www.hollywoodreporter

fredfa

11-19-06, 09:49 PM

TV Notebook
Sitcoms borrowing cable tricks
By Joanne Ostrow Denver Post TV Critic Nov. 19, 2006

"Everybody Hates Chris" last week sent critics a DVD titled "Everybody Hates Holiday Episodes" that speaks to the state of TV comedy. There are still 22 minutes of light, snappy, family-centric humor, still stooping to holiday-theme episodes. But with twists.

Knowing, self-referential humor - "hippie humor," in the estimation of "30 Rock's" corporate honcho - is the rule.

The evolution continues, thanks to the single-camera film style. That has supplanted the old setup-punch-line-kicker dance taped in front of an audience by three cameras and hyped with a laugh track.

Network TV comedy is dumping stale conventions and creeping closer to the inventive weirdness of cable series like "Curb Your Enthusiasm," "The Comeback" and "Entourage."

The recent network standard was set by Fox's "Arrested Development." Currently, however, there are laugh-out-loud lines weekly in NBC's "The Office."

If "Arrested" was rooted in over-the-top characterizations and bizarre situations (from the banana stand to the shady real-estate dealings with Saddam Hussein), "The Office" is based in recognizable, archetypal workplace characters caught in dull, everyday circumstances and bureaucratic rules (the diversity seminar, the forced merriment of an office party). The hilarity lies in our recognition of the soul-crushing regularity of the working world.

The writers of "The Office" have figured out a smart way to reunite Pam and Jim and increase tensions. Just when you thought the simultaneous presence of Dwight Schrute (Rainn Wilson) and Andy (Ed Helms) would make any room explode, a merger throws them together, fighting over rank.

Even the more traditional comedies boast modern overlays. CW's "Everybody Hates Chris" has a typically endearing "Everybody Hates Thanksgiving" episode Monday with Wayne Brady in a guest role. Chris Rock's voice-overs (about race and crack in particular) update the holiday proceedings.

NBC's "30 Rock" may prove too "inside" to last, but it offers deep pleasures for now. Tina Fey's good work is accented by Alec Baldwin and Tracy Morgan's slick performances. A sendup of a corporate video on product integration was particularly rich, as corporate honcho Jack Donaghy (Baldwin) encourages the show writers to put positive mentions ("pos-mens") of GE products in their shows to "monetize" network TV.

"My Name Is Earl" remains a terrific eccentric ensemble clicking through a string of mini-scenes. Creator-writer Greg Garcia has a big heart that goes out to seriously tacky America. With clay animation!

More good news: Wendie Malick is a force of nature in ABC's upcoming "Big Day," a clever real-time chronicle of wedding- day calamities. Old idea, freshly done - with a single camera.

"Big Day," debuting Nov. 28 on ABC, is playfully described by its producers as "24" meets "Father of the Bride." The half-hour stars Marla Sokoloff ("The Practice") as Alice and Josh Cooke as Danny, the bride and groom. Malick ("Just Shoot Me") is the neurotic mother of the bride; Kurt Fuller ("Anger Management") plays her husband; Miriam Shor is single, older sister Becca, Stephen Rannazzisi plays the best man and Stephnie Weir ("MADtv") is the anxious wedding planner.

Producer Josh Goldsmith noted, "It's not '24.' They're not defusing a nuclear bomb here. They're arguing about salad, but the stakes have to seem just as high." Judging by the first three episodes, they are. "The beauty of single camera is you can find some more subtleties," Malick told critics. "Obviously, the great thing about having an audience (in the studio) is they raise the whole energy level and you're kind of doing that hybrid of theater and film, which was great fun.

"But (single camera) gives you a chance to land and have some moments that are much trickier to do in front of an audience. It's a lot more intimate."

That intimacy pays off. When Jane (Malick) reacts to her daughter's Caesar salad preference, you can feel her pulse-pounding, vein-throbbing displeasure.

Comparing her character Nina from "Just Shoot Me," to Jane on "Big Day," Malick said, "I think my job is always to hold up this sort of mirror and say, 'If you remotely resemble this woman, you should go get help."'

http://www.denverpost.com/ostrow

fredfa

11-19-06, 11:06 PM

TV Sports
For Fox TV, an Unusually Grim Autumn
By Bill Carter The New York Times November 20, 2006

In most recent years, Fox has been the split-personality network, a lamb in fall and a lion in winter. But never has the disparity been as stark as it has been this television season, when the lamb has been led to the slaughter every week.

From almost every ratings standpoint, the Fox network is in the midst of a dismal run. The network is last in almost every audience category, even in areas of its traditional strength, like viewers 18 to 34.

Over all, ratings are down about 9 percent from already depressed levels of 2005. And the network’s new programs this season have gone almost completely unnoticed by viewers — not one new Fox series ranks among the top 55 shows in television.

If all this bad news had happened at any other network, it would be cause for internal panic. But that’s not happening with Fox because the network has the equivalent of Peyton Manning and Tiki Barber ready to storm to victory in the second half: “American Idol” will come on in January and can be expected to alter the ratings landscape again, accompanied by another of Fox’s powerhouse reserves, the hit drama “24.”

As rivals point out, though, there is the matter of the tens of millions of dollars that Fox has spent on developing new shows that have not worked. Some, like the new drama “Vanished” and a comedy, “Happy Hour,” attracted ratings below offerings on the part-time CW network. A new game show, “The Rich List,” was withdrawn after just one woefully low-rated broadcast.

The opportunity to find new hits seems to have come and gone this fall, hits that could have expanded Fox’s success and taken the pressure off the midseason additions to save the network’s bacon again. And Fox cannot shrug off the guarantees made to advertisers that its shows would do much better. The network is required to make good on some of those guarantees with free commercials on other programs.

And now Fox is contending with growing outrage over its decision to broadcast a special next week featuring O. J. Simpson describing how he would have killed his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald L. Goldman — if he had actually done it. Fox is being widely accused of looking to climb out of the ratings ditch by diving into the gutter of low-taste programming.

Peter Liguori, the president of Fox Entertainment, is aware of all this; he is not jaded by the knowledge that he still has aces up and down his sleeves. “Not having success in the fourth quarter is not beneficial for us,” Mr. Liguori said. “We have to do better in the fourth quarter.”

But he and Preston Beckman, the executive vice president for entertainment, maintained in a telephone interview that Fox continues to labor under handicaps in the fall, chiefly an annual interruption for postseason baseball. Once again this year, the baseball gods were unkind, the two executives pointed out, because the World Series was less than compelling, with two smaller-market teams playing only five games.

“I always say we live by the bat and we die by the bat,” Mr. Liguori said.

He cited other issues unique to Fox, like the start the network gives its programs in August, which means that new series get a few weeks to gain some traction, and then run into an onslaught of competing shows starting in September on other networks.

Still, none of that would presumably matter if the new Fox series seized the attention of the public. Last year’s show introduced in August, the drama “Prison Break,” did just that, and it continues to be a solid performer.

This year, nothing new approached that level of success. The roster of Fox shows that worked at all among viewers 18 to 49, a widely cited standard of ratings success, has been sharply abbreviated — led by a standout hit, the drama “House.”

The cavalry, commanded by Simon Cowell on “American Idol” and Kiefer Sutherland on “24,” will soon arrive. But Fox’s depressed ratings position fueled some of the fusillade of criticism directed at the network last week after it announced its deal for O.J.’s two hours of pseudo-confession.

Fox has always been known for convention-shattering, politically incorrect television: everything from good pets going bad to people behaving badly on tape. But this exercise in traffic-accident television has seemed to hit an extremely raw nerve with women’s and victim’s rights groups, as well as hordes of just regular viewers, and even with Bill O’Reilly, the star of the network’s sister cable outlet, the Fox News Channel.

Some criticism pointed out how Fox has struggled in the ratings and suggested that it is turning to the Simpson special as a desperate ploy to beef up its lagging performance at the end of November, a special ratings period known as a sweeps month.

Fox executives have put up a wall of no comment around the decision to broadcast the Simpson program. But Mr. Liguori denied that the network was showing desperation after its ratings performance this fall.

“I certainly feel disappointed,” Mr. Liguori said, “but not desperate.”

He noted that Fox was about to enter its period of “maximum circulation,” meaning its biggest audiences of the year. That may be putting it mildly. Within a few days in January, Fox will broadcast the college football championship game, an N.F.L. playoff game, the two-hour season premiere of “24” and the two-night season premiere of “American Idol.”

“That’s our little programming tsunami,” Mr. Beckman said.

Competitors can see all that coming and are bracing themselves. They expect Fox to stretch “Idol” to as many hours as it will need to overtake the other networks.

But Mr. Beckman said that kind of characterization was an unfair attempt to dismiss Fox as a one-trick pony. “We’re sticking to our agreement with the producers of the show,” he said, promising no padding on the planned hours of “Idol.”

He added that other networks had no reluctance to expand their reality series. “When NBC does 8,000 hours of ‘Deal or No Deal,’ or ABC suddenly goes to 90-minute editions of ‘Dancing With the Stars,’ we don’t make a peep,” Mr. Beckman said.

Of course Fox so far has not needed to do much more than roll out its second-half juggernaut to take command of prime time. It’s a nice fallback to have.

“I don’t want to rely on it,” Mr. Liguori said. “But I’d rather have it than not.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/business/media/20fox.html?ref=business&pagewanted=print

fredfa

11-19-06, 11:10 PM

The BCS rankings and team records have been added to the Nov. 25 HD college football schedules at the top of the first post in this thread.

rustycruiser

11-20-06, 12:10 AM

http://www.nbcsports.com/flex/index.html

The Week 12 meeting of the Philadelphia Eagles and Indianapolis Colts has been moved to Sunday Night Football at 8:15 p.m. EST on NBC, the NFL announced Monday. The Nov. 26 game will be the third week of "flexible scheduling" for the NFL.

I guess Donovan McNabb's torn ACL puts a kibosh on Flex Scheduling ensuring a good game on Sunday Night. The Eagles sans Donovan are not the same attractive matchup. Even with the short window the NFL has allowed NBC, there are still tangibles you can't control.

fredfa

11-20-06, 12:31 AM

Nielsen November Sweep Notebook
NBC Unseats CBS for Sweeps Second Place
Football, 'Heroes' Propel Peacock to 21 Percent Gain After Week 2
By James Hibberd Television Week November 20, 2006

There's been a ratings upset two weeks into the November sweeps race: NBC has climbed into second place behind leader ABC, knocking perennial runner-up CBS down to third among adults 18 to 49.
Propelled by its breakout drama "Heroes" and sports franchise "Sunday Night Football," NBC is up a steep 21 percent to a 4.0 rating for the first 14 days of sweeps compared with the same period last year, according to Nielsen Media Research.

CBS, while still leading the pack in total viewers, is down 16 percent to a 3.8 for the sweeps period, which is used to set advertising rates for television stations. Season to date, CBS continues to hold onto its second-place position among adults 18 to 49, but NBC is gaining there as well and now trails by a tenth of a rating point.

Brad Adgate, senior VP of research for Horizon, found the CBS drop "a little surprising."

"Some of those shows are getting long in the tooth and the competition is getting stiffer," he said. "I'd say the changes are a cause for concern."

NBC's advance may signal an uptick in its fortunes, which have suffered in the past two years as the network failed to replicate the success of its "Friends" and "Seinfeld" franchises. The ratings decline pushed NBC from the top spot into fourth place two seasons ago, and cost as much as $1 billion in lost ad revenue at the network and its stations. NBC Universal Television Group CEO Jeff Zucker has responded with a plan to trim $750 million in spending.

Most of CBS's current ratings drain among the 18- to 49-year-old viewers prized by advertisers can be attributed to year-to-year decreases among eight of its nine crime dramas.

Two of the shows-"Cold Case" (down 14 percent) and "Without a Trace" (down 38 percent-changed time periods to strengthen CBS's Sunday night lineup. But most of CBS's other crime shows also show some erosion among 18- to 49-year-olds in their familiar slots. "Close to Home" is down 9 percent, "CSI" is down 30 percent, "CSI: Miami" is down 6 percent, "CSI: NY" is down 12 percent and "Numb3rs" is down 9 percent.

"CSI" has taken a particularly hard hit due to ABC's "Grey's Anatomy" moving opposite its Thursday night time period and luring viewers.

CBS's reality shows are also having trouble. "Survivor" is down 24 percent and "Amazing Race" is down 22 percent in the age group so far in sweeps.

One bright spot for the channel is the Wednesday show "Criminal Minds" (up 19 percent), which has recently been beating ABC's "Lost" among total viewers.

Looking at season to date instead of only the sweeps period, the numbers are not as dire. "CSI:NY" is down only 4 percent as opposed to 12 percent, for example, and "CSI" is down only 23 percent instead of 30. And during the past two weeks, "CSI" has been closing the gap with "Grey's."

CBS spokesman Chris Ender, explaining the sweeps numbers, pointed out that during last year November, the network had the "CMA Awards," the miniseries "Category 7" and the special "I Walk The Line: A Night for Johnny Cash."

"We're somewhat the victim of a comparison to an extraordinary November sweeps in 2006," Mr. Ender said. "That being said, we're hardly a wallflower for the month. We're number one in viewers, number one in 25 to 54 and competitive in 18 to 49."

Mr. Ender said CBS will stick with its new Sunday-night lineup, despite "Trace" and "Cold Case" losing viewers. Season to date, "Trace" has improved its new time period by 52 percent and "Cold Case" has improved its period by 21 percent.

"We still stand by that move," he said. "We've improved ourselves dramatically on Sunday. While 'Shark' [on Thursday] is starting to inch up and demonstrate the same type of retention that 'Without a Trace' did early on."

Among the other networks, ABC continued to lead the pack with a 4.2. Fox continued to trail with a 2.8. The CW and Univision were tied with a 1.5.

http://www.tvweek.com/article.cms?articleId=30877

Reagan

11-20-06, 10:04 AM

Affiliates find Simpson scary

So when are those "stand-up" guys at Sinclair going to announce a ban on this?

-Reagan

bgooch

11-20-06, 02:41 PM

NFL Network Is Still Plugging Holes/Might NFL Network Be Offsides On Antitrust?
Several Major Cablers Still Haven’t Signed for Eight-Game Package
By R. Thomas Umstead 11/20/2006

Pigskin fans in markets served by Time Warner Cable, Cablevision Systems, Insight Communications and Charter Communications will most likely have to skip Thanksgiving dessert and head to a neighborhood watering hole if they want to watch the Denver Broncos against the Kansas City Chiefs on the NFL Network.

The National Football League’s television network and the four cable operators dug their cleats in the turf last week over distribution fees for the channel and its package of eight primetime games on Thursday and Saturday nights. The league-owned network is asking for a monthly license fee of 70 cents a subscriber for its service, up from 20 cents before the eight games became part of its roster.

Last January, Comcast, according to executives familiar with the negotiations, bid $2.4 billion over six seasons and offered an equity stake in the network now known as Versus for the package, before the league awarded the rights to its in-house channel.

Since that point, the NFL Network has been fighting to get wide, basic distribution before its season, in effect, kicks off on Thanksgiving Day.

But operators have been blocking that bid. As of press time last Friday — just five days before the NFL Network’s first live game — here’s a scorecard of the holes that opened up in the service’s distribution lineup:

Time Warner Cable: Will not carry the first game. Executive vice president of programming Fred Dressler said last Wednesday at the SportsBusiness Journal Sports Media & Technology summit in New York that it’s “100%” assured that the cable operator will not come to terms with the network before its primetime package kicks off on Nov. 23. Time Warner has steadfastly held the line and wants to offer the NFL Network on its low-penetrated sports tier, while the NFL Network continues to seeking analog basic distribution.

“It comes down to whether consumers will be allowed to pay for it discretely or whether it will be bundled into basic,” he added.

Cox Communications: Will carry games, but not on the basic tier. Senior vice president Bob Wilson, who also spoke at the conference, confirmed that the operator will offer NFL Network and its live games on its sports and information tier. He said that tier has about 30% penetration across all Cox subscribers and 60% penetration among Cox digital-cable homes.

Wilson would not reveal specifics about the agreement, but executives involved in NFL Network-cable operator negotiations said Cox and other distributors of the live game package are paying a surcharge for the games that’s more than double the approximately 20-cent license fee for the rest of the network’s programming.

Charter Communications: Off-air. The first cable operator to sign up with and carry the NFL Network in 2004 is in litigation with the service over the terms of that initial carriage deal. The network pulled its signal from Charter in December 2005 and filed a breach of contract suit against the operator in New York Supreme Court over contract language regarding distribution.

Executives at Charter — whose chairman, Paul Allen, owns the defending National Football Conference champion Seattle Seahawks — would only confirm that it is engaged in litigation with the network and plans to file a counterclaim. In August, the parties met with a mediator but were unsuccessful in efforts to work out their differences, according to Charter.

Insight Communications: Will not carry the games. Insight, which carries the NFL Network on its digital basic tier, has decided not to pay the additional surcharge to carry the game package. Representatives from Insight did not return phone calls by press time.

Cablevision Systems: Not likely to carry the first game. The operator doesn’t have a deal with the NFL Network and declined to comment on the matter.

Comcast: Will carry the eight games on its Digital Plus tier and sports tier in systems that already have the NFL Network, according to a spokeswoman. That does not include the recently acquired Adelphia and Time Warner Cable systems it picked up earlier this year.

Last week, though, the NFL disclosed that it filed suit in October in a New York State court to block Comcast from distributing NFL Network exclusively on a sports tier the nation’s largest cable operator plans to launch sometime in 2007. The disclosure about the suit, which remains sealed, came during a hearing in Washington, D.C., focusing on the distribution of its “NFL Sunday Ticket” out-of-market game package.

NFL Network president Steve Bornstein said during a network conference call last week that he was “not optimistic” that deals with Time Warner and other recalcitrant operators would be completed by Thanksgiving. He said the network will distribute the games to a little over 40 million subscribers.

“I’m always looking at the glass as half-full,” Bornstein said, adding that the network has 160 other cable distributors currently on board. “I believe I am offering a real good value to cable distributors … we are just hopeful that we can get 100% [distribution].”

Might NFL Network Be Offsides On Antitrust?

Washington — A Senate panel zeroed in not just on the National Football League’s efforts to gain distribution on cable for its NFL Network and for out-of-market games on satellite through its “NFL Sunday Ticket” out-of-market package, but also on legal protections that allow professional sports leagues to negotiate national TV contracts on behalf of their member teams.

Under the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961, Congress gave major sports leagues an exemption from antitrust law that otherwise would stop leagues from pooling the interests of their teams in order to execute contracts for the broadcasts of games. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, citing a federal court case, said the 1961 law did not exempt the major leagues in their bargaining with pay-TV providers.

Stanford University economist Roger Noll, testifying before Specter’s panel, said he’s taught the SBA to students for 40 years “because it illustrates everything that could possibly go wrong with legislative antitrust exemptions.”

Noll, who urged Congress to sunset the SBA, said that without an antitrust exemption, sports teams could form groups or consortia that sold TV rights. After the hearing, he told a reporter the NFL could not offer NFL Sunday Ticket without the SBA exemption.

Although he hadn’t given NFL Network’s legal position a close review, Noll said it was his hunch that the network’s distribution of NFL games was an antitrust violation.

“The NFL Network is a profit enhancing reduction in output in the sense that … the eight games will be available to fewer people than had those games been offered on broadcast television,” Noll said.

Jeffery Pash, executive vice president and general counsel of the NFL, disputed Noll’s analysis.

“We are trying to develop the NFL Network. We are trying to build that as a new entrant into the television world,” said Pash, who also claimed that exclusive distribution of Sunday Ticket by DirecTV was pro-competitive.

The NFL wouldn’t sell the eight-game package to cable because cable operators refused to broadcast the games on free TV in the home markets of two teams on the field. “They wanted to have it exclusively on cable,” said Pash.

Specter pressed Pash on whether former NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue told Comcast that it couldn’t bid on NFL Sunday Ticket. Although Pash didn’t know the answer, he said the NFL had sound justification for keeping Sunday Ticket away from cable.

If Sunday Ticket were in “80 or 90 million cable households,” it “would cannibalize or undermine broadcast television,” Pash said. “We don’t want to have Sunday Ticket undermine or substitute for that.”

— Ted Hearn
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6393309.html

fredfa

11-20-06, 03:06 PM

Sorry I haven't updated the Sunday night ratings yet...I am on the road (changing planes at the moment in Kansas City) and will do some catching up later this afternoon.

harley1

11-20-06, 03:46 PM

News Corp. Cancels O.J. Simpson Book and TV Special

Monday , November 20, 2006

NEW YORK — News Corp., the parent company of book publisher HarperCollins and the FOX network, has canceled publication of the O.J. Simpson book and television special "If I Did It."

Last week, Judith Regan, would-be publisher of Simpson's book, says she did not pay Simpson for the rights to publish his book, in which the one-time football superstar tells how he would have killed his ex-wife and her friend if, in fact, he had done it.

"What I do know is I didn't pay him," Regan says in an eight-page statement titled "Why I Did It" released on Thursday. "I contracted through a third party who owns the rights, and I was told the money would go to his children. That much I could live with."

Regan also says in the statement that she wanted Simpson's "confession" because she herself was once a victim of abuse.

"I made the decision to publish this book, and to sit face to face with the killer, because I wanted him, and the men who broke my heart and your hearts, to tell the truth, to confess their sins, to do penance and to amend their lives."

Although Regan has acknowledged that Simpson does not directly say that he killed his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman, she said she considers the book to be his confession.

Regan said Simpson approached her with the idea for the book, which reportedly was sold for $3.5 million.

Regan also says in the statement that she knew "from my own experience" that Simpson would be found not guilty of the murders, because she was abused in her 20s by a boyfriend who "manipulated, lied, and broke my heart. ... And then, after all but leaving me for dead in a hospital ... he left for good."

Regan said the book was a way to undo the "criminal injustice system" that let her own abuser go free, a man she says "could charm anyone" and with whom she had a child.

"My son is now 25 years old, my daughter 15," Regan's statement says. "I wanted them, and everyone else, to have a chance to see that there are consequences to grievous acts. ... And I wanted, as so many victims do, to hear him say, 'I did it and I am sorry."'

"I didn't know if he would," she says. "But I wanted to try. I wanted his confession."

After word of the book emerged, Regan says she's watched as the media "have all but called for my death for publishing his book and for interviewing him."

"To publish does not mean 'to endorse'; it means 'to make public,"' she says.

"If you doubt that, ask the mainstream publishers who keep Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' in print to this day. ... There is historical value in such work ... for anyone who wants to gain insight into the mind of a sociopath."

"If I Did It," which was to be published by ReganBooks — an imprint to HarperCollins, was scheduled for release Nov. 30. FOX had planned to air a two-part TV interview of Simpson on Nov. 27 and 29.

Simpson was acquitted of the murders in 1995, but was later found criminally liable for the deaths in civil court in 1997.

Although he was ordered to pay $33.5 million in damages to the Goldman family, Simpson has avoided making full restitution because California law prevents his NFL pension from being seized to satisfy the judgment. His lavish residence in Florida is similarly protected under state law.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

FOX and HarperCollins are owned by News Corp., which is the parent company of FOXNews.com.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,230838,00.html

TommyK

11-20-06, 03:48 PM

Fox Cancels OJ
By DAVID BAUDER
NEW YORK (AP) -- After a firestorm of criticism, News. Corp. said
Monday that it has canceled the O.J. Simpson book and television
special "If I Did It."

"I and senior management agree with the American public that
this was an ill-considered project," said Rupert Murdoch, News
Corp. chairman. "We are sorry for any pain that his has caused the
families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson."

A dozen Fox affiliates had already said they would not air the
two-part sweeps month special, planned for next week before
publication of the book. It was being published by ReganBooks, a
HarperCollins imprint owned, like the Fox network, by News Corp.

In the projects, Simpson speaks in hypothetical terms about how
he would have committed the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife Nicole and
her friend Goldman.

The industry trade publication Broadcasting & Cable
editorialized against the show Monday, saying "Fox should cancel
this evil sweeps stunt."

One of the nation's largest superstore chains, Borders Group
Inc., said last week it would donate any profits on the book to
charity.

RemyM

11-20-06, 05:32 PM

Glad News Corp came to their senses.

turansformer

11-20-06, 05:39 PM

I was curious when Rupert himself would step in over this controversy. I'm not here to argue why he did it, I'm just happy he did it period.

DoubleDAZ

11-20-06, 10:04 PM

I think the local affiliates have been getting angry calls/emails.

bgooch

11-21-06, 12:00 AM

Thank goodness the Simpson interview is canceled. I was worried Fox would give OJ a tryout on their NFL Pregame Show :eek:

jandron

11-21-06, 04:51 AM

Last week, 30 Rock did a show about fighting product placement, featuring (ironically) a lot of product placement.

Last night, Studio 60 did a show about fighting product placement, featuring (ironically) a lot of product placement.

And folks were worried these shows would be too much alike!

dad1153

11-21-06, 08:19 AM

I guess since the boss is out of town (and conviniently forgot to tell me about it! :rolleyes: ) its time for me to take over for a little while... again!

TV Notebook
Under Pressure, News Corp. Pulls Simpson Project
By Bill Carter and Edward Wyatt The New York Times November 21, 2006

Bowing to intense pressure from both outside and inside the company, the News Corporation yesterday canceled its plans to publish a book and broadcast an interview with O. J. Simpson in which he was to give an account of how he might have murdered his former wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald L. Goldman.

The company was responding to a week’s worth of ferocious criticism. Critics called for boycotts of advertisers who might sponsor the television broadcast on the Fox network; numerous broadcast stations announced that they would refuse to carry the program; television hosts like Bill O’Reilly on the Fox News Channel — which, like Fox, is owned by the News Corporation — were vocal in their opposition to the telecast; and various bookstores said they might not stock the book, which was titled “If I Did It.” The book was to be published by ReganBooks, also owned by the News Corporation.

Rupert Murdoch, chairman of the News Corporation, issued a statement yesterday announcing that the interview would not be broadcast and the book not be published.

“I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project,” Mr. Murdoch said. “We are sorry for any pain this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson.”

Any projects involving Mr. Simpson have met with public outrage in the 11 years since he was acquitted in a media-saturated murder trial. He was later found responsible for the deaths in a civil trial and ordered to pay $33.5 million in restitution to the victims’ families.

Mr. Simpson, a former football star and actor, moved from Los Angeles to Florida partly to protect his assets from that civil judgment. He has only occasionally appeared in public in recent years and has never stopped declaring himself innocent of the murder charges. A Florida lawyer representing Mr. Simpson could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Mr. Simpson told The Associated Press yesterday that he could not comment ”until I know legally where I stand.” He added, "’I would like nothing better than to straighten out some things that have been mischaracterized. But I think I’m legally muzzled at this point.”

The decision to cancel the twin Simpson projects was greeted with widespread expressions of relief. Michael Angelos, a vice president of Pappas Telecasting Companies, which told the network Friday that its four Fox-affiliated stations did not intend to broadcast the interview, released a statement calling the network’s decision “a victory for the people who spoke out.”

The statement concluded, “This special would have benefited only O. J. Simpson, who deserves nothing but contempt, and certainly no benefit.”

Numerous staff members at the News Corporation and the Fox network, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because they had been ordered not to comment about the Simpson deal, said they were thankful the company had abandoned the project. A News Corporation executive said that internally the project had been considered a disaster for the company.

Another executive said that the company had badly miscalculated the public’s tolerance for anything having to do with Mr. Simpson, thinking enough time had passed for the public to consider him less a pariah.

Neither of the two top News Corporation executives would comment beyond yesterday’s statement. Mr. Murdoch was said to be in Australia on business and not available. A company spokesman said Peter A. Chernin, the president and the executive with direct authority over the Fox network, had no comment.

No one at the company would discuss on the record the exact details of how the project had been accepted in the first place. But one executive involved in the negotiations about the book and the television special said Mr. Murdoch had been aware of both deals before they were announced publicly last week.

The executive said in a telephone interview that payments to representatives of Mr. Simpson would probably still have to be made for his participation in the book and the television interviews.

Standard publishing contracts call for a percentage of an author’s advance, usually up to 50 percent, to be paid when a contract is signed, and for the remainder to be paid when the finished book is accepted by the publisher. The executive said Mr. Simpson’s book was covered by a standard publishing contract.

In an interview last week, Judith Regan, the publisher, said ReganBooks, an imprint of HarperCollins, had signed a contract with “a manager who represents a third party” who owned the rights to Mr. Simpson’s account.

Because the News Corporation and ReganBooks decided on their own to cancel the book and the television special, that money is likely to still have to be paid.

A spokesman said Ms. Regan declined to comment yesterday on the book’s withdrawal.

Erin Crum, a spokeswoman for HarperCollins, said some books had already been shipped to stores. Those books will be recalled and destroyed, Ms. Crum said.

Last Friday, Borders announced that it would donate the net proceeds from sales of Mr. Simpson’s book to a nonprofit organization for victims of domestic violence.

Ann Binkley, a spokeswoman for Borders, said she received a call from HarperCollins yesterday afternoon notifying her that the book would be recalled. No explanation was offered for the decision.

“I think everybody knows why,” Ms. Binkley said.

The rights to the book could still be sold to another publisher, said the News Corporation executive involved in the negotiations.

There is precedent for a recalled book to be sold to another publisher and then to the public. In 1990, Vintage Books, a division of Random House, bought the rights to “American Psycho,” a novel by Bret Easton Ellis, after the original publisher, Simon & Schuster, withdrew from publishing it because of the novel’s graphically violent content.

As for the television interview, it could also be offered to other outlets, although at least two other networks, ABC and NBC, have reported that they turned it down before it was accepted by Fox. Ms. Regan, who conducted the on-camera interview with Mr. Simpson and is presumed to own the rights to it, could still seek a sale to either a cable channel or even a pay-per-view company.

The fact that the interview already exists on tape, executives at Fox and News Corporation said, means it is likely to turn up somewhere, perhaps on the Internet.

But it will not show up on the Fox network, and that pleased many of those who had opposed the broadcast.

Scott Blumenthal, an executive vice president of the Lin Television Corporation, which had announced it would not broadcast the interview on its five Fox affiliates, said in a phone interview from the company’s headquarters in Providence, R.I.: “Our actions spoke for themselves. At this point, the discussion is moot. We just felt the program was inappropriate for our markets.”

Asked if he supported the cancellation of the interview by Fox, Mr. Blumenthal said, “Only Fox knows whether or not they did the right thing.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/us/21simp.html?hp&ex=1164171600&en=1c5a7441a09e446a&ei=5094&partner=homepage

dad1153

11-21-06, 08:24 AM

Since we're criticizing Fox for going into the gutter looking for a Nov. sweeps boost how about a cheer to NBC for going the classy route for a change?

Critic’s Notebook
The man defines classic
Tony Bennett duet special airs tonight, and magic happens
By Hal Boedeker Orlando Sentinel November 21, 2006

Variety used to be the spice of television. When the variety show waned, prime time lost a lot of flavor. For a reminder of the tangy pleasures we have been missing, just sample "Tony Bennett: An American Classic."

This stylish, stirring special is like a wonderful banquet from the heyday of Ed Sullivan, Dean Martin and Andy Williams. NBC lays out the "American Classic" spread at 8 tonight on Ch. 4.

Rob Marshall, director of Oscar-winning "Chicago," conceived and guided this affectionate tribute to Bennett. Singers from Barbra Streisand to John Legend join Bennett for duets. Actors from Robert De Niro to John Travolta salute Bennett in words. This fast-moving hour depicts crucial periods in the long, impressive career of Bennett, who turned 80 this year.

Like the old variety programs, "An American Classic" is a mixed bag. But the choice moments outnumber the perfunctory or misguided ones. The renditions, which range from lovely to rousing, should transfix fans of Bennett and classic songs.

What are the high points? Debate among yourselves. I'll pick three:

Bennett and k.d. lang perform a moving version of "Because of You," a crucial Bennett hit. He and lang sing with obvious admiration for each other, which enhances the segment. Marshall sets the scene in a recording studio, where trumpeter Chris Botti adds his soaring sound.

Stevie Wonder joins Bennett on "For Once in My Life," and the two singers push each other to invigorating heights. The backdrop is a theater with an orchestra, and Wonder contributes a harmonica solo. Bennett ends the duet by rightly calling his colleague "Stevie Wonderful."

Christina Aguilera celebrates Bennett's appeal to the MTV generation by joining him for a splashy rendition of "Steppin' Out." Marshall's use of sultry, strutting dancers recalls Bob Fosse's choreography in "Cabaret." Aguilera slinks through the number with Jean Harlow-like sexiness. Vocally, Aguilera and Bennett make a fun, formidable team.

Showman Marshall repeatedly displays his versatility. He opens the special simply and lovingly, with Streisand joining Bennett on a stage for "Smile." When you have two of the world's greatest singers, Marshall realizes, you don't need a lot of tricks.

The special ends, thrillingly, with Bennett alone on his signature song, "I Left My Heart in San Francisco."

The testimonials bolster the special's star power, even though those segments feel truncated and underdeveloped. Helping trace Bennett's career are Travolta, Billy Crystal Catherine Zeta-Jones and Bruce Willis.

Near the end, Oscar-winner De Niro repeats the highest praise Bennett ever received. "For my money, Tony Bennett is the best singer in the business," Frank Sinatra told Life magazine in 1965. The Chairman of the Board's approval made the public pay attention.

Through the years, Bennett has continued to earn that praise. Despite his age, his voice remains an incredible instrument. He has stayed true to his classy style while reaching younger fans.

Marshall plays up Bennett's timeless appeal in other segments. In a rousing scene reminiscent of "Chicago," R&B singer Legend joins Bennett on "Sing, You Sinners" in a jazz-club setting. Marshall salutes Bennett's Las Vegas career with dancing girls and two duets. First, there's a ragged one with a playful Elton John. Then, there's a smoother one with Michael Bublé, who seems a likelier candidate for the Boy Scouts than the Rat Pack. Still another scene evokes television variety from the 1960s.

Diana Krall and Bennett roll merrily through "The Best Is Yet to Come," accompanied by dancers who could have wandered in from "The Dean Martin Show." It's a kitschy setup, one that gives way to a serious version of "The Shadow of Your Smile" by Bennett and Latin artist Juanes.

Variety still has a place on television, from "American Idol" to "Dancing With the Stars" to awards shows. But as the Bennett special illustrates, when the professionals show up - and don't expect a prize - something wonderful can happen. Despite unevenness, "Tony Bennett: An American Classic" is an exhilarating event. We could use more like it.

TONY BENNETT: AN AMERICAN CLASSIC. The singer is still at the top of his form. Special airs tonight at 8 on NBC/4.

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/ny-ettel4984153nov21,0,5283426,print.story?coll=ny-television-headlines

dad1153

11-21-06, 08:41 AM

TV Notebook
Hoping 'Trees' will grow on Thursdays
Zap2it.com November 20, 2006

With one freshman show, "Six Degrees," struggling to hold onto the "Grey's Anatomy" audience, ABC will try another one on Thursday nights.

The dramedy "Men in Trees" will take over the 10 p.m. Thursday spot starting Nov. 30. The series, which stars Anne Heche as a self-help author who tries to put her own life back together in a small Alaska town, has been a steady (although not huge) performer for ABC on Fridays this fall.

Along with the new time slot, "Men in Trees" has received a full-season pickup. It will air at 10 p.m. Thursdays through December; what happens after that will depend how it performs. As for "Six Degrees," it's done for the remainder of 2006, although ABC says it will return to the schedule in January, though where is still unclear.

"Men in Trees" has averaged about 7.5 million viewers per week on Fridays, where, incidentally, it has followed "Grey's Anatomy" repeats for most of the fall.

"Six Degrees," meanwhile, draws 9.64 million viewers per week, less than half of the 22.1 million who watch lead-in "Grey's Anatomy."

A previously announced Barbara Walters special aired last Thursday. Plans for Thanksgiving night haven't been finalized yet.

"Men in Trees" becomes just the seventh new show to earn a full-season order this fall. It joins fellow ABC shows "Brothers & Sisters" and "Ugly Betty," NBC's "Heroes," CBS' "Shark" and "Jericho," and The CW's "The Game."

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/ny-ettvtwo4983939nov20,0,5406352.story?coll=ny-television-headlines

dad1153

11-21-06, 08:45 AM

TV Notebook
A Producer Hangs 10 in a Risky HBO Pilot
By David Carr The New York Times November 20, 2006

Writing is generally a silent, solitary pursuit. But not for David Milch, one of the most prolific and successful writers in television with a résumé that includes Emmys for work on “Hill Street Blues” and “NYPD Blue” and, most recently, critical plaudits for HBO’s darkly poetic “Deadwood.” He composes verbally, extemporaneously and in a crowd.

His method, and a bit of his madness, were on display here recently in front of a roomful of actors, writers, an ex-cop and a lip-reading deaf girl. They had come to Mr. Milch’s plain-vanilla offices to work on a pilot for “John From Cincinnati,” a drama for HBO. The pilot, scheduled for broadcast in the spring, is based on the travails of a mythical first family of surfing. “John from Cincinnati” is taking shape under Mr. Milch’s direction as executive producer, with the surf novelist Kem Nunn, among others, providing aquatic verisimilitude. The story defies television genre-speak, but in literature it would be called surf noir. There is a dysfunctional family viewed through the twin prisms of surfing and heroin addiction, a space alien and a lawyer named Dickstein. It should be mentioned that some characters occasionally levitate.

The subject of the group writing session was where John is from — Cincinnati and/or outer space — but the discussion quickly turned to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, a message to the great beyond from which John is bringing back a response.

“9/11 is big,” Mr. Milch, 61, said to the unusually large crowd in the room. He was lying on the floor — a bad back is his curse — next to a microphone. He was just getting going. “What part of 9/11 is big? If the future continues to reinterpret the past, it could be argued that 9/11 provides irrefutable proof that unless there is some other way that we learn to deal with our technology or deal with our brothers and sisters, it is goodbye as a species. That genie does not leave that bottle.”

He went on like that for a while, then said: “A dying culture, intuiting that it is dying, postulates an alternative reality: The Indians postulated in the ghost dance that they were impervious to technology, that when a bullet hit them, they went up to heaven. Does any of that sound familiar?”

Everybody nodded assent. Down the hall a parrot made that signal three-tone noise from “Close Encounters.”

While Mr. Milch’s background includes significant stints as an addict, a horse player and a depressive, he is also a student of the poet Robert Penn Warren and a teacher of fiction seminars at Yale. Attentive, upturned faces are his inspiration, his clay and his congregation. The atmosphere in the room feels a bit like church, of which Mr. Milch is well aware. “Showbiz and churches are the same thing,” he said during a break. “You never saw ‘The Wizard of Oz’?”

He has, as recovered drug users generally do, come back from the dead several times, and has come to believe that he is intended, somehow, to tell stories in a way that has an impact on the species.

“I am an instrument of purposes that I don’t fully understand,” he said, not caring how grand or silly it might sound. “Time will tell whether I am a wing nut or a megalomaniac,” he added. “The difference between a cult and faith is time. I believe that we are a single organism, and that something is at stake in this particular moment.”

The reason he acts out all the parts in his shows in front of the people who work on them, and explains their philosophical underpinnings, invoking Gustav Theodor Fechner and three euphemisms for the male sex organ in the same sentence, is related to the notion of faith.

“They need to understand something,” he said of his actors. “And if they don’t have a script, they need to believe in something.”

After the break Mr. Milch walked Brian Van Holt, who plays Butchie Yost, a surfer turned addict, through a scene in which John from Cincinnati enters his fetid apartment.

“Everything is shameful to a junkie,” Mr. Milch said. “Every time a junkie walks into a new environment, he looks around and says, ‘What are the specific items of the indictment?’ ”

Mr. Milch knows this because he has lived from fix to fix. He embraces his own imperfection and finds humanity in the woundedness of others. Rebecca De Mornay, an actress who has spent a couple of years between opportunities, will play Cissy Yost, the matriarch of the family. Shaun Yost, a talented young surfer turned skateboarder, will be played by Greyson Fletcher, a nonactor and, not so coincidentally, one of the real-life models for at least part of the story.

The conscience of the pilot, a wizened character named Bill, is modeled after Mr. Milch’s best friend, Bill Clark, a retired New York police detective who is never far from Mr. Milch’s side. The role will be held down by Ed O’Neill, who will be the moral center of the series and the dramatic collective Mr. Milch is trying to build.

“We are going to be doing a story that is on HBO and there are these endearing characters. It is about surfing, but some of the characters levitate and as the story complicates itself, my faith begins with looking at my friend,” Mr. Milch said, gesturing toward Mr. O’Neill.

In an interview later that day Mr. Milch does not so much answer questions as flatten them and then rebuild them to create a teachable moment.

“What is this show about? It is about itself,” he said later in the day, lying on the floor supported by the crook of one arm, the other doing jerky arabesques in the air. “Ostensibly it is about a family of surfers who seem to have become more and more disassociated from themselves and from good surfing. They were all champions, and they are in one way or another alienated, loaded and ascetic.”

He paused. “And then a strange guy comes into their life: John from Cincinnati.”

Surfing in general has an indifferent show-business history, heroin addiction has never been a big commercial draw, and it would be hard to come up with a surer route to shark bait than aliens.

“The smart money is that this show is about a stupid subject,” he said. “The wave of commerce,” he added, “is that what goes up must go down.”

“Deadwood” was a success, albeit one whose abrupt end left Mr. Milch with “a bitter taste in the cup.”

“So now the smart money is saying that HBO and I are on the way down,” Mr. Milch continued. “But there is a saying at the racetrack: the smart money tends to miss its bus in the morning.”

He is less cocky than steeped in his own legacy of overcoming doubts. In an a-literate medium, his love of words has brought him awards, applause and a lot of money.

Chris Albrecht, chief executive of HBO, said the network is betting on a horse they have come to revere.

“He is a great writer and a great producer who is very responsive to the business realities of making a big television show,” Mr. Albrecht said. “We don’t have to worry about looking for a broad audience. You have to just say to him, ‘Go write it.’ ”

Shortly after the day’s work the “John From Cincinnati” group decamped to Imperial Beach, Calif., a stand-in for the border town in the script, where they spent several weeks shooting the pilot.

Sometime after their return Mr. Milch, in a follow-up phone call, said he was still choosing to believe. The story and cast were jelling, he said. And the look of the show, he seemed pleased to report, was informed not by Martin Scorsese or MTV, but by his mentor Robert Penn Warren.

“Have you ever seen moonlight on the Wabash as the diesel rigs boom by? Have you ever wondered how the moonlit continent might look through the tearless and unblinking distance of God’s wide eye,” he quoted Warren over the phone. “I have been working to make sure that the camera is stationed at a tearless and unblinking distance.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/arts/television/20milc.html?_r=1&ref=television&oref=slogin

dad1153

11-21-06, 08:52 AM

Critic’s Notebook
For MSNBC, Time to Get Political
November's Shouting Over, A Network Finds Its Voice
From Howard Kurtz's Washington Post Media Notes Column Nov. 20, 2006

MSNBC has seen the future, and it is politics.

Delivered with plenty of opinion.

Preferably with lots of cameo appearances by big-name news stars from the mothership.

The perennial third-place cable news channel enjoyed a nice bump in the ratings during the midterm campaign, in part because the likes of Brian Williams, Tim Russert, David Gregory and Campbell Brown broke away from their NBC duties to help out.

"We've found a voice as of late, and a large part of that voice is politics," says MSNBC General Manager Dan Abrams. And although he doesn't plan to put on "all politics all the time until 2008," Abrams says he wants to continue "branding" MSNBC as a haven for political junkies.

Of course, MSNBC has done well in other campaigns, only to have the gains vanish after Election Day. All of cable news tends to get big spikes during major stories -- war, scandal, missing white women -- that fade when the news cycle moves on.

"The chronic problem -- and it will likely happen again in the days ahead -- is a big drop-off back to unpleasant, distant-third reality," says Erik Sorenson, a former MSNBC president.

There's no plan to transform the channel into an extended version of Chris Matthews's "Hardball," but MSNBC covered the House leadership shootout between Jack Murtha and Steny Hoyer with presidential-campaign intensity.

During the midterm campaign's stretch run, Abrams devoted two full days to politics and persuaded some of NBC's heavyweights to anchor hour-long programs. In October, MSNBC's ratings were up 14 percent over a year earlier, while Fox News was down 17 percent and CNN was down 8 percent. Of course, the NBC channel started from a much lower base. Fox averaged 792,000 viewers for the month, CNN 491,000 and MSNBC 287,000. (CNN scored a rare ratings win between 7 p.m. and 2 a.m. on election night, drawing 2.54 million viewers to Fox's 2.39 million and MSNBC's 1.58 million.)

NBC hotshots once looked down their noses at their cable sibling. But Andrea Mitchell, the network's chief foreign affairs correspondent, who made frequent MSNBC appearances during the campaign, is now anchoring an hour most mornings at 11. Although the cable audience is far smaller, "you would not believe the kind of reaction I've had from people I really respect," Mitchell says. As for potential guests, "many people want to do live interviews as opposed to edited interviews where they'll be a 15-second sound bite."

Mitchell also sees a certain synergy, such as when she was interviewing an Iraq expert last week on MSNBC and gleaned information for a piece she was preparing on the subject for NBC's "Today" show.

The network feasted on last week's Democratic infighting, from Matthews's midday appearances to a steady stream of analysts, including Newsweek's Jonathan Alter and Howard Fineman and The Washington Post's Dana Milbank. (The two Post-owned publications share a news alliance with MSNBC.) By contrast with its rivals, MSNBC essentially ignored the controversy over O.J. Simpson's maybe-I-did-it television special and the search for a missing 2-year-old in Florida, and provided modest coverage of a deadly tornado in North Carolina.

The effort by Abrams, the former legal-affairs commentator who took over in June, to tap more NBC talent will be getting an unexpected boost from a painful round of budget cuts at the network. Over the next year, MSNBC will abandon its Secaucus, N.J., campus and move in with its corporate parent at Manhattan's 30 Rock. A number of producers, bookers and others will be let go as job functions are combined. Abrams insists that the impact will be modest because his network is already thinly staffed.

Some of the election coverage was anchored by Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, and Keith Olbermann, whose show "Countdown" has become a nightly feast of Bush-bashing.

"His program could become a model for the newscast of the future," Abrams says. "It's a mix of straight news reporting with lighter fare and occasionally with some opinion."

Some opinion? Not only does Olbermann steer clear of conservative guests, he has added an occasional "special comment" segment in which he recently urged President Bush to apologize to American troops for starting and mishandling the war, going on to suggest that "you are not honest" and "you are far more stupid than the worst of your critics has suggested."

Olbermann said last spring that he is not ideological but that his growing conviction about the administration's failings puts him "in the same part of the ballpark as a lot of liberals."

Scarborough, for his part, says: "I see my job now as someone who holds both parties accountable, and I think I've proven that over the last year. Probably I've held my own party to a higher standard than Democrats. The burden is on me to prove I'm fair and down the middle." Both Olbermann and Scarborough did put aside their views while anchoring campaign news shows.

Abrams, who was no shrinking violet back when he hosted his own show, says CBS is edging in a similar direction in trying to make Katie Couric "accessible and personable. . . . In cable news, the most honest thing we can provide for our viewers is the sense that you know where the host is coming from."

Holding Back

For 10 weeks, Denver television reporter Paula Woodward tried to break the story about the Rev. Ted Haggard carrying on a gay relationship. She had the firsthand account of a male prostitute, Mike Jones, and copies of voice mails that Haggard, the head of the National Association of Evangelicals, had left for Jones. But Woodward was so cautious that she lost the scoop when Jones, frustrated by the delays, made his allegations -- under a pseudonym -- on a local radio show.

"We're very comfortable with the way we handled it," Woodward, a KUSA reporter, says. "We knew that the story, if true, would have a very dramatic impact on his life, his family's life and the church."

The station contacted voice experts, who said they could not verify the phone messages without a "first generation" recording of Haggard's voice. So, as Columbia Journalism Review reported, Woodward and her news director decided to use hidden cameras to tape Haggard entering and leaving Jones's apartment. That plan failed because Haggard, who always initiated the visits, stopped contacting Jones.

After Jones went on the radio show this month, KUSA got an interview with Haggard -- who denied any misconduct -- and was able to use that tape to confirm the authenticity of the voice-mail messages. When the station reported that information the following day, Haggard resigned from the evangelical group and later admitted to sexual "immorality."

Woodward and her news director, Patti Dennis, insist they're not disappointed. "In my mind, we broke the story," Dennis says.

Parting Words

It was a routine memo from USA Today's management, telling the staff that reporter Elliot Blair Smith would be leaving the paper for Bloomberg News and thanking him "for his excellent work."

But accidentally attached to the mass e-mail last week was a note from Smith, griping about how his last story was being handled. Smith, whose last day will be Friday, called the piece "the most powerful, the most explosive report on the most important financial story of the year. It required intense dedication. . . . It would take one hour of everybody's time to sit down and iron out any wrinkles that remain. One hour, I have that, don't you?" Smith said they should "close out the relationship with really substantial and meaningful actions, instead of these nice words below."

Well, at least everybody got both sides.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/19/AR2006111901027.html

dad1153

11-21-06, 08:58 AM

The Business of TV
CBS sues FCC over Jackson's 'wardrobe malfuncton' fine
By John Dunbar Associated Press November 20, 2006

Lawyers for CBS Corp. argued Monday that singer Janet Jackson's breast-baring at the Super Bowl halftime show in 2004 was unintended, took place without the knowledge of the network, and should not be considered indecent.

CBS is suing the Federal Communications Commission in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, challenging a $550,000 fine issued by the agency over the stunt, which created a national furor.

In a court brief, CBS argued that the FCC had "failed to turn up even a shred of evidence suggesting that anyone at CBS participated" in the so-called "wardrobe malfunction," and that the commission had abandoned its long-standing approach that "fleeting, isolated or unintended" images should not automatically be considered indecent.

In response, the FCC released a statement charging that the network "continues to ignore the voices of millions of Americans, Congress and the commission by arguing that Janet Jackson's halftime performance was not indecent ... we continue to believe they are wrong."

The show aired on Feb. 1, 2004, to an estimated audience of 90 million. During a musical number, singer Justin Timberlake pulled off part of Jackson's bustier, briefly exposing one of her breasts.

In its filing, CBS described the flashing as an "unscripted, unauthorized and unintended long-distance shot of Ms. Jackson's breast for nine-sixteenths of one second."

The network claims that Jackson and Timberlake "independently and clandestinely devised the finale" without informing anyone at the network.

In the 76-page brief, the network also said the fine should be dismissed because the broadcast itself was "neither explicit nor graphic."

The network stated that the "blink and you miss it" nature of the episode went "largely unrecognized for most of the broadcast audience."

CBS argued that the FCC's "zero tolerance approach to indecency enforcement" eliminated the "breathing space to which CBS and all broadcasters are entitled to exercise their First Amendment rights."

In another high-profile broadcast indecency case, CBS and Fox Television Stations Inc. are expected to file a brief Wednesday in a federal appeals court in New York challenging the FCC's policy on how it fines shows that air foul language.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-11-20-cbs-janet-jackson_x.htm

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:11 AM

Here's a three-in-one special post to keep things in perspective. First two reviews of the same PBS 'Frontline' program airing tonight on most markets (or soon after wherever you live) followed by an article related to the subject matter.

Critic's Notebook
TV Review: Special puts viewers on front line of 'Living Old'
By Rob Owen Pittsburgh Post-Gazette November 21, 2006

It's understandable that American TV viewers largely prefer their television light, escapist and entertaining. After all, more people snack on desserts than on vegetables. But every now and then, even the candy-lovers need to let go of their sugar high and crunch on some fiber.

Tonight's "Frontline" (9 p.m., WQED) is not at all entertaining, but it presents an issue that everyone should take an interest in because they're eventually going to face it, first with older relatives and eventually themselves. The subject: "Living Old."

With typical "Frontline" straightforwardness and sensitivity, producers Miri Navasky and Karen O'Connor explore the challenges that await an American population that's living longer but not necessarily better.

"We're on the threshold of the first ever mass geriatric society," says Dr. Leon Kass. Before you start imagining all the "Simpsons" jokes at the expense of Grandpa Simpson that could stem from a statement like that, consider the not-so-funny repercussions. People are living longer, but Dr. Kass says the price that many people pay for an extra decade of longevity is "to suffer from the as-yet-incurable diseases of body and mind."

"Living Old" depicts this in sad, precise detail, introducing viewers to an assortment of elderly Americans. Some are living happily; others are in physical pain. One man endures the dementia-stoked conversations of his wife as they live out their final days together in a nursing home.

Dr. Kass says Americans largely believe family should care for family, but that grows increasingly difficult as families get smaller through diminished birth rates and distance, as children move away from their parents.

"One very telling study shows that only those people who have three or more daughters or daughters-in-law have a better than 50 percent chance of not finishing their life in a nursing home or an institution," Dr. Kass says.

"Living Old" is not a complete downer. It introduces viewers to some feisty, funny characters who have a zest for life. The program doesn't offer a cure-all solution, because there isn't one. But it does raise an increasingly important issue, experts share their advice and viewers are left to ponder what living to a ripe old age will mean to them and to their families.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06325/739947-237.stm
____________________________________________________________ ____________________
Critic's Notebook
The Blessing and Curse of Longevity: A Focus on the ‘Old Old’
By Virginia Heffernan The New York Times November 21, 2006

The very old are different from you and me. They have more age.

Seriously, folks, I’m trying to save you the trouble of watching “Living Old,” about our nation’s mass geriatric society, tonight on “Frontline” on PBS. But, more seriously, “Living Old” is not a bad documentary, filled as it is with lively and less lively old folks and facts galore about chronic diseases, physical decline and nonagenarians and their overburdened 70-something children. It puts on display the suffering that awaits us all, which is important, in its way, but also troublesome.

There are 35 million people 65 and older in the United States. That is seven times the number of Americans who suffer from eating disorders — the subject of a recent high-profile documentary on HBO — and certainly a worthy subject for examination.

Much here compels attention. In one scene Mary Ann DiBerardino, the daughter of two ailing 90-somethings, one with Parkinson’s and the other with Alzheimer’s, succinctly calls into question the idea that there is something kinder and more dignified about letting terminally ill patients die “naturally.” In a geriatric patient with Parkinson’s, say, do you just not fix a fractured hip? Ms. DiBerardino asks.

And then, as the viewer wonders about that one, she poses a harder question still. Her father, Chester Haak, has trouble swallowing. Should she allow him to eat popcorn, though he might choke on it? Or intervene to stop him? Or is putting the kibosh on the popcorn taking what some living wills call heroic measures?

Ms. DiBerardino decides it isn’t and oversees what her father eats. She also has the doctors fix her parents’ broken bones. She further tries to find ways to give meaning to their lives. And she gives them this attention in spite of Mr. Haak’s modest contention that “I don’t really look forward to anything; old age is for the birds.”

Among the experts Leon R. Kass, chairman of the President’s Council on Bioethics from 2002 to 2005 and the public face of aging issues, cites an almost Shakespearean tidbit: only those people with three or more daughters or daughters-in-law have a better than 50-50 chance of not finishing their lives in a nursing home.

The problem with the numbers — even those as evocative as this — is that they are like the diseases: levelers. Killers, in a way. What’s distinctive about old age now, and what makes the lives of the so-called old old interesting, is what this generation of 80- and 90-somethings and centurions brings to it.

To that end I wish someone had asked the people in this program about Europe, Ellis Island, cars, the Roaring Twenties, cocaine, the Depression, the Dust Bowl, ghettos, the war, the New Deal, polio, civil rights, socialism, washing machines, swimming pools, the Kennedy assassination, the lunar landing. And what, if anything, they make of the Internet.

Amid many hospital scenes, and exposition from experts, the old people who come across most vividly are the ones who don’t talk about aging or death. Who can be profound on such subjects? Instead they talk about their lives.

Estelle Strongin, a 94-year-old stockbroker and the grandmother of Miri Navasky, one of the film’s producers, has a self-preserving wit that comes into high relief when she talks about her son’s failed efforts to get her to grant him authority to make decisions regarding “termination.”

We hear her buying and selling stocks by phone. “I still have ambitions,” she says, “to do the job well.”

Clara Singer, 99, asked about dying, produces instead a lovely summary of the alternative. “I like life,” she says thoughtfully. “The sun, the air, the work, the books. Everything.”

FRONTLINE

Living Old

On most PBS stations tonight (check local listings).

Produced, directed and written by Miri Navasky and Karen O’Connor; David Fanning, series executive producer; Michael Sullivan, executive producer, “Frontline” special projects. Produced by WGBH, Boston, and Mead Street Films.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/arts/television/21heff.html?ref=television
____________________________________________________________ _________________________
TV Notebook
Baby boomers getting irritated over TV's obsession with youth
By David Bauder Associated Press November 21, 2006

Americans born between 1946 and 1964 are accustomed to being catered to, but that's not the case with much of television today. Now there's some new evidence that they're finding this mighty irritating.

A study conducted by Harris Interactive suggests that the television industry's obsession with youth is backfiring.

Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they believe that most TV programming and advertising is targeted toward people under 40, the survey said. More than 80 percent of adults over 40 say they have a hard time finding TV shows that reflect their lives.

A significant number of baby boomers -- 37 percent -- say they aren't happy with what's on television, according to the study.

"The amount of people dissatisfied with television overall was a pretty big eye-opening thing for us," said Larry Jones, president of the TV Land cable network, which commissioned the study.

To a certain extent, the generation that decades ago warned against trusting people over 30 can blame itself for the predicament. The TV industry's slavish devotion to ratings within the 18-to-49-year-old demographic started when most baby boomers fit into that group.

The theory among advertisers is that it's important to reach young people as their preferences are forming -- get them hooked on a certain toothpaste or soda early and they'll be hooked for life. Advertisers will pay a premium for young viewers: $335 for every thousand people in the 18-to-24 age range that a network delivers, for example. Viewers aged 55-to-64 are worth only $119 for every thousand, according to Nielsen Media Research.

That's why ABC and NBC conduct all of their business with advertisers in the 18-to-49 demo. From a financial standpoint, if you're 50 or over, you mean nothing to those networks' executives. For Fox, the CW, MTV, BET and countless other networks, even 40 is too old.

The peak year for births within the baby boom, Jones noted, was 1957 -- meaning all those people are turning 49 this year.

Much of the television industry isn't aging with them.

"They've just never changed or haven't realized that the population has moved on," said Randy Berkowitz, vice president of research for Combe Inc., which makes health products and beauty aids.

Berkowitz believes that "people are just not in tune with TV because they can't relate to it anymore."

Jones, who's 46, said he wants to come home at night and see an entertainment program that appeals to his sensibilities. Some people may find Paris Hilton funny on "The Simple Life," for example -- not him.

To a surprising extent, advertising is also alienating. The Harris Interactive study found that half of baby boomers say they tune out commercials that are clearly aimed at young people. An additional one-third said they'd go out of their way NOT to buy such a product.

"I'm not saying that every show, every network should reshape, but that's an awfully high level of dissatisfaction among the largest generation group of all time," said Ken Dychtwald, a psychologist who worked with Harris Interactive on the study. (Harris conducted an online survey of 4,220 adults between April 28-May 15 this year, with a sampling error of plus or minus 1.5 percent.)

Some advertisers have responded to the aging population. Financial services firms, for example, see many potential customers advancing toward retirement. Two decades ago drug companies didn't advertise on TV; now you could fill a medicine cabinet with all the products hawked on the evening news.

But these were cases where the companies making these products saw the opportunity, not necessarily the TV industry, Berkowitz said.

TV Land's Jones is already using the survey in his business. The results have convinced him that, more than ever, his network of mostly classic TV shows should be boomer-centric, he said. He also comes armed with the survey when he meets with the Madison Avenue types who buy advertising time.

One statistic he's sure to cite: The survey found 51 percent of the postwar generation describe themselves as "open to new ideas." Meanwhile, only 12 percent of young adults think the older folks feel that way.

Why does that matter? Jones said the average media buyer or planner is under 30. Many are undoubtedly hired for their know-how in appealing to a specific generation, and it isn't the baby boomers.

"There is this huge perception vs. reality situation in the marketplace," he said.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06325/739941-237.stm

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:20 AM

The Business of TV
NBC Tweaks Schedule to Stay Alive With 18-49 Demo
By John Consoli Mediaweek November 20, 2006

NBC seems to have stanched its ratings bleeding this season, and now it has to find a way to begin replenishing itself with scripted programming. The network is up this season in the key adults 18-49 demographic by three-tenths of a rating (to a 3.6) because of the addition of Sunday Night Football to the schedule. But NBC is flat, not down, at a 3.3 with 18-49s without football factored in.

The net has kept itself on par with last year’s ratings, with a heavy dose of game shows that are working well: Deal or No Deal (initially three nights a week, now two) and the recent addition of 1 vs. 100. But TV media buyers argue that long-term stability needs to come more from scripted shows than unscripted. Only one of its five new scripted series, Heroes, is considered a sure shot to return next season.

Thanks to the steady performance of ER (averaging a 5.5 18-49 rating in its 13th year), NBC has stayed in the game on Thursday, and rejuvenated Friday by moving a pair of veteran shows—Law & Order and Las Vegas— there. While, the network’s newest shows, such as Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, are struggling to find higher ratings, they are still pulling in a fair share of high-income viewers.

“When you look at the internals of a show, you look not only at the rating but also at who those viewers are,” said Mitch Metcalf, executive vp of program planning and scheduling at NBC. “Upscale viewers tend to watch less television and are harder to reach. That’s why advertisers value them.”

For midseason, NBC has two solid, if unspectacular, veterans in The Apprentice and Crossing Jordan to bring back after football, plus highly touted new dramas The Black Donnellys and Raines, along with a few new sitcoms.

The media-buying community, which for the past two seasons has battered ratings-challenged NBC by spending about $2 billion less in its upfront, has started to quietly root for the network to make a comeback—and snapping up chunks of its scatter avails.

“When it was No.1, NBC just got too arrogant,” said one media buyer who did not want to speak for attribution. “So when the ratings went down, big money was moved out. But NBC’s [ratings] numbers have been OK so far this season. And a lot of us are now pulling for NBC to do well. Yes, they are doing some of it with game shows. But game shows are family friendly, and if that’s what viewers are watching, there’s nothing wrong with it. But they do need to develop a new watercooler show or two.”

NBC, buyers said, has also been able to capitalize on the ratings shortfalls of Fox and The CW. “NBC held back a lot of inventory for scatter and they are now taking advantage of the other networks’ ratings deficiencies,” another TV buyer said.

That’s not to say every package that NBC sold is meeting its guarantees. But NBC on Fridays is averaging a 3.0/9 in adults 18-49 this season vs. a 2.1/7 last season. That 42 percent increase was a result of moving veteran-drama Law & Order from Wednesday at 10 to Friday at 10, and Las Vegas from Monday at 9 to Friday at 9. Heroes is now airing in Las Vegas’ Monday time period from last season, earning a 5.7 18-49 rating, 32 percent higher than Las Vegas did last year. Overall on Monday nights, NBC is averaging a 4.5 in the 18-49 demo, 15 percent higher than last season. (All those ratings represent “live” viewing to make the year-to-year comparisons equal.)

Tuesday night has been adequate from 9-11 with Law & Order: Criminal Intent doing a 3.5 18-49 rating and Law & Order: SVU doing a 4.7. But new drama Friday Night Lights is struggling on Tuesdays at 8, averaging only a 2.3. And with Wednesday’s new 10 p.m. drama Kidnapped already cancelled, along with new Wednesday 8 p.m. sitcom 20 Good Years, NBC will have to rebuild that night.

Metcalf said the network does want to try to save Friday Nights Lights, perhaps moving it to Sunday at 8 once football departs in January. That slot could lead into The Apprentice, which could lead into Crossing Jordan, although as Mediaweek went to press last week, NBC had not yet finalized its midseason changes. “One advantage NBC has versus ABC [which had Monday Night Football last season] is that it won’t have to program the whole night [Sunday] from scratch,” said Steve Sternberg, executive vp of audience analysis at Magna Global USA.

NBC also has decided to add two more comedies to Thursdays, bringing back Scrubs at 8:30 leading into The Office at 9, and moving 30 Rock to 9:30 from Wednesday at 8:30. “This is a move we needed to make,” said Metcalf. “A two-hour block will give each show a better chance to succeed, and the block will be an alternative to the dramas and other programming in those time periods.”

Metcalf conceded that leading off Wednesday with two new comedies was a mistake, and that the night—with The Biggest Loser leading into Kidnapped—did not flow well. The network has already brought back veteran drama Medium on Wednesdays at 10. In its two-hour debut last week (from 9-11), the show earned a credible 3.5 18-49 rating, though it trailed CBS’ Criminal Minds at 9 p.m. (which delivered a 4.9) and CSI: NY at 10 (with a 5.2).

While NBC has a long way to go to get back on top of the ratings heap, Metcalf believes the network has fallen as low as it can go and is now primed to move upward again.

“It seems like we are bringing better assets in,” he said. “It feels like a network with some shows that people are beginning to talk about. We are not there yet, but it feels more like a team that is starting to gel.”

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003409767

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:21 AM

HOORAY!!! :D :D :D

TV Notebook
EXTRA TONY
MOB OPERA ADDS HOUR
By Michael Starr The New York Post November 21, 2006

The final season of "The Sopranos" has been super-sized.

The mob opera has quietly added another hour to its final season - due to start next spring.

Series co-star Steve Schirripa, who plays Bobby Bacala on the show, broke the news over the weekend.

"There are now going to be nine shows altogether," Schirripa told celebrityweek.com. "We added one show.

"We were only supposed to do eight, but they just added a ninth show."

An HBO spokeswoman confirmed the additional episode yesterday after reading Schirripa's comments, which he made last Saturday while backstage at the Comic Relief show in Las Vegas.

The news is good for fans of the show - indicating that the show's rococo plot needs more time to get wrapped up.

Series creator David Chase has sworn up and down that the upcoming season, considered "Part 2" of Season 6, will be the show's last.

HBO has set an "early April" return date for "The Sopranos," which hasn't aired a new episode since last June.

The series left off with Tony and family celebrating a tense, weird Christmas.

Schirripa refused to talk about what happens at the end or why the producers decided they needed and extra hour to tell the story.

The actor indicated that six episodes have been completed since production began again late last summer.

The 10-month gap between seasons is actually a short one in the world of "The Sopranos," which has made its fans wait for long periods between new episodes.

Season 6, which premiered last March after a two-year "Sopranos" hiatus, began with a bang - literally - when Tony (James Gandolfini) was shot and nearly killed by his delusional Uncle Junior (Dominic Chianese).

When all was said and done, ratings for the 12-episode season were down from the previous season - which some industry types attributed to the two-year gap.

All of the show's main stars will return in April.

Troubled actor Daniel Baldwin, who was arrested for allegedly stealing an SUV in L.A. earlier this month, will be featured next season as the star of Christopher's (Michael Imperioli) horror movie.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11212006/tv/extra_tony_tv_michael_starr.htm

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:30 AM

Nielsen Notebook
Readers: Nielsen blew it on ad ratings
Poll: Fault rating service on commercial minute plan
By Diego Vasquez Media Life Magazine November 20, 2006

The idea of providing advertisers actual ratings for when their ads run has been a long-time wish of media people, and it may happen some time. When and by whom is the question.

Two weeks ago, facing a revolt by both broadcast and cable networks, Nielsen shelved its plan to begin offering so-called commercial minute ratings, which would provide ratings for particular minutes within an ad pod. It's not saying when it will be revived.

Then on Friday, TNS Media Intelligence announced plans to provide data on second-by second ratings for commercials (see news shorts). While the data will be less inclusive than Nielsen data, many in media strongly favor second-by-second ratings as far more accurate. This could position TNS to become a direct Nielsen competitor in time.

One thing is clear, though. Media people believe that Nielsen Media Research has done a poor job so far in attempting to provide commercial ratings, a very poor job. That's according to a recent Media Life survey of media buyers and planners on the issue.

Three fourths of those polled agreed that Nielsen did the right thing by delaying the commercial minute ratings, but they blame Nielsen squarely for what they feel are shortcomings to its ratings system and for the way Nielsen handled its rollout, set for this month until it was abruptly canceled.

Media Life asked readers: What’s your biggest concern about Nielsen’s proposed commercial ratings system?

The largest share, 27.7 percent, think the plan is fundamentally flawed, agreeing with the statement: "The manner in which Nielsen wants to break the minutes down. These are not true commercial ratings but rather minute by minute ratings that contain both commercial and program data. I’d prefer second-by-second data."

But not far behind was how Nielsen presented the plan, with 24.6 percent agreeing with the statement: "The way Nielsen has gone about the process. I had hoped this would be done quickly and relatively seamlessly, but it’s bungled things yet again."

Others found fault with Nielsen's plans for including DVR and VCR viewing and not properly addressing the numerous complaints from the cable networks over the accuracy of the data.

"Nielsen seems to have missed asking themselves several important, basic questions on the concept," writes one respondent. Writes another: "It was an idiotic notion to begin with, poorly planned."

Most readers think Nielsen could have avoided the controversy, with 41.5 percent agreeing that it could have done so by delaying the announcement of the rollout until all the issues had been settled.

Nearly a third, 29.2 percent, think it could have done so by working more closely with media people about what they wanted from the ratings system.

Only 3.1 percent think Nielsen did a good job rolling out the system.

And media people think commercial ratings are an important issue. Media Life asked readers: On a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being a minor delay in issuing data and 10 being the Boston local people meter revolt, how serious a problem is the commercial ratings issue?

The answer: pretty serious, around an 8 on the 10-point scale. That figure got 27.7 percent of the response. The next largest was 7 at 15.4 percent.

Nielsen's decision to delay indefinitely commercial minute ratings means that it will be that much longer before they play a role in ad negotiations at the upfront. How much longer is the question.

More than a third of readers, 36.9 percent, believe it will be at least a year, and 23.1 percent believe it will be not for at least another two years.

And what should Nielsen do to repair the damage and gets it commercial minute ratings back on track? Media planners and buyers have lots of ideas.

Here are some of their comments:

"Talk more to advertisers and agencies instead of primarily taking direction from the media companies, particularly the big broadcasters. Commercial ratings have been treated as though they will solve the DVR issue, but this will only happen if viewers seeing the ads in DVR fast forward mode are not included in the audience estimates. Agencies could have told Nielsen this early on."

"Nielsen panicked when the network researchers/sales departments began talking to the press about 'commercial ratings.' What had been intended to be a custom product suddenly was assumed to be an industry standard. Moving forward, Nielsen needs to remain in touch with all parties--network/cable/syndication sellers AND buyers--and analyze the wants and needs before developing future products."

"Release data for review purposes, so everyone will have a measure of the impact of the methodological changes and can give input into how to best calculate viewers and address those methodological changes. Increase the sample size for better reporting. Require better log data from cable and broadcast networks, so the currency is more transparent. "

"Stop acting like the monopoly you are and start acting like a partner with providers and agencies in the advertising industry."

"Quit trying to serve up bandaid solutions. Clean it up, quit trying to pawn off 'tainted' ratings (including VCR record, DVR HUT issue, etc). Networks have program ratings as bloated as they want them, it's time to have a clean measure for trade that is as impartial as we can get it--which means in practical terms, if you can't measure it right, don't include it."

"Provide data at a more granular level and let the buyers and sellers develop their own approaches to using it. This would allow them to mine the information to best advantage and they can negotiate how the buying will be done."

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_8641.asp

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:34 AM

TV Notebook
New 'Battlestar' orbit
Sci Fi Channel drama moving to Sundays at 10
By Denise Martin Variety November 20, 2006

"Battlestar Galactica" is hitching its hopes to Sunday nights.

The critically acclaimed Sci Fi Channel drama will move from Friday nights to Sundays at 10 beginning Jan. 21.

Move will mark the first time Sci Fi has tried an original series on the night -- and the first time since its premiere in 2003 that "Battlestar" will have a new home.

Cabler usually runs a mix of original movies and acquisitions on Sunday.

Third cycle of "Battlestar" is off slightly from last season. Since its premiere Oct. 6, series has averaged 2.1 million overall viewers (down from 2.3 million) and 1.4 million in adults 18-49.

Sci Fi exec VP of programming Mark Stern said there are two reasons for moving the series.

"Broadcast and cable networks realized Friday was not such a bad timeslot, so it's not the easy lay-up it once was," he said.

In addition, he added, Sundays have bigger HUT levels and will be less competitive come January when football leaves the sked.

Frosh one-hour "Eureka" showed that "we can launch a show successfully on a new night beyond Friday," Stern said. "Sunday is the home for premiere programming and for us, that's 'Battlestar.' "

Sci Fi Channel also will debut its detective drama "The Dresden Files" Jan. 21 at 9, where it will lead into "Battlestar." Stern said the cabler is hoping that "Dresden" will bring in a new and broader audience to the latter.

"Battlestar" will have at least two major competitors when it makes the move: CBS' "Without a Trace" and ABC's "Brothers & Sisters."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954320.html?categoryid=14&cs=1

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:44 AM

Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets early for who will pay the piper for this whole OJ fiasco. My money is on...

TV Notebook
Regan turns a page
Editor's fate still unwritten

Variety November 20, 2006

The books have been printed and shipped, but their eventual fate is a mystery -- which is also true of Judith Regan, the editor behind the mega-deal.

According to publisher HarperCollins, O.J. Simpson's "If I Did It" is under an official recall. Retailers are being asked to ship boxes back unopened, and the publisher said it would destroy all copies.

However, since thousands of books have already been sent via the U.S. postal system, it will be hard to stop the sale of black-market copies via Internet sellers and retailers.

For Simpson, the payday is already at hand. Though the book is being spiked, it is far enough along that insiders said Simpson -- or at least the mysterious third-party rep Regan has said she is paying -- will get the advance in full.

Meanwhile, there's the question of what Rupert Murdoch's move means for Regan, who had positioned the TV spec-book combo as her first major Hollywood move.

The public wrist-slapping from Murdoch deepens what has already been an uneasy relationship between her and News Corp.

In the years that ReganBooks -- a quasi-autonomous imprint within HarperCollins -- has been housed at News Corp., the partnership has been undeniably profitable. Regan has paid comparatively little money to acquire what has turned into a steady stream of blockbusters by the likes of Jenna Jameson, Michael Moore, Jose Canseco and James McGreevey.

But she occasionally had reported flareups with HarperCollins topper Jane Friedman.

When her contract was set to expire several years ago, entertainment lawyer Bert Fields met with publishers around Gotham to suss out whether someone else might pick up her contract. In the end, she reupped with HarperCollins. But not long afterward, she declared a move to Hollywood in what the industry saw as a chance to create a separation between her imprint and HarperCollins as well as to further a News Corp. vision of synergy.

Since settling into her Century City office earlier this year, however, she has been relatively quiet. The O.J. project, which insiders said was close to her heart and for which she helped persuade Simpson, could have turned into a classic Regan success story: a high-profile get and blockbuster that nobody saw coming.

But there was too much heat in the backlash from pundits and even News Corp.'s own ranks.Regan didn't help her cause by issuing a 2,000-plus-word statement defending the Simpson deal that was alternately rambling and misguided. In it she spoke of having been a victim of domestic abuse herself and cited Katie Couric's news interview two years ago with Simpson; some pundits noted that Couric opting for a news piece was different from Regan conducting an interview to promote a tie-in book with him.

On Monday, Regan maintained silence, with her office forwarding all calls to a ReganBooks publicist, who did not return a call seeking comment.

As for the books, other tomes have been destroyed in the warehouse before, but industryites said they couldn't recall an incident when a title had been recalled this late in the process.

"This is what happens when you keep something secret for so long," said one person in the book biz. Book was not listed in HarperCollins' fall catalog and major retailers were told only about a week before the announcement was made that a title was even due.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954314.html?categoryid=14&cs=1

fredfa

11-21-06, 11:10 AM

Monday’s metered market over-night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

11-21-06, 11:13 AM

Thanks to all -- and especially to the stalwart dad1153 -- for pitching in while I have been in an unexpected internet wilderness.

I hope things will improve, but am not holding my breath. So anything you can do to help keep the thread current until Sunday will be appreciated. I will certainly make efforts to contribute whenever I can.

Good work from all on getting the Simpson story updated quickly.

dad1153

11-21-06, 11:20 AM

No problem Fred. Just let me know the next time you'll be out of town (this Kansas thing caught me completely off guard) or if you need time off during the holidays. I'm atheist so nothing special planned for Christmas or Thanksgiving (or, like we atheists like to call them, Monday and Thursday ;) ) which means I can cover for you if you have other plans with friends and family. Anything to get in good graces with my only hope to get a PS3 sometime before the midseason starts. :(

steverobertson

11-21-06, 11:47 AM

fredfa

11-21-06, 03:37 PM

Monday’s updated fast national over night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

11-21-06, 03:57 PM

(John was a great reporter and will be missed.)
TV Notebook
John M. Higgins, 45
Broadcasting & Cable Business Editor

(11/21/2006)

John M. Higgins, longtime journalist and business editor of Broadcasting & Cable Magazine, died last night of a heart attack in a hospital in New Jersey with his wife at his side. He was 45.

Higgins, who joined B&C in 1997 after working at Multichannel News, was known as a talented and tough-as-nails reporter. He was renowned in the media industry he covered for his knowledge of the business and for his tenacity.

“They broke the mold with John Higgins,” said Mark Robichaux, executive editor at B&C. “He was a great reporter and an even better friend. I’ll miss him.”

“He was bigger than life," said publisher Larry Oliver. “Anyone who met John Higgins always had a story about him.”

But beneath his tough exterior, Higgins was a gentle soul with a rapier wit who nurtured young reporters and worked at soup kitchens during holidays without fanfare.

“He knew everything and knew everybody,” says PJ Bednarski, executive editor. “And if he didn’t, he would in 10 minutes. He drove us crazy, and he made this magazine great.”

Higgins was almost universally liked and respected by the executives he covered. "He was a warm guy and very smart underneath the journalist's skeptical exterior," said Jeff Bewkes, president and COO of Time Warner. "We will miss him. He got a lot of things right and was decent about what he covered, even the bad things."

"I thought he was a terrific journalist," said former FCC Chairman Richard Wiley, one of Washington's mostly highly respected and influential attorneys. "There was a certain edge to his writing that was appropriate. He got right to the point. He was a keen analyst and I will really miss reading his material. I'm shocked and saddened by his passing."

Max Robins, B&C editor in chief, said that one of the attractions of joining B&C was Higgins’ reputation. His stories and scoops often bested not only the trade competition but major papers such as The New York Times and Wall Street Journal. "John Higgins was the heart and soul" of Broadcasting & Cable, said Robins. “It was a privilege working with him.”

Higgins is survived by his wife, Deborah Marrone, an attorney with the Federal Trade Commission.

Funeral and eulogy arrangements will be announced shortly and posted to this Website.

Friends and sources of John are invited to post remembrances and anecdotes to bncletters@reedbusiness.com

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6393812

fredfa

11-21-06, 03:59 PM

The Business of TV
EchoStar Loses Another Court Round
By Ted Hearn MultiChannel News Nov. 21, 2006

A federal judge in Florida ruled Monday that Dec. 1 will remain the date on which EchoStar Communications has to cease providing distant feeds of ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox programming to 850,000 customers.

EchoStar, citing various business-operations concerns, had asked U.S. Judge William Dimitrouleas to move the date of his injunction from Dec. 1 to April 16.

Noting that EchoStar has known since May 23 that a permanent nationwide injunction was likely, Dimitrouleas rejected the idea that the direct-broadcast satellite provider didn’t have sufficient time to cope with a shutoff.

“The time to prepare for such an outcome was months ago, when EchoStar first learned of the likelihood of entry of a nationwide injunction, not weeks before the injunction would take effect,” Dimitrouleas said in a three-page opinion.

Distant network signals originate outside the home market of subscribers. Subscribers who can view local network affiliates with antennas are barred from buying distant signals. EchoStar was found to have violated federal copyright law by selling distant network signals to hundreds of thousands of legally ineligible customers.

In the opinion, Dimitrouleas said he had already accommodated EchoStar to some degree by not imposing the injunction immediately Oct. 20.

“Therefore, no further extension of time is warranted. Any unfortunate interruption of service to EchoStar’s clients continues to be the responsibility of EchoStar,” Dimitrouleas added.

EchoStar has pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit a motion to stay the Dec. 1 injunction.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6393831

fredfa

11-21-06, 04:16 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
NBC's 'Heroes' hits a new ratings high
[size=4 Year's breakout hit averages a 6.9 in 18-49s [/size]
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Nov. 21, 2006

Two months into the season, NBC’s “Heroes” continues to grow. The show once again set a new series high last night after promising viewers greater insight into this catchphrase: “Save the cheerleader, save the world.”

The show averaged a 6.9 among adults 18-49 in dominating its 9 p.m. timeslot, according to Nielsen overnights, 0.2 better than its previous series high of 6.7 set a few weeks ago. It was also the highest-rated episode of any new show this season.

Among total viewers “Heroes” also achieved a series best, averaging 16 million, better than any new show since the debut of “Ugly Betty” on ABC earlier this year.

It was the highest-rated non-special Monday telecast on NBC since a January 2004 episode of “Average Joe.”

And it helped NBC, which trails ABC in the November sweeps, to a decisive Monday night victory, its eighth in 10 weeks.

“Heroes” seems to be growing in part because the producers, while introducing new mysteries each week, are also providing answers to the already-incorporated mysteries. Each week ends on a cliffhanger, which sets chatboards ablaze at 10:01 p.m.

Elsewhere last night, Fox’s “Prison Break” posted its best 18-49 rating since its season premiere in August, while “The Bachelor” fell to its lowest rating of the season on ABC.

For the night, NBC averaged a 5.0 rating and a 12 share. CBS finished second at 4.4/11, Fox third at 3.5/9, ABC fourth at 2.8/7, Univision fifth at 1.6/4 and CW sixth at 1.2/3.

At 8 p.m. NBC kicked the night off in the lead with a 4.9 average for “Deal or No Deal.” Fox was second with a 4.0 for “Prison Break,” ABC fourth with a 3.2 for an hour of Charlie Brown specials and CBS fourth with a 3.1 average for “How I Met Your Mother” (3.2) and “The Class” (2.9). Univision was fifth that hour with a 1.9 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and CW sixth with a 1.3 for “Everybody Hates Chris” (1.3) and “All of Us” (1.2).

NBC led again during the 9 p.m. hour with a 6.9 average for “Heroes,” the top-rated show of the night among 18-49s. CBS was second with a 4.3 for “Two and a Half Men” (4.7) and “Old Christine” (3.8), Fox third with a 3.0 for a repeat of “House,” ABC fourth with a 2.7 for “The Bachelor” and Univision fifth with a 1.5 for “Mundo de Fieras.” That left CW sixth with a 1.1 average for “Girlfriends” (1.2) and “The Game” (1.1).

CBS took the lead at 10 p.m. with a 5.9 for “CSI: Miami,” with NBC dropping to second with a 3.1 for “Studio 60.” ABC was third with a 2.4 for “What About Brian” and Univision fourth with a 1.3 for “Cristina.”

CBS edged NBC for the night among households, averaging an 8.6 rating and a 13 share to NBC’s 8.0/12. Fox finished third at 5.7/9, ABC fourth at 4.6/7, Univision fifth at 2.1/3 and CW sixth at 1.9/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_8693.asp

fredfa

11-21-06, 04:44 PM

TV Notebook
Spielberg calls for responsible TV
By Paul J. Gough Hollywood Reporter

NEW YORK - Steven Spielberg urged TV networks to be mindful of what they show on the air because of the effect it might have on children, and said programs like "CSI" and "Heroes" were too gruesome.

"Today we are needing to be as responsible as we can possibly be, not just thinking of our own children but our friends' and neighbors' children," Spielberg told an audience Monday at the International Emmys board of directors meeting here.

Spielberg decried on-air promotions for television shows like "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" that showed "blood and people being dissected." He also said that when his favorite TV show of the new season, NBC's "Heroes," showed someone cut in half in the 9 p.m. hour, he sent his younger children out of the room.

"I'm a parent who is very concerned," he said.

Spielberg said that the TV landscape was much more "homogenized" 20 years ago, even seven or eight years ago. One of his shows, "ER," wouldn't have been on the air 20 years ago because of its graphic depictions.

Two of Spielberg's movies, "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan," have generated controversy during their television airings with uncut language and graphic depictions. But Spielberg has also made a famous edit to the DVD release of "E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial," where a government agent wielded a gun in the original film and then held a walkie-talkie in the DVD.

In a free-ranging hour of interview with former NBC News correspondent Garrick Utley and questions from the audience, Spielberg said iPod video may be all the rage but count his films out from tailoring his films to fit the small screen.

"That's one medium where I have to draw the line," he said. "We'll shoot for television and the movies and let there be a wide gap" between that and the small 3-inch screen. He also said that he felt that people are social animals who will choose to go out to a movie rather than watch a show on widescreen.

"I don't think movie theaters will ever go away," Spielberg said.

But the producer-director who got his start in TV directing Joan Crawford for a 1969 episode of Rod Serling's "Night Gallery" isn't lacking for work on screens of any kind. He's developing a 10- or 11-hour miniseries about the U.S. war against Japan in the Pacific Theatre during World War II, part of the 20% of his time that he estimated he worked on TV projects compared with 80% for films.

He called working on miniseries "the most fun I have" and especially liked the ability to develop characters. He pointed to HBO's "Band of Brothers," which developed characters over hours rather than the eight to 10 minutes that he said was available in a two-hour feature film.

Another project is "On the Lot," a Mark Burnett-Spielberg TV series that will choose one of 16 aspiring filmmakers for a development deal with DreamWorks, Spielberg's studio. It will air on Fox. And of course there's another film coming in the "Indiana Jones" series, which Spielberg was relatively mum about.

"There's still life in the series," Spielberg said.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyid=2006-11-21T034827Z_01_N20328591_RTRUKOC_0_US-SPIELBERG.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

harley1

11-21-06, 05:52 PM

News Corp. Accused of Hush Money Offer

By HILLEL ITALIE

The O.J. Simpson book saga took another twist Tuesday when his former sister-in-law, Denise Brown, accused the media company behind the project of trying to buy her family's silence for "millions of dollars."

Simpson's book, "If I did it," was a sequel few had dared conceive, with Simpson _ acquitted of murdering his ex-wife and her friend but later found liable in civil court _ describing how he would have killed them.

A spokesman for News Corp., owner of Fox Broadcasting and publisher HarperCollins, confirmed that the company had conversations with representatives of Nicole Brown Simpson's and Ron Goldman's families over the past week and that the families were offered all profits from the planned Simpson book and television show, but he denied that it was hush money.

"There were no strings attached," News Corp. spokesman Andrew Butcher said.

Denise Brown told NBC's "Today" show Tuesday that her family's response was "Absolutely not."

"They wanted to offer us millions of dollars. Millions of dollars for, like, 'Oh, I'm sorry' money. But they were still going to air the show," Brown said. "We just thought, 'oh my god.' What they're trying to do is trying to keep us quiet, trying to make this like hush money, trying to go around the civil verdict, giving us this money to keep our mouths shut."

Any fascination with Simpson's shocking return to public life was overcome by revulsion and disbelief from the public.

Even News Corp's Rupert Murdoch, a media king with a famous taste for scandal, couldn't stand it anymore. On Monday, he canceled the whole thing, less than a week after it was announced.

"I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project," Murdoch said. "We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson."

"If I Did It" had been scheduled to air as a two-part interview Nov. 27 and Nov. 29 on Fox, with the book to follow on Nov. 30. HarperCollins spokeswoman Erin Crum said some copies had already been shipped to stores but would be recalled, and all copies would be destroyed.

Simpson's attorney, Yale Galanter, told The Associated Press: "We had known for three or four days that this was a possibility."

"There are only three possible reactions: anger, happiness or indifference. He's totally indifferent about the fact that it's been canceled," Galanter said.

He said he didn't know if Simpson was paid upfront.

Simpson was acquitted of murder in 1995 but was later found liable for the deaths in a wrongful-death suit filed by the Goldman family. Simpson has failed to pay the $33.5 million judgment against him in the civil case. His NFL pension and his Florida home cannot legally be seized. He and the families of the victims have wrangled over the money in court for years.

Ron Goldman's sister, Kim Goldman, said on CBS' "The Early Show" Tuesday that the family would take legal action to collect any money Simpson received from the deal. Denise Brown went farther, saying that money was being hidden for Simpson so he didn't have to pay the civil judgment. "The courts one day will find out who that person is," Brown said.

Simpson told the AP in a phone interview late Monday he could not comment on the situation "until I know legally where I stand."

"I would like nothing better than to straighten out some things that have been mischaracterized," he said. "But I think I'm legally muzzled at this point."

Sensation has long been in News Corp's game, but the Simpson book drew almost universal anger _ from those who knew Goldman and Brown, from booksellers and advertisers, even from Fox News Channel personality Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly urged a boycott of any company that advertised on the special.

A dozen Fox network affiliates said they would not air the two-part special, and numerous stores had either declined to sell the book or had promised to donate any profits to charity.

"I really don't think there would have been very many advertisers who would have been willing to participate in this show," said Brad Adgate of the ad buying firm Horizon Media.

With little advertising, Fox would miss the chance to profit from the show. If there were no advertisers, the show wouldn't even be rated by Nielsen Media Research _ so the number of people watching would have done nothing to help Fox's season average, he said.

The cancellation was a stunning rebuke to ReganBooks _ a high-profile imprint of HarperCollins _ and Judith Regan, who had labeled the book and interview Simpson's "confession." She insisted that she had done it not for money, but as a victim of domestic violence anxious to face down a man she believed got away, literally, with murder.

ReganBooks is known for gossipy best-sellers such as Jose Canseco's "Juiced" and Jenna Jameson's "How to Make Love Like a Porn Star." Regan, one of publishing's most driven and forceful personalities, did not immediately respond to requests for an interview.

The TV special was to air on two of the final three nights of the November sweeps, when ratings are watched closely to set local advertising rates. It has been a particularly tough fall for Fox, which has seen none of its new shows catch on and is waiting for the January appearances of "American Idol" and "24."

The closest precedent for such an about-face came when CBS yanked a miniseries about Ronald Reagan from its schedule in 2003 when complaints were raised about its accuracy. It was seen on CBS' sister premium-cable channel, Showtime, instead.

One Fox affiliate station manager said he wasn't going to air the special because he was concerned that, whether or not Simpson was guilty, he'd still be profiting from murders.

"I have my own moral compass and this was easy," said Bill Lamb, general manager of WDRB in Louisville.

During an appearance on CNN's "Larry King Live," Fred Goldman, Ron's father, expressed appreciation to anyone who opposed the book.

"We want to say thank you, thank you for everyone in this country who raised their voice and stood up for the right thing," Goldman said.

Numerous books have been withdrawn over the years because of possible plagiarism, most recently Kaavya Viswanathan's "How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life," but removal simply for objectionable content is exceptionally rare. In the early 1990s, Simon & Schuster canceled Bret Easton Ellis' "American Pyscho," a graphic account of a serial killer. The novel was released by Random House Inc., and later made into a feature film, an improbable fate for Simpson's book.

Sales for "If I Did It," had been strong, but not sensational. It cracked the top 20 of Amazon.com last weekend, but by Monday afternoon, at the time its cancellation was announced, the book had fallen to No. 51.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/21/D8LHHG2G0.html

harley1

11-21-06, 06:09 PM

Third 'Dateline' to Replace 'Lights' on Tuesdays

By Michele Greppi

"Dateline NBC" is getting a third night per week beginning Dec. 26, when 8 p.m. Tuesdays becomes a regular slot for the NBC newsmagazine. "Dateline" has been airing on Saturdays and will return to Sundays after the NFL TV season is over, ending NBC's Sunday night football franchise.

The magazine will displace "Friday Night Lights" on Tuesdays. There was no immediate word from NBC about where the critically adored but ratings-challenged drama will go, and an NBC spokesperson declined to comment on the schedule change.

NBC recently raised its order for "Friday" to a full season and has repeatedly declared its intention to be patient with the show in hopes it will find an audience.

The good news for "Dateline" illustrates the ironic facts of life for the newsmagazine, which has long expanded or contracted to suit the needs of the entertainment lineup. It was only two weeks ago that 15 to 17 people, including two correspondents, were laid off as part of NBC Universal's goal to cut 700 jobs and $750 million per year by the end of 2008. "Dateline" took the biggest cuts at NBC News.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11109

tkmedia2

11-21-06, 06:54 PM

old article but... full of info for the small amount of non HD fans of the show...

A ray of sunshine for 'It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia'
The sun continues to shine for local lad Rob McElhenney.
By Gail Shister Philadelphia Inquirer

FX has ordered a 15-episode, third season of Robbie Mac's sitcom, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, the network announced yesterday. Production begins in March for a summer debut.

Sunny's future had been heavily clouded.

Though its ratings improved 15 percent over the previous season, Sunny averaged only 1.3 million total viewers last season, and didn't bring in big advertising dollars. Still, FX Entertainment chief John Landgraf has faith in the show.

"The bottom line is that I believe in it creatively," he says. "I think it's really funny, a comedic expression of FX's brand. I love working with the guys. We just had to figure out how to produce it more cost-efficiently."

To that end, creator-executive producer McElhenney and his costars agreed to no salary hikes until (or if) FX orders additional seasons. Then the real cheesecake begins.

"John and FX are really hanging their butts out there for us this year, because we're not a big hit," says Robbie Mac, 29, a St. Joseph's Prep grad. "They're investing in the show, which we appreciate. It's not a big issue with us. We're being compensated very well."

Also, Landgraf says he wants to increase the number of episodes produced each season (seven in the first; 10 in the second). A basic-cable show must have at least 80 episodes to reach syndication, he says.

Sunny costars Glenn Howerton, Charlie Day and Kaitlin Olson as politically incorrect Philly pals running a loser bar here. Danny DeVito, who joined the cast last season, will return for all 15 episodes. In addition, he's agreed to stick around for up to three more seasons.

"We didn't even have to ask. He offered," McElhenney says. "Danny had a really good time and we all became good friends. He likes hanging out with us."

Though twice the age of his costars, DeVito is a regular at off-campus cast parties.

He brought his wife, Rhea Perlman, daughter Lucy and several of her friends to a "high school" blast at Day's house. The theme: Dress the way you did in high school.

For Robbie Mac, that meant earrings, flannel shirt and black combat boots.

At the Prep, "I loved it, but I was a real pain," he recalls. "I overcompensated for being small and underdeveloped by being obnoxious and loud. I was a major headache for my parents and the school."

Speaking of major headaches, McElhenney and his buds Howerton and Day wrote virtually every episode the last two seasons. This season, three to four staff writers will be hired.

"It's a big deal," Robbie Mac says. "Hopefully, it will be easier than last year, but you never know. If it doesn't work out, we're prepared to write all 15 episodes. We've got it down to a science."

McElhenney wants to shoot on location in Philly for two weeks this season - double last season's total. The odds "are likely," according to Landgraf.

Hit comedies on basic cable are rare, and Sunny has the potential to become FX's first. Landgraf says he's holding back several other sitcoms in development so Sunny doesn't have to share the spotlight this season.

"People expect our original series to take risks. We tend to have characters on our air who are complicated and dark. The characters on Sunny are worthy to stand on the same stage as antiheroes like Tommy Gavin Rescue Me], Vic Mackey The Shield] and Christian Troy Nip/Tuck]."

On the personal side, Robbie Mac is riding a wave. Literally.

After Sunny wrapped production in July, he learned how to surf during his travels to Central America and Mexico.

"I'm a terrible surfer," he says. "I can paddle out, get up and surf, but I almost get into a fistfight every time because I cut off the other surfers. I don't do it on purpose. How else am I going to learn?"

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/magazine/daily/15954762.htm

CPanther95

11-21-06, 06:57 PM

Turn the channel, Spielberg.

Demodave

11-21-06, 07:37 PM

keenan

11-21-06, 08:15 PM

Turn the channel, Spielberg.
No sh!t.

tkmedia2

11-21-06, 08:28 PM

I find it amazing that the "Always Sunny" gang are able to do the show with such limited resources compared to most shows. Being behind and in front of the camera for almost every episode.

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:05 PM

TV Notebook
O.J. Simpson's TV Interview: The Story Doesn't End
By Wayne Friedman Media Post November 21, 2006

In light of yesterday's announcement from News Corp concerning cancellation of O.J. Simpson's TV interview and book--get ready for O.J. Simpson's new book and his TV interview to come out.

You heard right.

Of course, these won't be official versions. But the betting is that there'll be a black market book, and a black market TV interview on the Internet somewhere. (Did someone say YouTube?). The book has been written, published and produced. It's just not on retailers' book shelves. Additionally, the TV interview is already in the can.

Piracy is still rampant on the Internet and in other places (though since being acquired by Google and becoming a good Internet citizen, YouTube is looking to go straight with big media companies.)

Overall, analysts speculate that News Corp.'s decision--which comes less than a week after its Fox network unit released the news of a November sweeps TV interview and a book debut--won't mean the end of Simpson or the story.

ReganBooks has asked book retailers to ship back boxes of the Simpson book unopened. But the likelihood of a least one book slipping out through the illegal part of Internet ether is very possible.

And then TV news magazines are likely to pick it all up. Subsequent lawsuits, perhaps against Simpson and other parties, will come to the fore. There'll be other stories to be unearthed--like that mysterious Simpson intermediary paid a fee by Judith Regan, publisher of ReganBooks and the Simpson book. Sources say Simpson already got a $3.5 million advance on that book--which is another tale to tell.

What of Judith Regan, now that Rupert Murdoch himself has pulled the rug out from under her? Probably not much. Not from the publisher who has made an art of publishing highly profitable tomes from highly public controversial figures--Jenna Jameson, Michael Moore, Jose Canseco and James McGreevey.

The Simpson story doesn't die because too much media is already in motion--and those wildly interested aficionados of everything Simpson have had their taste buds enticed once again.

http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showTodaysArticle&art_type=34

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:11 PM

TV Notebook
CNN, Grace sued for causing suicide
Associated Press November 22, 2006

Relatives of a missing boy's mother who killed herself after aggressive questioning by CNN's Nancy Grace sued the network and the talk-show host Tuesday, claiming Grace caused emotional distress that led to the suicide.

Melinda Duckett committed suicide Sept. 8, a day after Grace's show on CNN Headline News aired a segment in which Grace grilled Duckett about her whereabouts Aug. 27 -- the day 2-year-old Trenton Duckett was reported missing.

Authorities, who said last week they believe the boy is alive, have named Melinda Duckett as the prime suspect in his disappearance.

Jay Paul Deratany, the attorney representing Duckett's estate, said Tuesday that Grace encouraged Duckett to appear on her show by saying the goal was to draw public attention to help find Trenton.

"It's not just about the questioning, it's about the misrepresentation with the knowledge that she was emotionally distraught," Deratany said. The attorney said Grace improperly took on the role of a law enforcement officer.

CNN Headline News declined to comment specifically on the lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages.

"We stand by Nancy Grace and fully support her, as we have from the beginning of this matter," a spokeswoman said in a news release Tuesday.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3i16f84bda028f8f32f25baf4ce5ad4002

fredfa

11-21-06, 09:15 PM

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

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:18 PM

November Sweeps (Nielsen Watch)
ABC sees ratings 'Stars'
'Heroes' holds strong to slot

By Rick Kissell Variety November 21, 2006

ABC kicked up its heels last week as the final installments of "Dancing With the Stars" contributed to the net's highest-rated frame of the season.

The Alphabet won in adults 18-49 for the eighth time in the nine-week-old season and is now sitting pretty to win the November sweep in the demo. Nine nights were left to be counted, but ABC is projected to win while CBS and NBC could go down to the wire for second.

The Eye should prevail in its core 25-54 demo while winning yet again in total viewers.

Looking at the Nov. 13-19 sesh, ABC's 4.4 rating/12 share in adults 18-49 bested CBS (4.0/11) and NBC (3.7/10), according to Nielsen estimates, with fourth-place Fox again not very competitive (2.7/7). The CW (1.5/4) edged out Univision (1.4/4) for fifth.

For a third straight week, NBC -- with strong additions "Heroes," "Sunday Night Football" and "Deal or No Deal" -- was the only broadcaster showing year-to-year gains.

ABC and CBS tied for the adults 25-54 lead (5.1/12), while the Alphabet ruled once again in persons 12-34 (3.1/10) and the Eye had it in total viewers (13.4 million to 13.0 for ABC).

ABC, which matched its highest-rated week in 18-49 since the Oscars in late February, claimed four of the week's top five spots in the demo, led by No. 1 "Grey's Anatomy" (8.7/21 in 18-49, 20.92 million viewers overall) and No. 2 "Desperate Housewives" (8.6/19, 21.63m).

CBS drama "CSI" ran third in 18-49 (8.0/19, 24.11m), followed by Tuesday's "Dancing With the Stars" performance show (7.5/20, 26.80m) and Wednesday's fall finale of the skein (7.1/19, 27.52m).

"Dancing" telecasts were also the top two programs of the week in total viewers, lifting ABC to its best frame by this measure since Super Bowl week in early February.

Other ABC highlights included one of the top-rated segs to date for Sunday rookie "Brothers & Sisters" (5.4/13, 13.04m) and a good showing for Barbara Walters two-night spec "30 Mistakes in 30 Years." Thursday seg (4.8/13 in 18-49, 12.91m) performed well behind "Grey's Anatomy," and Friday's conclusion (2/9/9, 9.31m) logged the net's best demo delivery in the 10 o'clock hour since April.

Wednesday's two-hour preem of "Day Break" did OK (3.6/9, 10.16m), with the show settling into its regular 9 o'clock slot this week.

For the sweep, ABC was averaging a 4.2 rating in 18-49 through Monday, followed by CBS and NBC (both at 3.9) and Fox at 2.7. Several key events on various nets have yet to play, but Daily Variety projects the Alphabet will win the month in the key demo race with a 4.1 rating.

CBS and NBC will be battling for second, with the Peacock having the inside track at perhaps a 4.0.

Last week, CBS got a boost from the final 20 minutes of the Dallas-Indianapolis NFL late-afternoon game on Sunday -- the highest-rated contest on any net this season -- as the primetime overrun averaged a big 10.1 rating/30 share in 18-49.

That led into the top-rated "60 Minutes" of the season in both adults 25-54 (5.5/14) and total viewers (19.16m). "The Amazing Race" (4.1/9 in 18-49, 12.40m) also hit highs.

The Eye led Thursday among young adults for the first time this season (Daily Variety, Nov. 20), as "CSI" (8.0/19 in 18-49, 24.11m) matched or set season highs in key categories and rookie lead-out drama "Shark" posted its best numbers to date (4.4/12 in 18-49, 12.52m).

Also hitting a season high was Monday drama "CSI: Miami" (6.3/16, 18.77m), which beat the combined deliveries of rival dramas "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" on NBC (3.1/8, 7.58m) and "What About Brian" on ABC (2.3/6, 5.21m).

New drama "3 Lbs." was modest in its bow Tuesday (2.9/8, 9.86m).

For NBC, "Heroes" (6.5/16 in 18-49, 15.08m) dominated its 9 o'clock slot Monday, forming a strong one-two combo with lead-in "Deal or No Deal" (5.5/14, 18.07m), which hit season-high scores.

On Monday of the current week, "Heroes" rose even higher (6.9/16, 16.03m), again establishing the best demo score for a rookie series in the past two seasons. It also topped the series preem of "ER" in 18-49 (6.8/18) to become NBC's top-rated entertainment series telecast of the fall.

Also in the week's top 10 among adults 18-49 were "Sunday Night Football" (5.7/14 in 18-49, 14.99m) and Thursday's "ER" (5.5/15, 12.52m).

Fourth-place Fox looked good in a few spots, including Monday at 8, where "Prison Break" (3.8/10 in 18-49, 9.21m) was on the rise. Skein then achieved a fall high on Monday of the current week (4.0/10, 9.62m) in advance of next week's fall finale.

"House" was again a rock for Fox on Tuesday (6.2/15, 14.80m), and "Bones" hit a season high on Wednesday (2.9/8, 7.83m).

Net's Sunday comedies were above average too, with "Family Guy" (4.6/10 in 18-49, 9.30m) leading the way and standing as the week's No. 1 program in men 18-34 (7.3/19).

The CW was in line with the WB vs. the same week a year ago, with the new net having its best Sunday of the season thanks to the season preem of "Reba" at 7:30 (1.6/4 in 18-49, 4.34m).

Wednesday's "America's Next Top Model" was again the CW's top show (2.2/6 in 18-49, 4.71m), even though it was subpar opposite the "Dancing With the Stars" finale.

Univision was paced by the best week since its April premiere for "La Fea Mas Bella," which averaged 5 million viewers in its five airings.

Among the ad-supported cable nets there was something of an upset as USA (1.01 rating in 18-49, 2.83 million viewers overall) edged out ESPN (0.96 rating, 2.66m). Sports net's "Monday Night Football" was the top cable program of the frame (3.6/10 in 18-49, 9.59m), but that repped its lowest score this fall.

Boosting USA, in addition to Monday wrestling staple "WWE Raw," was Friday's original episode of "Monk" (1.2/4 in 18-49, 3.95m).

FX's "Nip/Tuck" was cable's top scripted series of the week in 18-49 (1.9/5), 25-54 (1.7/4) and 18-34 (2.2/7).

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954356.html?categoryid=14&cs=1

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:35 PM

The Business of TV
CBS, WGA still at loggerheads
By Carl DiOrio Hollywood Reporter November 21, 2006

CBS' lead negotiator circulated a memo to network management Monday suggesting that the WGA has misrepresented its news-contract offer, a multiyear package on which guild membership is currently voting.

CBS senior vp industry relations Harry Isaacs sent the memo to senior managers in New York and Los Angeles "to clear up some of the public mischaracterizations the guild has made about our offer."

The Isaacs memo goes on to detail the terms of the network's latest offer, including annual pay raises of 3% for employees in TV and network radio and 2% for those in local radio.

WGA East executive director Mona Mangan issued a statement in response to a management suggestion that the guild had not explained terms of the contract proposal sufficiently to members.

"When we informed the WGA-CBS membership of the impending contract vote, we sent each guild member a detailed outline of the entire proposal they will vote on," Mangan said. "We fully expected CBS to present these same employees with the CBS perspective. Our membership is smart and informed. We're confident that they will see this offer as exactly what it is -- and reject it. We hope CBS will finally get the message that we've been sending them for 20 months: Their offer is unacceptable."

About 500 CBS newswriters, editors, desk and production assistants, graphic artists, promotion writers and researchers in New York, Washington, Chicago and Los Angeles continue to work under terms of a contract that expired in April 2005.

The network has set a Nov. 30 deadline for accepting the proposal. A WGAE spokeswoman said the results of ongoing membership voting should be available by Nov. 29.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3i8083483a56ce0c9397184ad47e921f33

dad1153

11-21-06, 09:37 PM

Critic’s Notebook
For MSNBC, Time to Get Political
November's Shouting Over, A Network Finds Its Voice
From Howard Kurtz's Washington Post Media Notes Column Nov. 20, 2006

Since political shows like 'Hardball' are already in full 2008 presidential campaign mode I'm surprised Matthews hasn't booked this guy already: http://www.zod2008.com/. Tough, truthful and with an agenda. What's not to love? He's got my vote! :D ;) :p

tkmedia2

11-21-06, 11:25 PM

Acclaimed 'Arrested Development' Series Begins on MSN Video
Press Release Source: Microsoft Corp.
Tuesday November 21, 12:01 am ET

In addition to all three seasons of the show, MSN unveils a new video player designed to enhance the experience of long-form video.

REDMOND, Wash., Nov. 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- MSN announced that beginning today episodes of the Emmy award-winning comedy "Arrested Development" will be streamed on demand on MSN® Video and at no cost to viewers. The first five episodes are available today at http://arresteddevelopment.msn.com and, starting Dec. 15, three new episodes will be added every three weeks. All 53 episodes from the three seasons of the show will be rolled out within the next year.

The "Arrested Development" episodes will be running with a new MSN Video player designed to create a better viewing experience of long-form video. The new playback experience will set the standard for future long-form content available on MSN Video, and will include added functionality. The player provides viewers with many options to return to an episode they were watching if there is an interruption by automatically finding the last position in the episode before the interruption, and also at any time allowing the user to jump back 15 seconds. In addition, viewers have the ability to send a link of their favorite moment within an episode to their friends. The player can also present the show in a larger "sit-back" view with great quality and will still allow viewers to see their task bar to keep an eye on e-mail and instant messages.

"We're thrilled to present this critically acclaimed show to the MSN audience along with exclusive online content for the ultimate 'Arrested Development' fans," said Rob Bennett, general manager of Entertainment and Video Services for MSN. "We've created a number of innovative new features to enhance the video experience for 'Arrested Development,' and will lead the industry in improving the overall experience for watching long-form video content online."

Future additional content will include deleted scenes, blooper reels and related DVD content. Interactive features such as message boards, cast information, fan areas, blogging helpers, and subscription options for newsletters and RSS feeds will collectively provide a deeper community experience for fans of the show.

Produced by Twentieth Century Fox Television and Imagine Entertainment, the multiple-award-winning "Arrested Development" ran for three years on FOX and was one of the most celebrated comedies in the network's history. It revolves around Michael Bluth (Jason Bateman), who is doing his best to pick up the pieces and keep his offbeat family from falling apart after his father, George Bluth (Jeffrey Tambor), is locked up for fraud. "Arrested Development" content on MSN will be available at http://arresteddevelopment.msn.com . Currently this content is only available to U.S. viewers.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-21-2006/0004478272&EDATE=

dad1153

11-21-06, 11:58 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Media investors can't buy a better image
Brian Lowry's Variety 'Tuning In' Column Nov. 22, 2006

Not to sound like a conspiracy nut, but is anyone else wary of private equity firms swooping in to acquire beleaguered media companies, given that shadowy corporate interests have come to represent such popular villains in movies and TV?

Look no further than the latest addition to the James Bond series, "Casino Royale," where the bad guy sets considerable mayhem in motion not out of a desire to rule the world but rather to cash in by shorting stocks. He follows the power-mad media baron played by Jonathan Pryce in the 1997 Bond adventure "Tomorrow Never Dies," who attempts to trigger World War III to augment his satellite-TV empire.

Somehow, it's not quite the Cold War and threat of nuclear annihilation as stakes go.

Then again, greedy moguls have become a favorite whipping boy in movies and TV, reflecting both nagging distrust of big money and the need to replace the dated jingoistic heavies (Soviets! Chinese! The original WWII Axis of Evil, not the new one!) of years gone by.

The '70s "Superman" series starring Christopher Reeve helped get this ball rolling, transforming the Man of Steel's nemesis, Lex Luthor, into a twisted real-estate tycoon plotting to drop California into the ocean to increase the value of his landlocked property -- Donald Trump, if you will, albeit with blatantly bogus hair and more misanthropic tendencies.

More recent examples include the corporate cartels puppet-mastering the government in the Fox programs "Prison Break" and "24," as well as the jarring transformation of "The Manchurian Candidate" remake, where the brain-manipulating forces evolved from being sneaky Communists into a global conglomerate.

As a practical matter, well-heeled corporate overseers are a low-risk target, inasmuch as they're unlikely to take offense or protest outside studios, which is no doubt a major factor in their becoming such popular foils. What minimal outcry there has been can be seen in whining by the conservative Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute, which complains that movies depict businessmen overwhelmingly "as either criminals or simply unethical" and became positively apoplectic over films like "Syriana" and "The Constant Gardener," where conglomerates ruthlessly put profit ahead of principle.

The irony is that this disdain for corporations gained momentum as studios and networks were absorbed into larger and larger companies, a sign not only of suspicion toward those institutions but a well-established sense of perversity among media pros, who invariably savor biting the hands that feed them.

The negative portrayals of big business are also emblematic of boorish behavior by some of these entities, which explains why News Corp.'s about-face this week -- canceling its planned O.J. Simpson book and related Fox special -- took so many by surprise: For quite awhile now, the question "Have you no shame?" in media circles has simply been a rhetorical one.

Being held in such low esteem, however, doesn't appear to be dissuading equity firms and hedge funds from pouring billions into the entertainment sector. Recent deals include the buyout of Spanish-language Univision and radio behemoth Clear Channel, as well as private bids for Tribune Co. Such investors continue to exhibit a healthy appetite for the movie business, too, despite having sand kicked in their face publicity-wise and, more significantly, frequent demonstrations of the adage "A fool and his money are soon parted," with many funds taking a financial bath.

When the smoke ultimately clears, perhaps the private equity infusion will be good news for media companies, with investors aspiring to do nothing more than turn a profit and, not incidentally, rub elbows with a few stars -- always an intangible part of this equation. And who knows, rescued from Wall Street's unyielding demands, maybe creative types and newshounds will come to look more kindly upon these faceless financiers.

That's an enticing scenario, but probably one that smacks of wishful thinking on both sides. Because just as throwing a few bucks into the media mix won't generate more favorable press or better treatment within movies for the money men, history shows that once someone gets their hooks into Hollywood and vice versa, almost inevitably, what the really want to do is direct.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954336.html?categoryid=1682&cs=1

dad1153

11-21-06, 11:59 PM

TV Q&A
Ask Matt
Ask Matt's column at TVGuide.com November 20, 2006
By Matt Roush TVGuide.com TV Critic

Question: I share your puzzlement about Jericho, which I also watch regularly. I think I figured it out, though. In three simple words: Lost for Republicans. I have my theories about this, but am more interested in yours. Discuss!— Don

Matt Roush: Ha! I've told a number of execs at CBS and the Paramount studio (which produces Jericho) much the same thing, albeit jokingly. One of them calls it "the feel-good postapocalyptic show of the year." And so it is. (The minute Skeet Ulrich's face begins to peel off from radiation exposure, you can contradict me.) While in many ways Jericho is an earnest drama about family and community survival in the wake of nuclear disaster (off in the distance, mind you), with the usual intrigues and romances offset by a concern that lawlessness could usurp what's left of civilization, I wouldn't be surprised if cultural theorists and academicians aren't preparing papers and studies about Jericho as a repudiation of big-city — or, god help us, liberal — so-called "values" or some such hogwash. What puzzles me most about Jericho is that in many ways this is just the sort of show I ordinarily like. I just find everything about it — the characters, the writing, even the adventure sequences — stubbornly mundane. But for those who love it: Godspeed. A note for those who missed the news: Jericho will take a hiatus after the Nov. 29 "fall cliff-hanger," to be replaced for a while by King of Queens, and will return with new episodes in February. Just so you don't think the world is coming to an end when it disappears.

Question: In a recent column of yours, the discussion revolved around Battlestar Galactica going the Babylon 5 route and neatly tying up the series after five years. This all actually sounds pretty good to me, for more than just BSG: Take shows like Jericho or Smallville. They could take the current renditions to their natural conclusion and then establish a new series picking up where the old one left off. For Jericho, the world has indeed experienced a nuclear war, but mankind has survived. Now mankind must reestablish itself and find common ground. For BSG, the excitement now is the journey to find Earth and the trials and tribulations of getting there. The next step would logically play out that once they find Earth, they have to figure out how to fit in. Would the Galacticans be welcomed with open arms? Would their beliefs be in total conflict with those on Earth? Would other nations on the planet see the folly of current disagreements and band together to fight the Cylons? With this concept, wouldn't it still be letting go while delving into new and exciting territory, but with familiar characters and the original concept?— James

Matt Roush: What you're really talking about, in a roundabout way, is spin-offs. Next Generation-style spin-offs, but still spin-offs. Battlestar producers are already readying a "prequel" in Caprica, so who's to say that it's not a good idea to develop sequels? A lot of this would have to hinge on how well these shows perform in the long run. If Battlestar's numbers stay consistent but low throughout its run, I wouldn't see much incentive for Sci Fi to try extending the franchise yet again (especially if the show were to become, literally, earthbound). Jericho, though surprisingly successful, isn't exactly a runaway hit, and it's awfully premature to speculate about a follow-up.

Question: I've noticed many questions in your column, and in other places, in which viewers express impatience with some of their favorite TV shows, such as Lost, Heroes or last season's Invasion. Frankly, it's driving me nuts. Why can't people just enjoy their shows rather than want a payoff every week? Do we have such short attention spans that we can't just sit back, relax and let the show's producers and writers take us on their journey? Is everyone a TV critic today? Or have people always been this way, and it's just that now all of us can easily see viewer mindsets on blogs and Q&A forums? Oh, and by the way, you really need to talk up Supernatural more! It really has become one of the best shows on TV!— John

Matt Roush: Believe me, Supernatural's on my list — just let me survive sweeps first. I of course agree with you that people need to get a grip when watching TV, but this particular column would be useless if I didn't also believe that everyone's entitled to an opinion. You can even find it in the editor's note from when I first joined TV Guide, but I've long held to the belief that everyone really is a TV critic, in their own fashion, and the rise of the Internet has only democratized the idea of fandom. I do think it can get out of hand, and there's an awful lot of piling-on when it comes to a medium that we should be thrilled delivers as much good product as it does every single week. It's a messy business, to be sure, and not always pretty to observe. But at least it isn't boring.

Question: I've noticed this TV season that all the big networks are putting full, free episodes on their websites. I know last year you could only watch episodes this way if you paid through iTunes or Google Video. Obviously it's a great thing for viewers at home: No longer are we held hostage by having to watch a program on a certain day or certain time. Now we can watch episodes whenever we want, even at work! I would think this service would result in overall lower ratings, though, so why did the networks decide to do it? Is it because more TV shows now are story-driven, and networks fear that if people miss an episode, they may stop watching, thinking they've missed too much? Do you think this could result in people canceling their cable subscriptions? Do you think this could affect DVD sales, since now people don't have to buy a DVD set to watch the episodes they missed?— Adam B.

Matt Roush: It's still in the early days, and way too soon to predict the impact of these new methods of delivering TV shows. For now, it's a win for the networks, keeping their shows out there so people with the desire and ability to watch TV on their computers can do so. It can enhance a show's visibility and exposure, and it makes it easier for viewers to keep up with their favorites. But we're a very long way from the day when a majority of people would rather download a show than tune in on their actual TV sets. I'm not there yet, that's for sure.

Question: What are the chances that The Nine won't get canceled? I know it is not doing well in the ratings, but the last few episodes have started to pick up.— Cathy

Matt Roush: We're probably a week or more away from an actual call being made. I'd hate to think its fate rests on this week's episode, since it is being aired the night before Thanksgiving, but no doubt its performance on the last night of sweeps (Nov. 29) will be a factor in analyzing how it's trending. I know that the network still believes in The Nine and is frustrated by its performance. If that weren't the case, it would already be gone by now. But will it get a full season on Wednesday, the way Invasion did last year? I really haven't a clue.

Question: I have always appreciated how you keep spoilers out of your discussion of current television shows. I read spoilers for a couple of seasons of Gilmore Girls, but then I decided I enjoyed not knowing what was coming and stopped reading all the spoiler sites before Season 6. I haven't been thrilled with this season, mostly because I don't like Christopher's character and feel like Lorelai really regresses when she's around him, but I am still watching, at least for now. I have to admit that I was less than thrilled to see the spoiler about Lorelai and Christopher on the cover of TV Guide a few weeks ago. Since I know you have advocated going spoiler-free in the past, I was wondering if you had any comment about spoilers on the cover, and if this is going to be more of a regular occurrence. If people want to read spoilers, that's fine, but those of us who just want to watch the story unfold should be allowed to do that without being bombarded with information we'd rather not have. It makes me miss those innocent TV-watching days before the Internet.— Kari B.

Matt Roush: It really isn't my policy or place to comment on the magazine's editorial decisions, especially ones I'm not a part of, but in this case, as part of a sweeps preview, I felt this "spoiler" headline was pretty harmless (though this wasn't the only complaint I got about it), in part because the show was doing absolutely nothing to keep it a secret. In fact, it looked to me like the CW was trumpeting the marriage as part of its own sweeps promotions. I wouldn't expect to see spoilers blared on our covers as a "regular occurrence," but I'm sorry if this one ruined your enjoyment of that blessed event. (And yes, I was being sarcastic there.)

Question: It seems the term "family values" may have touched a nerve a few weeks ago. I never thought the term could mean such vastly different things. Anyway, the reason I see Friday Night Lights as a family show is this: Sure, my family would watch popular shows like Seinfeld and Friends together. Heck, when I was younger, we even watched Family Matters together, but we never talked about them. Once they were over, that was it. But when an episode of The West Wing touched on a particularly interesting topic, my parents would discuss it with my brother and me at the dinner table the following night. I can't tell you how many times a well-written show brought my family closer together after it was over. If a show about sportsmanship and people making mistakes isn't worthy of being watched by families, I don't know what is. And is it just me, or did the Nov. 7 episode of Friday Night Lights put to rest the "family values" argument once and for all? A kid flew off the handle and beat someone up, then lied about it, and his punishment after he got caught lying was to get the only thing he really cares about taken away from him. I don't have children myself, but if I did I would want them to watch this.— Dan C.

Matt Roush: I couldn't agree more. Look for the show to appear on best-of-year and top-10 lists everywhere in the next month.

Question: I'm really not one to write in about how the networks should schedule their programs, but I've found the discussions on which show ABC should schedule after Lost quite interesting! I think people have had a lot of good ideas, but then I started thinking about what I tend to watch after Lost, since it's never actually been Invasion or The Nine; I always switch over to Bravo for Project Runway or Top Chef. I watch very little reality TV, but I find competition shows where contestants have to prove they're the best at something involving an actual skill really fun to watch. I know "intelligent" and "reality show" might be an oxymoron to ABC, but if they could find one along the vein of Project Runway, I would definitely stick around in the 10 pm hour. The reason I think this is a good idea is because Lost is so... out there. It blows my mind in one way or another in almost every episode. I almost can't handle TV after watching Lost, unless it's somewhat mindless.— Julie L.

Matt Roush: You're not alone, trust me. I also find Bravo's competition-reality shows an enjoyable way to wrap up Wednesday night. And while this would certainly be a cost-effective way to go, there's a wide chasm between what even a struggling show on ABC draws and what a cult/buzz phenom like Runway actually attracts. What looks like a hit on Bravo would likely be a disaster for a broadcaster like ABC. Still, flipping from a megahit to a cult hit is one of the joys of living life by remote.

Question: This weekend I had a debate with a couple of friends as to what is a soap opera and what isn't. My friends contend that shows like Lost and Friday Night Lights are soap operas, much like Dallas and Melrose Place. I disagreed. Yes, episodes and stories continue from week to week, but they aren't soap operas. I said they were continuing dramas. Could you shed some light on this?— John

Matt Roush: It's all a bit blurry, but "soap opera" is often used as a pejorative, as if it were somehow a lesser form of TV life than the higher-aiming serialized dramas, which is where I'd put Friday Night Lights. It is without doubt a continuing story, and one with at least one very potent romantic triangle (which is the stuff of soap opera), but if Friday Night Lights were a soap, there would be more clear-cut villains and heroes. Soaps are often lurid and melodramatic, rarely nuanced or filled with the sort of character ambiguities you find in a show like Friday. Lost, with its romances and intrigues and overlapping flashbacks, is something I'd classify differently. There are soap-opera elements, as there are in any continuing saga, but Lost is first and foremost an exotic adventure... a ripping good yarn.

Question: So I watched the remaining filmed episodes of Smith on the Internet, and I remained as interested and entertained as I had been by the episodes that actually aired on TV before CBS yanked it. But then I read the synopses of the episodes that were not filmed. [SPOILER ALERT] According to the synopses, Simon Baker and Jonny Lee Miller's characters (two of my main reasons for watching) were to go out Butch Cassidy-Sundance Kid style in a shootout in Episode 10. By the end of the season, Shohreh Aghdashloo's character kills Franky G.'s character's girlfriend, only to be killed by him as revenge. He then manages to escape with his son to start a new life, as does Amy Smart's character after killing her innocent friend and leaving her in the desert to be identified as Amy (by pouring acid over the girl's face and hands to prevent identification). Finally, Ray Liotta's character turns himself in to save Virginia Madsen's character from arrest, in exchange for her immunity for trying to escape with him to Mexico. So she gets to stay and raise her kids with a clean slate, while he's being driven away by the cops in the last scene. Just who was going to continue on the show had it been renewed for a second season? Amy Smart's character? Were they all only signed for one season or for a handful of episodes, like Miller and Baker? Was the plan to start over completely with new characters?— Mary A.

Matt Roush: At this stage, aren't these really moot questions? (And honestly, is there no satisfying anyone? They give you this much info, and you still want more?) All I can say is: If that was the ludicrous game plan, I'm glad I didn't waste any more time with Smith than I did. And I'll bet you if the show had continued, research would have compelled the producers not to kill off the Simon Baker and Jonny Lee Miller characters. The problem with this scenario, as well as with some of the other failed serial mysteries this season, is that they all sound more like miniseries than weekly series. Who knows what Season 2 of Smith would have looked like? Maybe they would have built a story around a new "unsub" Smith.

http://www.tvguide.com/News-Views/Columnists/Ask-Matt/default.aspx

dad1153

11-22-06, 12:31 AM

TV Notebook
Kelly Ripa’s Rosie over homophobic charge
Boston Herald Wire Services November 22, 2006

“The View’s” Rosie O’Donnell and chirpy Kelly Ripa are in a chat-show catfight after O’Donnell, an out-of-the-closet lesbian, accused “Live’s” leading lady of homophobia.

Rosie started the hostilities when she ripped Ripa for scolding ex-“American Idol” runner-up Clay Aiken after he jokingly put his hand over Kelly’s mouth to quiet her down. “Oh, that’s a no-no,” Ripa remarked, adding, “I don’t know where that hand’s been, honey!”

Rosie took great offense to the comment, proclaiming during yesterday’s “View” that “from where I sit” as an openly gay woman, the remark looked “homophobic.”

Rosie suggested that if Aiken had been a “straight guy, a cute guy” or, for instance, Mario Lopez, Ripa wouldn’t have made the same remark. Well, Kelly does have a thing for the Latin hotties!

As for Ripa, the “Live with Regis and Kelly” co-host was reportedly so incensed by Rosie’s remarks that she rang up “The View” to set the record straight, so to speak.

Ripa retorted that O’Donnell was “outrageous” and “irresponsible,” adding that she objected to the man-handling because it was “cold and flu season.”

“He reached across and covered my mouth with his hand,” she explained. “I have three kids (and) he’s shaking hands with everybody in the audience . .that’s what I meant, and to imply that it’s homophobic is outrageous, Rosie.”

Not surprisingly, O’Donnell’s stance on the subject didn’t budge.

BTW, Clay has neither confirmed nor denied persistent rumors that he’s playing for Rosie’s team.

http://thetrack.bostonherald.com/moreTrack/view.bg?articleid=168509

dad1153

11-22-06, 01:03 AM

The Business of TV
Media buyers on O.J.: Thanks, Rupert
Applaud News Corp. boss for axing sweeps stunt
By Tony Fitzgerald Media Life Magazine November 21, 2006

Just why Fox ever considered airing an interview entitled “If I Did It” with accused murderer O.J. Simpson still leaves media buyers perplexed.

But they’re nothing short of ecstatic that News Corp. chairman and CEO Rupert Murdoch abruptly killed the project yesterday, ending six days of public outrage.

Media people who spoke to Media Life yesterday, just minutes after News Corp. announced it was canceling the show, expressed relief that the two-part special would not air.

As media buyers, they worried that their clients' ads might end up airing next to promotions for the special, but like the vast majority of the American public, they also were morally offended by the content of the interview.

"I think they made the right move, they averted a public relations nightmare," said one media veteran. "It was in horribly bad taste."

In axing the O.J. special and book, Murdoch came down on the side of taste.

“I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project," said a statement released by Murdoch yesterday, in which he also canceled publication of a Simpson book by News Corp.’s HarperCollins. Murdoch also apologized to the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, the two murder victims.

The interview was being used to promote the now-canceled book, in which Simpson detailed how he might have gone about killing his ex-wife and her friend, if he had in fact done so. He was acquitted of their murders in 1995 and has consistently denied killing them. Nonetheless, the book's publisher, Judith Regan, has consistently described the book as a confession.

The Simpson special, which was to air Nov. 27 and 29 at the end of November sweeps, became an instant headache to media people the moment it was announced. A dozen affiliates said they would not air the interview, and still more were waiting to see a preview of the interview before deciding.

Public sentiment was clearly against it. Nearly 50,000 people signed a petition protesting the book and show on a site set up by Goldman’s family, and 55 percent of respondents to a CNN poll found the book offensive. Another 30 percent termed it inappropriate.

Media people agreed that virtually no one would have advertised on the program.

“I was less surprised that Fox dropped it than that they would seriously consider airing it," says Karen McCallum, media director at Esparza Advertising in Albuquerque, N.M. "My first reaction when they pitched me was, none of my advertisers could risk being associated with something this controversial no matter how high the rating.”

That Fox would even consider such a project tells media people just how desperate the network had become at this point in the season and November sweeps. None of its new shows have caught on, and three have already been yanked.

Though “House” is thriving, “The OC” has declined sharply. Through the first two weeks of sweeps, Fox has averaged a 2.8 adults 18-49 rating, down 10 percent from a 3.1 at the same point last year.

“It was just ratings, plain and simple,” says Brad Adgate, senior vice president and director of research at Horizon Media, explaining why Fox had chosen to air the special.

“It was sweeps stunt. Fox, as it has in the past few seasons, had a very lackluster fourth quarter, they’ve had a very lackluster November sweeps, it’s fourth among 18-49s, no new shows are really bringing in the viewers they hoped for, [it had] the lowest-rated World Series of all time. I mean, how often can you count on 'American Idol' and '24' to bail you out?”

Fox has resorted to similarly outrageous stunts in the past.

Past shows like “Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire” and “Temptation Island” have similarly pushed the boundaries of good taste, though often drawing lots of viewers.

John Padgett, media director at Hauser Group in Atlanta, previously worked at Coca-Cola, where he says the company had long warned Fox away from such cheesy sweeps stunting. The message: “‘Guys, please, no more of this stuff.’ We didn’t want to advertise with it.”

Padgett doubts Fox had found any advertisers for the Simpson special and likely received pressure to pull it from advertisers wary of having their product in any way associated with the special.

“Look at the affiliates, where during a local break somebody runs [next to an O.J. promo] by accident, and all of a sudden their business is in jeopardy. It’s just bad,” he says.

“It’s just an indecent thing to put on television. Fox realized, ‘We did this 10 years ago when we had to, we don’t really have to do this [now], do we?’”

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_8669.asp

dad1153

11-22-06, 01:18 AM

In Memoriam
Tears, laughs mark service for Bradley
By Paul J. Gough Hollywood Reporter November 22, 2006

With the complicated melodies of the music he loved so much surrounding them, the family and friends of Ed Bradley said goodbye to the "60 Minutes" correspondent with a three-hour service Tuesday filled with life, love and laughs.

Nearly 2,000 people filled the stately Riverside Church on the edge of the Hudson River to pay tribute to Bradley, who died Nov. 9 at age 65. They came from the wide spectrum of Bradley's life: from his youth as a Philadelphia sixth-grade math teacher to his early days at CBS Radio and covering the Vietnam War, to his friends in jazz and other music, and the many people he came in contact with as a globe-trotting correspondent.

"He came on the scene in one of the most exciting times in American history, and he embraced what Oliver Wendell Holmes called 'the action and passion of his times,' " said Charlayne Hunter-Gault, who traveled from her home in Africa to be with Bradley in his final days.

"He was, after all, the jazz master," said former President Bill Clinton, one of the many interview subjects whom Bradley disarmed with his manner. "He always played in the key of reason, and his songs were full of the notes of facts, but he knew to make the most of the music you have to improvise."

Music permeated the service, particularly the jazz Bradley adored and the New Orleans style he had come to love. A brass band rendered a processional dirge to open the service, returning to close it in traditional style with "When The Saints Go Marching In." Lizz Wright performed India.Arie's "Complicated Melody," which was handpicked by Bradley's wife, Patricia Blanchet. Wynton Marsalis performed, as did New Orleans jazz legend Irma Thomas, who sang three songs. Bradley's friend Jimmy Buffett and Allen Toussaint performed "Do You Know What It Means to Miss New Orleans?" and another Bradley friend, Aaron Neville, sang "Amazing Grace."

Among those attending were Bradley's CBS News colleagues Mike Wallace, Andy Rooney, Lesley Stahl, Steve Kroft and retired anchors Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather; such other network journalists as NBC's Brian Williams, Meredith Vieira and Steve Capus, and ABC's Diane Sawyer; and Bill Cosby, Paul Simon, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Leslie Moonves, Dick Parsons and Howard Stern.

"He never forgot where he came from, and he always gave back generously, with his time, his money and his advice," longtime Philadelphia friend Marie Brown said.

Former CBS head Howard Stringer, who worked with Bradley in the 1960s at WCBS-AM, called him a "pied piper for children ... a man of the people, absolutely."

Kroft remembered that Bradley never was driven by what Kroft called "the '60 Minutes' stopwatch." He said that for a time Bradley was heir apparent to Rather, but he didn't want the anchorship.

"He didn't want to be tethered to a news desk. ... CBS News was his job, not his life," Kroft said.

Bradley, 12 days before he passed, checked himself out of Mount Sinai Hospital to record the narration for what would be his last "60 Minutes" report. He was so weak that his wife had to hold him up.

"I listened to it and heard a man who did his work with passion and courage until the day he died," producer David Gelber said.

"Finding another Ed Bradley is as close to an impossible task as anything in broadcasting," said Don Hewitt, who hired Bradley at "60 Minutes" in the early 1980s.

"If you want to follow in Ed Bradley's footsteps, you can't sit behind a desk looking good," Hunter-Gault said. "You've got to put on your traveling shoes. You've got to walk the walk, not just talk the talk."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i74d7f1097c5379d6bfc6328db01c03d4

dad1153

11-22-06, 01:41 AM

You have got to be f***ing kidding me? :eek: :eek: :eek:

The New Season
Faves to rerun 'Race'
CBS to air 'All-Stars' skein in 2007
By Josef Adalian Variety November 22, 2006

CBS is giving "The Amazing Race" the all-star treatment.

Net Tuesday confirmed the upcoming 11th edition of the Emmy-winning reality skein, produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and Bertram van Munster, will feature cast members from previous cycles of the show. Production on "The Amazing Race: All-Stars" began last week in Miami and will premiere in first-quarter 2007.

"Race" becomes the third CBS unscripted skein to go all-star. "Survivor" began the trend a few years ago, while "Big Brother" followed suit last summer.

A CBS spokesman confirmed the all-star nature of the next "Race" but declined comment on which past cast members will return.

However, insiders said Rob and Amber -- who appeared on "Race" after appearing on two editions of "Survivor" -- will be given another shot at the top prize. Duo have wrapped lensing on their upcoming Fox Reality Channel skein, "Rob and Amber: Against the Odds," which debuts in January.

They are expected to square off against Joyce and Uchenna, their two chief opponents in season seven of "Race." Latter team narrowly won that edition.

Also lacing up again: David and Mary, the plain-spoken coalminer and his wife from Kentucky.

Not expected on the "All-Star" race: Jonathan and Victoria, the feuding couple whose antics landed them on a Dr. Phil primetime special. Chip and Kim, two of the most popular former "Race" cast members, won't appear either.

Most editions of the "Race" are expected to be represented on the all-star edition, save for the much-panned family edition.

Bruckheimer, van Munster, Jonathan Littman and Hayma Screech Washington are exec producers of "Race." Skein is produced by Bruckheimer TV and Earthview, in association with Touchstone TV and Amazing Race Prods.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954363.html?categoryid=14&cs=1

Rob and Amber, again??!! And David and Mary from Kentucky were just eliminated a few episodes ago in the current season, so I'd hardly call them All-Star material. If you're a diehard 'TAR' fan these rumors are enough to get your hopes in civilization as we know it (or at least reality TV) shattered! :(

dad1153

11-22-06, 01:46 AM

Technology
YouTube a boon for CBS
By Carly Mayberry Hollywood Reporter November 22, 2006

The eye network is drawing eyeballs on YouTube.

A month after launching its CBS Brand Channel on the site, clips from the network's daily stream of news, sports and entertainment have become some of YouTube's most widely viewed content.

The network said three of the top 25 most-viewed YouTube videos this month include clips from "NCIS," "Late Show With David Letterman" and "The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson."

"What's most exciting here is the extent to which CBS is learning about its audience as never before," CBS Interactive president Quincy Smith said. "Professional content seeds YouTube and allows an open dialogue between established media players and a new set of viewers."

CBS reports uploading more than 300 clips that have a total of 29.2 million views on the site, which averages 857,000 views per day since the CBS Channel launched Oct. 18.

The network also reports that ratings for its late-night programming, including "Letterman" and "Ferguson," have shown a notable increase, with viewership up 7% since the YouTube postings.

In October, YouTube and CBS Corp. launched the CBS Brand Channel as a central part of the content and advertising partnership between the companies.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/business/news/e3i74d7f1097c5379d6949c758a13ed3ec9

dad1153

11-22-06, 01:51 AM

TV Notebook
NBC takes up 'Smoking'
Peacock to 'Thank' satire
By Josef Adalian Variety November 21, 2006

NBC is lighting up a TV spin on "Thank You for Smoking."

Rick Cleveland ("Six Feet Under") is aboard to write and exec produce the small-screen version of the indie pic. David O. Sacks, who produced the film, will exec produce the TV take via Room 9 Entertainment and NBC U Television Studio.

Christopher Buckley, who wrote the book on which the movie was based, will serve as a consulting producer.

Peacock version of "Smoking" is being developed as a single-camera laffer focusing on Nick Naylor, the superstar spin doctor who, as played by Aaron Eckhart in the movie, did PR for big tobacco. TV take will pick up where the feature left off, with Naylor running his own firm.

"The idea is that there's a never-ending array of clients he could have," Sacks told Daily Variety. "But it has to be something where Nick is on the wrong or unpopular side of things."

Potential clients could include fast-food companies, environmental polluters or politicos caught with their pants down.

"The reason the movie resonated so much was that it wasn't about just one particular issue," Sacks said. "It's about PR as a culture, about the way we spin issues."

As in the movie, the small-screen "Smoking" will show Naylor balancing his conflicting responsibilities as a PR person and as a dad.

Original "Thank You for Smoking," released earlier this year by Fox Searchlight, has grossed nearly $25 million in the U.S.

Sacks is repped by the Rothman Brecher Agency. Cleveland is repped by CAA.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954367.html?categoryid=14&cs=1

dad1153

11-22-06, 02:02 AM

The Business of TV
Syndicators Bet on Game and Court Shows
By Ben Grossman Broadcsting & Cable November 20, 2006

Syndicators are playing it safe this development season.

After a fall in which King World’s Rachael Ray has been the only one of four rookie talk shows to average more than a 1.0 household rating, syndicators are turning to game and court shows. And with the phenomenal popularity of NBC primetime game show Deal or No Deal and the relative low cost of the game and court genres, executives are hoping such shows will be a safer bet for the 2007-08 season.

While everyone is looking to mimic the success of Deal, the appetite for yet another gavel-wielding disciplinarian presiding over another court show seems as healthy as ever. Without Judge Judy-level talent, court shows can be made for under $200,000 per week, where entertainment newsmagazines can cost five times that.

“That’s why you see people gravitating toward court over the last couple years and now game shows,” says Twentieth Television President Bob Cook. “It’s lower risk, and if you become huge like Wheel of Fortune or even just a [Who Wants To Be a] Millionaire, that’s not a bad business.”

“It is definitely the year of the game show,” says NBC Universal (NBCU) Syndication President Barry Wallach, whose division is considering a half-hour syndicated adaptation of the hour-long Deal. He won’t confirm that the show is definitely going ahead but says his company is “deliberating as to what the right plans are.”

The linchpin of a syndicated Deal will be the choice of host; Howie Mandel is widely credited for the success of the primetime version. Sources with knowledge of the show’s development say former late-night host Arsenio Hall was originally slated, but he and NBCU have since parted ways. Comic actor Mark Curry has also been in talks with NBC about the job.

The top prize for the syndicated version is expected to be in the neighborhood of $250,000, a quarter of that on the network show.

“We think [a syndicated Deal] would have a good chance,” says Wallach.

But CBS Television Distribution Group CEO Roger King is among those who have their doubts. He says the lower prize money and shorter length will compare unfavorably with the primetime version still on the air.

“Deal or No Deal will be a huge bomb” in syndication, he says. “Cutting it down to a half-hour will make it look chintzy.” He notes that CBS once wanted an hour version of Jeopardy! for the network but King refused for fear of hurting the half-hour daytime version.

Meanwhile, a raft of syndicated game shows, both new and retread, are making the rounds:

-Game-show guru Harry Friedman, who oversees Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy!, is planning new-format Combination Lock and an update of the old Joker’s Wild with a casino-style set.

-Merv Griffin is pitching syndicators on a couple of game shows, one of which is a word-scramble format. Griffin and his agents at William Morris have not yet revealed their strategy.

-Twentieth Television may be considering Catch Phrase and Connections from Granada and Temptations from Fremantle.

-Fremantle also has been shopping a remake of the enduring Match Game.

While hopeful about the prospects for a syndicated Deal, NBCU’s Wallach warns that creating formats for first-run syndication has a history of failure. “There has never really been a game show invented for syndication that worked,” he says. “They all have come off of network daytime or primetime.”

Whether new formats or adaptations, however, game shows are no guarantee. Since the 1981-82 season, 68 game shows have been launched into syndication; fewer than a quarter of them (16) made it to a second season.

“It is still a hard genre to make work in syndication,” says Telepictures Executive VP Hilary Estes McLaughlin, adding that game-show audiences tend to skew older.

Court shows have been a more bankable syndication favorite. Sony Pictures Television Distribution President John Weiser points out that eight of the 11 court shows currently on the air have endured for at least four years. The two introduced this year—Cristina’s Court and Judge Maria Lopez—may be poised for similarly long runs. Several new shows are in the works to join the already crowded field.

Sony, which launched Lopez this fall, is high on a project featuring Miami Judge David Young. Young is openly gay, but Weiser says that won’t be the show’s hook. “He has a personality that stands out, but we are not selling a gay court show,” he says. “We think that would be offensive.”

Twentieth, which launched Cristina’s Court this year, has considered as many as six judge personalities and is focusing on two. And Telepictures is pondering a “celebrity-jury” format, according to sources with knowledge of development.

Although low costs enable court shows to endure poor ratings, some industry observers wonder whether the genre has been overplayed. All but one veteran court show, Warner Bros. Domestic Television Distribution’s Judge Mathis, are showing year-over-year declines so far this season.

“You could probably say we have enough court shows at this point,” says Bill Carroll, VP/director of programming for Katz Television Group.

Beyond talk of a TMZ.com project at Telepictures, no magazine-based shows are in circulation. And with Rachael Ray, the one successful new personality-driven talk show, averaging only a 2.1 household rating, talk shows likely won’t make the splash they did at last year’s NATPE gathering. “I don’t think you will see a lot of talk,” says NBCU’s Wallach. “I just don’t know if there are a lot of great ideas or talent out there.”

The best chance in this genre may come from Telepictures, which is considering three projects, including two featuring Latina hosts: Latina magazine creator Christy Haubegger and TV reporter Maria Salazar. Former WB chief Garth Ancier is behind the Haubegger show. Survivor creator Mark Burnett is working on a project for hypnotist Paul McKenna.

Buena Vista was also looking at a project for actress Sherri Sheppard. And, as ever, a list of aspiring hosts, including actresses Vivica A. Fox and Patricia Heaton and actress/singer Brandi, is making the rounds.

“There is talent looking for homes,” says Twentieth’s Bob Cook. “But in a high-failure business and with daytime ratings so small, the risk/reward is getting compromised.”

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6393327.html

dad1153

11-22-06, 02:06 AM

TV Notebook
A 'Wizard ' makeover
Sci Fi to update 'Oz' with 'Tin Man'
By John Dempsey Variety November 21, 2006

"The Wizard of Oz" is getting a makeover, morphing into "Tin Man," an edgy science-fiction fantasy to be produced as a $19 million, six-hour miniseries for the Sci Fi Channel.

"Our goal is to take 'Wizard of Oz' to the next level and make it relevant, modern and fresh to a new generation," said Dave Howe, general manager of Sci Fi Channel. The producer is Robert Halmi's RHI Entertainment, which produced a previous mini for Sci Fi, the 2004 "Legend of Earthsea."

The writers of "Tin Man," Steven Long Mitchell and Craig Van Sickle, also will serve as co-exec producers with Robert Halmi Sr. and Robert Halmi Jr.

RHI has begun the search for a director and a cast, with production slated to begin in Vancouver early next year for a proposed air date on Sci Fi of December 2007.

Sci Fi's license fee will cover less than half of the production budget, so RHI gets the international rights to "Tin Man," with no participation by Sci Fi's parent, NBC Universal. Sci Fi gets multirun, multiyear exclusive rights to the mini in the U.S.

Using adjectives such as psychedelic, twisted and bizarre to describe "Tin Man," Sci Fi said the mini turns Dorothy into a young woman named DG, who finds herself plunged into a netherworld called the Outer Zone. Other celebrated characters are reimagined in "Tin Man": the cowardly lion as a wolverine-like creature without backbone, the wicked witch as a sorceress called Azkadellia and the wizard as a larger-than-life figure called the Mystic Man.

"Tin Man" continues Sci Fi's relationship with RHI, which will produce 10 original movies for the network in 2007.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954366.html?categoryid=14&cs=1

dad1153

11-22-06, 08:15 AM

TV Notebook
Makeover Star Hurt on Show
By Michael Starr The New York Post November 22, 2006

"Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" carpenter Ed Sanders needed some emergency repairs of his own after nearly chopping his hand off last Saturday.

Sanders was helping renovate the home of 9/11 hero Jason Thomas outside of Columbus, Ohio when he slipped - putting his left hand through an electric saw blade and slicing through his palm.

Sanders was rushed to a nearby hospital and underwent four hours of surgery to repair his hand, according to The Columbus Dispatch.

"It took a massive load of meat out of my hand," Sanders told the newspaper. "I was sure my carpentry and acting careers were done."

A show spokesman said the incident will be featured on the show when it airs early next year.

Thomas, a married father of five, was an ex-Marine living in Hempstead on 9/11 when he rushed to Ground Zero and helped save two Port Authority cops, whose story inspired the Oliver Stone movie, "World Trade Center."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11222006/tv/makeover_star_hurt_on_show_tv_michael_starr.htm

dad1153

11-22-06, 08:24 AM

The Business of TV
HBO's Digital Strategy?
By Anne Becker Broadcasting & Cable November 20, 2006

In the past year’s multiplatform party, HBO has been something of a wallflower. While broadcast and cable networks—including the network’s pay-cable competitors Showtime and Starz—are building broadband players and putting shows on iTunes, the leading premium cable channel has offered little more than a limited cellular deal, promotional podcasts and a forthcoming branded comedy site with corporate cousin AOL. For the network that famously boasted “It’s not TV—it’s HBO,” good old television appears to be the only platform that matters.

This is cause for frustration among those who want to watch The Sopranos online and scorn from those who think the network is afraid of a multiplatform future. But HBO says it is exploring plans to distribute its programming online—so long as those plans don’t jeopardize its subscription-based business model or its licensing agreements with cable operators, which account for 80% of HBO’s revenue.

“There’s not a business model presenting itself today that will replicate the existing subscription model we have,” says HBO COO Bill Nelson.

That model, he says, depends on preserving the integrity of HBO’s brand as a premium source for first-run movies, sports and original programming. “There’s not a disaggregated alternative available to our subscription model that comes anywhere near the financial results,” he adds.

With some 28 million subscribers, HBO is still a growing business. Indeed, subscription revenue is projected to be up year-to-year in 2006 from $2.88 billion to $3.03 billion, according to Morgan Stanley. And the “disaggregated” content that it does offer—in the form of DVDs of its series and documentaries, and selected titles on its video-on-demand (VOD) service—has not hurt that bottom line.

UPHOLDING A SUBSCRIPTION MODEL

HBO reports that it is in talks with Apple, Microsoft and others about selling shows at some point in the future, but the company hasn’t agreed on financial terms with any of them.

No wonder: With the latest 12-episode cycle of The Sopranos retailing at $100, one can imagine why selling episodes piecemeal on iTunes at the going rate of $1.99 a pop doesn’t seem so alluring.

The network upheld its business model when it partnered with Cingular last summer on HBO Mobile, a subscription-based cellphone service that offers mini-episodes of its Entourage series and full episodes of selected shows. (HBO declines to provide a subscriber count, but a representative puts the number “in the thousands,” noting that it is offered in only a fraction of the country.)

But even when announcing the service at the Television Critics Association tour in July, HBO Chairman/CEO Chris Albrecht struck a dismissive tone about multiplatform ventures, assuring the crowd that “you won’t be seeing HBO throwing new episodes up on iPod.” Whether the garbled reference to iTunes was calculated malapropism or genuine ignorance is unclear, but some have interpreted that attitude as fear of the unknown.

“They don’t know what technology will do to their businesses, so they stay away from it, and I think that’s a big mistake,” says Dan Rayburn, executive VP for online-industry Website Streaming Media.com. “It’s a matter of not understanding the market opportunity for new channels of digital distribution.”

Meanwhile, Showtime and Starz, which similarly rely on subscriptions and cable-operator licensing fees, have offered free streams and paid downloads of shows and movies online.

Showtime, which has half the subscribers of HBO, was the first pay-cable network to sell content on iTunes and Amazon. It has also streamed clips on its own site and on YouTube and paired with Yahoo! and several cable operators to offer free streaming previews via broadband.

To promote the second cycle of series Sleeper Cell, Showtime is offering the first cycle for free on its operators’ sites. And an interactive campaign with Dish Network, in which viewers can order the channel by clicking their remotes, earned the network two Emmys and thousands of upgrades since launching in 2003.

WORKING WITH OPERATORS

In January, Starz launched Vongo, a $9.99-a-month, Web-based movie service. The network has encouraged operators to offer it to their subscribers as an incentive to buy bundled broadband service, but none has signed on yet.

“We feel like we are ready to go and we’re running in place,” says Bob Greene, Starz Entertainment executive VP of advanced services. “I don’t think the cable industry specifically has a clear definition of what they think they should do—if anything—with content over the Internet.”

HBO is exploring a partnership with operators on a subscription-based broadband version of the channel. Whether the channel can succeed with operators where Starz has not remains to be seen, but Nelson is confident that “the HBO brand is at a certain level that certainly attracts consumer attention and drives consumer demand, and our cable partners understand that.”

But some industry observers question a strategy that puts the cart before the horse. “People watch shows, not channels,” says Steve Safran, president of digital consulting company Safran Media Group. “What makes HBO special? Just because you’re special under the old distribution method does not make you special anymore.”

Says Nelson, “We’re always looking to be on any platform we believe can extend our brand and bring our content to the consumer. We are being aggressive, and we will conduct business and make agreements when it makes overall financial sense for us.”

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6393268.html

dad1153

11-22-06, 08:37 AM

TV Sports
CBS' Colts vs. Cowboys Up 11% Over Last Year
By John Consoli Mediaweek November 21, 2006

The Indianapolis Colts vs. Dallas Cowboys national game on CBS on Sunday, Nov. 19, delivered a preliminary household rating/share of 14.7/27, 11 percent higher than the national game for the comparable week last year (13.3/24). The game was the highest rated NFL game on any network this season, and the third highest-rated sports event on televsion since the Super Bowl last February.

The game also trailed only the women's figure skating short and long programs during the 2006 Winter Olympics telecast on NBC in February.

For the second time in three weeks, The NFL Today, the CBS NFL pre-game show, out-rated the Fox NFL Sunday pre-game show, with a fast national household rating of 3.1/8, vs. a 2.8/8 on Fox. The NFL Today averaged 4.5 million viewers, compared to 3.9 million viewers on Fox NFL Sunday.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/networktv/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003410769

dad1153

11-22-06, 08:42 AM

The Business of TV
Comcast, Disney ink sweeping carriage deal
By Andrew Wallenstein Hollywood Reporter November 22, 2006

The Walt Disney Co. and Comcast Corp. have reached a wide-ranging carriage deal that will keep programming from ABC to SoapNet on multiple platforms, the companies said Tuesday.

The long-awaited deal -- years in the making -- will cover retransmission consent for ABC's 10 owned-and-operated stations, as well as carriage of 11 cable networks and, in a first for Disney, placement of broadcast series on video-on-demand. Financial terms of the multiyear deal were not disclosed, though the pact is believed to cover a range of multibillion-dollar assets.

"This is one of the broadest distribution agreements in the history of our company," Disney president and CEO Robert Iger said.

"Putting Disney, ESPN and ABC's extremely popular content on Comcast VOD is a watershed event for both of our companies," Comcast chairman and CEO Brian Roberts said. "We could not have gotten this deal done without Bob Iger's leadership and vision."

Beginning next fall, "Desperate Housewives," "Lost" and two shows to be named later will be offered on Comcast VOD, which already boasts series from NBC and CBS. In addition, ABC News and cable programming is expected to join the cable operator's VOD platform.

Select movie titles also will be offered on VOD from Walt Disney Pictures, Miramax Studios and Touchstone.

The deal also finalizes the sale of Disney's 39.5% stake in E! Networks to Comcast, which paid $1.23 billion to get full control of the cable programmer.

Among the cable assets that had their carriage renewed are ESPN, which is far and away the most expensive cable channel in the country, and SoapNet, which will get a significant distribution gain as part of the deal. Comcast also will launch ESPN Deportes and ESPN2HD, the latter channel already having been deployed in select Comcast markets.

Comcast's VOD content from ABC will only be available in O&O markets, including New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and San Francisco.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i95e8af4592b60050bd61d99b4a6bdcc2

dad1153

11-22-06, 08:45 AM

Could Nielsen's monopoly over ratings data be in jeopardy?

The Business of TV
TNS tests tools to track viewer demo
Would become a direct challenger to Nielsen
By Kevin Downey Media Life Magazine November 21, 2006

For years, media people have been wishing for someone to challenge Nielsen Media Research, and now they may see just such a competitor in TNS, best known in the U.S. for tracking media spending but elsewhere in the world a major supplier of TV audience data.

TNS is now testing a system to measure viewer demographics, the currency media buyers use to set prices for commercials. That comes as an add-on to a service it launched in April that measures total viewing in 300,000 households that subscribe to Charter Communications’ digital cable service in Los Angeles. Last week, media buying agency Starcom began a six-month test to evaluate these ratings.

The addition of the specific demographic groups to the base of census data will put TNS head to head with Nielsen in the breadth of information it can provide advertisers.

“For TNS, the whole area of measuring digital audiences is important because we see this as the direction for audience measurement,” George Shababb, chief operating officer of TNS Media Research, tells Media Life. “Our plans are to build a digital measurement capability in the U.S.”

Just when the demographic data would be available is unclear. “The metering system is now in the early stages of testing,” says Shababb. “Until the testing has been completed in the second half of next year, we cannot comment on when TNS will introduce demographics.”

TNS already uses meters to gather demographic data on TV viewing in two dozen countries. It first broke into the TV ratings business here with a deal with Time Warner in Honolulu in December 2004, then came the Charter deal in April. Then in September it signed a deal to track 250,000 DirecTV households.

Other such agreements are in the works with more cable operators and satellite services, and eventually TNS plans to measure audiences around the country.

The primary appeal of TNS’s service at this point is its measurement of second-by-second TV viewing. It can apply that to tracking viewing of commercials, giving it a substantial advantage over Nielsen. Nielsen's plan, now delayed indefinitely, would provide full-minute ratings of commercial pods, but media people and others have objected that the resulting data would be not accurately reflect actual commercial viewing, providing only a rough approximation.

Tracey Sheppach, vice president of video innovations at Starcom USA, says TNS’s second-by-second ratings may eventually help media buyers determine how much to pay for commercials based on where they are positioned in breaks.

“I don’t think it’s quite at the place where we’d use it for currency, but what’s really interesting to me is that when you look at the whole landscape of television viewing, potentially 50 percent of that viewing is able to have data collected on it,” she notes. TNS estimates that about 50 percent of homes have digital cable or satellite TV. “Digital, by definition, is measurable because it’s digits.”

She says the TNS data will allow Starcom to better understand how consumers watch commercials.

“I’m on a mission to make advertising more relevant,” says Sheppach. “Without having more data beyond Nielsen’s 10,000 sample, that’s hard to do. What TNS is doing in allowing second-by-second viewing and, in the process, making it more census-level, is really big news.”

The census eliminates the need for a sample audience, at least for total household viewing. A major problem with samples is the size is slashed when measuring specific demographics and users of devices like digital video recorders.

Still, TNS’s TV ratings service has drawbacks. One is that as a passive system it cannot detect when viewers leave the room. To do that TNS will have to install meters like Nielsen’s People Meter participants, which asks sample participants to log out of the system when they are not watching TV. It's these meters that will eventual provide the demographic data to enable TNS to compete directly with Nielsen.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_8639.asp

dad1153

11-22-06, 08:49 AM

The New Season
NBC orders more scripts for '30 Rock'
By Nellie Andreeva The Hollywood Reporter November 22, 2006

NBC has ordered three additional scripts of freshman comedy "30 Rock."

The order follows a three-script pickup the show received last month, bringing the total to six additional scripts.

The move follows a lackluster debut of the critically praised comedy on Thursday last week when a 40-minute episode of the show averaged 5.2 million viewers and a 2.4 rating/6 share among adults 18-49.

Created by and starring Tina Fey, "30 Rock" got off to a weak start on Wednesdays before being moved to Thursdays, where it will run at 9:30 p.m. after "Scrubs" beginning this week.

"30 Rock," from NBC Universal TV Studio and Lorne Michaels' Broadway Video TV, is set behind the scenes of a late-night sketch comedy show. Alec Baldwin, Tracy Morgan and Jane Krakowski co-star.

"30 Rock" is one of three Nielsen-challenged new NBC series that received an order for three more scripts last month. The other two, the dramas "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" and "Friday Night Lights," have since been picked up for a full season.

Meanwhile, "30 Rock" and ABC's drama "The Nine" are the only two freshman series whose fate is still up in the air.

"Nine," which was a given an order for four additional scripts last month, is struggling in the Wednesday 10 p.m. time slot and looks unlikely to continue beyond its original order.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3i74d7f1097c5379d6991f566e422a0c1d

fredfa

11-22-06, 09:14 AM

The TV Column
ABC Is the Belle of the Ballroom
The Week’s Winners and Losers
By Lisa de Moraes Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Former NFL star kills and the network cleans up in the ratings. No, not O.J. and Fox -- we're talking "Dancing With the Stars" winner Emmitt Smith and ABC.

Here's a look at the week's high-steppers and left feet:

WINNERS

"Dancing With the Stars." Tuesday's final dance-off and Wednesday's season finale, in which that nice Emmitt Smith beat out Mario "Pretty Boy" Lopez, logged 26.8 million and 27.5 million viewers, respectively, giving ABC bragging rights to the season's No. 1- and No. 2-ranked broadcasts and its largest weekly audience in more than nine months. That third-season finale is the dancing competition's biggest crowd ever.

"CSI." Identical-twin murder on "CSI" tops McDreamy and Meredith saving water in the tub on "Grey's Anatomy," to the tune of 3 million viewers. "CSI" also finished in its most competitive position yet with younger viewers against "Grey's."

"Deal or No Deal." On Monday of last week, NBC's screaming-at-briefcases game show posted more than 18 million viewers, nearly doubling its closest competitor in the time slot with the franchise's second-biggest audience on record.

Babs Walters. ABC enjoyed its largest audience in the Thursday 10 p.m. hour in 3 1/2 years with her bait-and-switch special "30 Mistakes in 30 Years."

LOSERS

"30 Rock." In its first night as part of NBC's Thursday lineup, Tina Fey's new sitcom posted its second-smallest audience ever -- a super-sized 5.2 million viewers. For comparison, here's how NBC's other series did on that night: "My Name Is Earl," 9.1 million viewers; "The Office," 8.4 million; "ER," 12.5 million.

"Vanished." Turns out killing the star in the seventh episode wasn't such a good idea after all. Fox has pulled "Vanished," which briefly starred Gale Harold, out of its lineup and will run the remaining episodes on the Internet.

"Standoff." Here's the thing: Fox has ordered more episodes of its new Ron Livingston drama, but last Tuesday it scored its smallest audience yet -- 4.6 million viewers. And the show that followed, "House," tripled that audience. In the TV industry, this is known as "bad." So Fox has changed its plans to air "Standoff" in the plum Monday time slot leading into "24" after the holidays. Instead, the planned holiday for "Prison Break" has been cut short; it will return Jan. 22 to pair up with "24."

"What About Brian." ABC's chick drama last week generated its smallest crowd yet -- 5.2 million viewers.

"Till Death." Fox's freshman sitcom -- one of only two Fox freshmen to make the additional-episode cut -- finished in fifth place in a five-way race on Thursday at 8. It drew 4.5 million viewers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/21/AR2006112101476_pf.html

harley1

11-22-06, 09:48 AM

In tonight's concert TV special, Madonna shows she still has it

Hal Boedeker
Sentinel Television Critic

November 22, 2006

She arrives by giant disco ball, which opens like a glittery spaceship. Out steps Madonna, done up as a horsewoman, to whip up excitement at London's Wembley Arena.

She earns the adulation in her stunning NBC special, Madonna: The Confessions Tour, which airs from 8 to 10 tonight on WESH-Channel 2.

The special serves as a needed reminder. Madonna might make headlines for controversies, from adopting an African boy to hanging from a cross in the concert. She might keep reinventing her image to stay in the public eye. Yet what matters most is that Madonna remains an electrifying entertainer, a determined singer and a tireless dancer.

The NBC special, shot with 15 cameras, provides an eye-popping record of two concerts from August. The program should be high-definition heaven. Madonna's razzle-dazzle showmanship echoes Cecil B. DeMille, Bob Fosse and even Steven Spielberg.

You want a light show? She gives you one on "Future Lovers," which opens the show, and another on "Ray of Light." Her pride in her dancers comes through in the showcases "Jump," "Sorry" and "Hung Up," the rousing finale.

Her affection for 1970s dance rhythms infuses her Confessions on a Dance Floor CD and playful numbers in the special. Her zesty performance of "Music" becomes a tribute to John Travolta and Saturday Night Fever. This "Erotica," performed in a workout leotard, recalls the Jane Fonda videos. "I Love New York" presents her as guitar-playing rock star.

At 48, she remains in tiptop shape. She struts through "Get Together" and saddles up for "Like a Virgin." She uses a chair provocatively for "Like It or Not" and flings herself around the stage for "Let It Will Be."

Her performance of "Live to Tell" takes the show in a jarring, serious direction. NBC has edited footage of her on a cross, although she can be seen wearing a crown of thorns. That imagery could offend, but she issues a heartfelt plea to remember the 12 million African children made orphans by AIDS. For anyone doubting her sincerity, the show quotes the Bible to reinforce that plea.

Fans should be dazzled by the mix of videos, lighting and dancing. Maybe she'll win a few new fans, although drawing an audience won't be easy on the night before Thanksgiving. In the end, the NBC special buttresses her status as the hardest-working woman in show business.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/tv/orl-a2story2206nov22,0,7127742,print.story?coll=orl-caltvtop

harley1

11-22-06, 09:51 AM

DIRECTV Will Carry HD NFLN Games

This week DIRECTV said it will carry the NFL Network's 2006 regular season games in high-def starting with the Thanksgiving day broadcast of the match up between Kansas City (6-4) and Denver (7-3). The nation's largest satellite provider said viewers would not need a subscription to its NFL Sunday Ticket to receive the high-def feed.

Despite the fact that DIRECTV doesn't carry NFL Network HD, company executives said the contests will air on its channel reserved for special HD events - channel 95.

The NFL Network received the rights to a total of eight games this year, beginning with the AFC West rivalry game this Thursday. As part of the all-football all-the-time channel's "Run Up to the Playoffs," the net will be airing four more Thursday games and three on Saturday nights.

Games slated for NFL Network's national package are: Ravens vs. Bengals (Nov. 30), Browns vs. Steelers (Dec. 7), 49ers vs. Seahawks (Dec. 14), Cowboys vs. Falcons (Dec. 16), Vikings vs. Packers (Dec. 21), Chiefs vs. Raiders (Dec. 23) and Giants vs. Redskins (Dec. 30). According to the company, these games will be shown on NFL Network HD and the net's non-HD channel.

http://www.skyreport.com/

harley1

11-22-06, 09:57 AM

From the Calgary Sun

Shatner cashes in

Bill Brioux
Sun Media

If only Rupert Murdoch owned ABC, too. Then the Fox boss who scrapped that O.J. special could also yank William Shatner’s Show Me The Money.

you weren’t scared off by last week’s preview (and, judging by the soft ratings, a lot of you were), the game show returns tonight at 9 p.m. on ABC and CH.

Imagine if you threw Dancing With The Stars, Deal Or No Deal, 1 vs. 100, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire and Shatner into a blender.

That’s Show Me The Money, and it is pure Shat.

ABC missed a perfect marketing opportunity to re-place Shatner with O.J. Simpson. Can’t you just see The Juice bellowing, “SHOW ME THE MONEY!”

Hey, this ‘TV-takes-the-high-road’ thing can’t last forever.

Show Me The Money finds Shatner on a new mission: to boldly lower IQs all across North America. He does this by reading incredibly lame trivia questions to incredibly dumb contestants.

In one of the most convoluted rigmaroles in the history of television, the player has to answer at least six questions correctly, all the while choosing from among 13 strippers who stand next to poles on a tiered stage.

Each holds a scroll with a dollar value printed on it. The money is added to or subtracted from the total.

The one twist: Players can’t take the money and run. They must play to the bitter end.

Shatner, the Montreal native who also dances on the show, is dancing all the way to the bank. He still plays Denny Crane on Boston Legal (Tuesdays on ABC).

Take the money and dance, Bill, but stick to your day job.

• • • • •

KRAMER VS. KRAMER

Viewers who tuned in to Michael Richards’ mea culpa on The Late Show With David Letterman Monday saw a clear cry for help.

The former Seinfeld funnyman, caught on camera on the weekend in a racial meltdown at an L.A. comedy club, seemed extremely remorseful for his actions, which included repeated use of the n-
word.

“I’m not a racist. That’s what’s so insane about this,” he said via satellite from L.A.

Jerry Seinfeld, booked as a guest, had set up the opportunity for his former cast mate to apologize.

It has been 10 years since I last set foot in an L.A. comedy club.

I walked out, along with several other patrons, after a steady stream of misogynist, racist hate humour from three stand-ups in a row.

While it in no way excuses what he said, perhaps Richards felt he had to lower himself to the house standards.

In this age of cellphone cameras and YouTube, that is a career-killing mistake.

And that, actually, is a good thing.

• • • • •

CANADIANS MAKE A DEAL

It was a Deal Or No Deal deluge, as tens of thousands of Canadians beat last Friday’s deadline to apply for the game show.

Global received more than 112,000 applications to be a contestant on the Canadian version of Deal Or No Deal.

Fans had to fill out 39 questions on a 14-page form.

More than 95,000 Canadians filled it out on-line, with another 17,713 mailing it in.

One application arrived with a layer cake in the shape of host Howie Mandel’s head. Other applicants sent in pictures of their dogs and other pets, listing them as in-studio supporters (definitely a no-no).

A lucky few will make it to the five episodes, taped in Toronto Jan. 23 to 27.

http://www.calgarysun.com/cgi-bin/publish.cgi?p=162727&x=articles&s=showbiz

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:08 AM

TV Notebook
GSN purrs with 'Cat-minster'
By Kimberly Nordyke Hollywood Reporter November 20, 2006

Move over, Fido: Whiskers is finally getting her turn in the spotlight.

Cat lovers around the country will be happy to hear that GSN is putting felines front and center with its telecast of "Cat-minster: CFS International Cat Championship," a two-hour special with an airdate still to be determined. The special, which falls in line with GSN's strategy to continue expanding beyond just game shows into other areas of competition-themed programming as well, will mark the first time the cat competition has been televised.

GSN senior vp marketing Dena Kaplan believes the show has the potential to become an "annual tentpole event" for the network. GSN has similar hopes for another recent initiative, the National Vocabulary Championship.

"Every dog has their day, now it's the 'purr-fect' time for cats to get in the limelight," she said. "GSN is thrilled to capture the exciting world of top feline breeders putting their pedigreed pets, their pride and passion on the line to win the coveted title 'best in show.' "

The 19th Annual Cat Fanciers' Association International Cat Show, the largest international pedigreed cat show in the Western Hemisphere, took place Friday-Sunday in San Mateo County Expo Center in Northern California, with more than 750 cats vying to be named "best in show."

Husband and wife Bob Goen ("Entertainment Tonight") and Marianne Curan ("Landscapers' Challenge") will host the special, which will feature highlights from the competition -- including the agility course, a cat race through hoops, jumps and tunnels -- and also take viewers into the lives of the exhibitors and cats before the event, showing the preparation that goes into the competition.

The special is being produced by Painless Entertainment, which specializes in animal competitions. Jim Casey and Joe Carolei serve as executive producers.

New Naturals from Purina Cat Chow brand cat food has signed on as the main sponsor of the telecast.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3i61fccc799efa3cb7feaf73cc622064e1

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:20 AM

Despite Fredfa cutting himself off the internet (again! :rolleyes: ) we'll continue to update this thread with as much information as we can find during this Thanksgiving weekend. So please click on this thread in-between your turkey and NFL binges when you can, we could use the numbers! Also check the previous two pages (607 and 608) for lots of stories posted by myself, fredfa, harley1 and others in the last couple of days (most in just the past 12 hours) that you may have missed! Thanks for reading and have a safe & happy turkey day! :)

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:21 AM

What media story could be so dramatic to compel us to give you this thread's first ever five-stories-in-one-posting selection? Why Michael Richards' attempt to displace Mel Gibson as the biggest douchebag not working in Hollywood right now (http://youtube.com/watch?v=-T7uKvpzVXI), that's what! :rolleyes:

#1 - TV Notebook
Richards Tries to Explain His Rant at Comedy Club
By Bill Carter The New York Times November 22, 2006

The special appearance Monday night by the embattled comedian Michael Richards on David Letterman’s late-night show on CBS was, according to several of those involved, awkward, disturbing, and yet completely arresting television.

As Jude Brennan, an executive producer of “Late Show With David Letterman,” put it, “It was one of those things that are a little difficult to watch, but you can’t stop watching.”

During the appearance, Mr. Richards tried to explain his actions at a Los Angeles comedy club on Friday night when he railed at several African-American audience members for heckling his act, using the most racially charged epithets, to a point where many audience members walked out and he himself simply dropped his microphone and walked off the stage.

Mr. Richards became a last-minute guest on the Letterman show only through the intervention of Jerry Seinfeld, his friend and co-star from their days on the now-classic comedy “Seinfeld.” Mr. Seinfeld, who had long been scheduled as a guest on the show Monday night, made an appeal to the show’s bookers and producers early yesterday afternoon to set up a satellite interview in which Mr. Richards could apologize publicly for the racially offensive remarks.

Mr. Richards’s act, at the Laugh Factory, which was caught on tape by a cellphone video camera, played Sunday and Monday on Web sites and television news programs. It stirred outrage and shock among many longtime fans of “Seinfeld,” who knew him chiefly as his loony but lovable character, Kramer.

Protesters appeared at the comedy club on Monday and its owner, Jamie Masada, said Mr. Richards would not be back until he had apologized. “That is one thing I won’t tolerate,” Mr. Masada told reporters on Monday.

Oddly, Mr. Richards actually appeared again at the Laugh Factory on Saturday night, before the tape of his offensive tirade became public.

Once the tape began circulating Monday, several news organizations sought reaction from Mr. Seinfeld, and he offered comments about how personally upset he was by what Mr. Richards had said, calling it “a horrible, horrible mistake” that he was “sick over.”

But Mr. Seinfeld’s appearance on the Letterman show was looming later in the day. As Ms. Brennan explained it, he had previously worked out a plan with the show in which he would appear in two segments, opening with five minutes or so of new stand-up comedy material, followed by a chat with Mr. Letterman.

But given the outcry against Mr. Richards’s performance and his closeness to the comedian, Mr. Seinfeld concluded that it would be unthinkable for him to go on television and do a stand-up act, Ms. Brennan said.

Mr. Seinfeld contacted the show early Monday afternoon and asked if it would be possible to give over his first segment to some kind of appearance by Mr. Richards where he could express his regret over the incident.

Ms. Brennan said: “This was all Jerry’s doing. He came to us and said: ‘I’d like to be able to do this for my friend. I know he’s just shattered by this.’ ”

The producers took the proposal to Mr. Letterman, who is also a longtime friend of Mr. Seinfeld. Mr. Letterman approved the plan, Ms. Brennan said, “mainly because Dave knew how important this was to Jerry.” The satellite interview was set up at CBS headquarters in Television City in Los Angeles, in the studio where the network’s other late-night show, “The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson,” is taped.

Mr. Letterman was actually taping two shows on Monday, one that would be saved for this Friday night. The earlier show, with Mr. Seinfeld, was taped earlier than usual, at 4:30 p.m. Many of the audience members were not even aware of the incident with Mr. Richards at the comedy club, Ms. Brennan said.

Mr. Letterman used one joke about it during his monologue, referring to the strange outburst by Mr. Richards and saying, “I blame it on Borat.”

But Ms. Brennan acknowledged that when Mr. Seinfeld appeared later and began talking about the situation with Mr. Richards and how he wanted to give him a chance to come on the air and apologize, much of the audience still seemed to think it was part of a comedy bit.

Indeed, during the first part of Mr. Richards’s comments, even though he was clearly distraught and expressing abject regret, some of the audience reacted with laughter, until Mr. Seinfeld gently mentioned that the interview was not meant to be funny.

Mr. Richards made his apologies and said he had some “personal work to do.”

After the interview, Mr. Seinfeld said he loved Mr. Richards and wanted him to find a way to deal with this issue. He came back and performed a comedy segment with Mr. Letterman after a commercial break.

When he finished, he thanked Mr. Letterman for allowing him the chance to bring Mr. Richards on the show. Ms. Brennan said he thanked Mr. Letterman again off the air. “He could not have been more sincere,” she said.

Mr. Seinfeld declined to comment further yesterday through his publicist, Elizabeth Clark. She said Mr. Seinfeld would continue to support Mr. Richards. “Jerry is a just an extremely loyal person,” she said.

How much he will be able to help Mr. Richards was a question being debated throughout show business yesterday. Numerous commentators in Hollywood speculated that Mr. Richards might have damaged his career irreparably. Some also questioned whether the “Seinfeld” show itself, which has been among the most successful television shows of all time, still running in syndication and selling DVD sets of the episodes, will suffer if viewers are now uncomfortable with Mr. Richards’s portrayal of the goofy Kramer.

Mr. Seinfeld himself continues to thrive. He has written and acted in an animated film called “Bee Movie,” to be released next fall, and he performs his stand-up act to sold-out arenas most weekends.

As for Mr. Letterman, his show had its highest ratings in almost a year on Monday night.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/22/arts/television/22rich.html?ref=television
____________________________________________________________ _____
#2 - Nielsen Ratings
Richards Apology Boosts Letterman Ratings
'Seinfeld' co-star's mea culpa can't top Oprah visit
Zap2it.com Nov. 21, 2006

Michael Richards appeared on Monday (Nov. 20) night's "Late Show with David Letterman" to offer an apology for his public racist tirade, sending the show's ratings soaring.

Joining Letterman and former co-worker Jerry Seinfeld via satellite, Richards attempted to explain and express his regret for the Friday night incident that circled the Internet on Monday thanks to a video posted by TMZ.com.

In the clip, Richards responds to some vocal audience members at a comedy club performance with a series of increasingly shocking racial slurs, building to a crescendo of ""You can talk, you can talk, you're brave now motherf**ker. Throw his a** out. He's a n****r! He's a n****r! He's a n****r! A n****r, look, there's a n****r!"

Appearing on "Late Show," Richards appeared solemn.

"You know, I'm really busted up over this and I'm very, very sorry to those people in the audience, the blacks, the Hispanics, whites -- everyone that was there that took the brunt of that anger and hate and rage and how it came through, and I'm concerned about more hate and more rage and more anger coming through, not just towards me but towards a black/white conflict," Richards said in the seven-minute segment. "There's a great deal of disturbance in this country and how blacks feel about what happened in Katrina, and, you know, many of the comics, many of performers are in Las Vegas and New Orleans trying to raise money for what happened there, and for this to happen, for me to be in a comedy club and flip out and say this crap, you know, I'm deeply, deeply sorry."

Letterman cut Richards no slack and frequently interrupted for clarifications on various points. The 57-year-old actor became increasingly frustrated and emotional.

"I'm not a racist," he insisted. "That's what's so insane about this".

The show's overnight ratings were the highest in nearly a year. "Late Show" did a 5.2/13 in metered markets, beating "The Tonight Show" by 18 percent. It was Letterman's best metered market performance since Dec. 1, 2005, an episode featuring a visit by Oprah Winfrey.

http://www.zap2it.com/tv/news/zap-richardslettermanapology,0,2612746.story?coll=zap-tv-headlines
____________________________________________________________ _____
#3 - Critic's Notebook
Time to Sein off on Kramer: Actor’s career goes up in smoke
By Margery Eagan The Boston Herald November 21, 2006

Mel Gibson did his anti-Semitic tirade. Rush Limbaugh did an awful shake-like-a-bowlful-of-jelly Parkinson’s disease imitation. Fox-TV, until they canceled The O.J. Show yesterday, had murdered mothers in the cross hairs.

And now Seinfeld’s Kramer has done this crazed, five n-words in a row, “upside down with a (expletive deleted) fork up your (expletive deleted),” on-stage racist rant. It’s a mad dog, cringe-inducing, vitriol-thick meltdown that has to be seen to be believed.

What’s next? Seinfeld’s George Costanza attacking special needs toddlers?

And who could have predicted this in a million years from Kramer, beloved Kramer!

Kramer with the Brillo hair sticking up and the two-tone brogue shoes and the loose shirt sticking out. Kramer who’d whirl into Jerry’s apartment in one careening yet seemless slide. Kramer, the weirdly lovable with the bubble baths, the Cuban cigars, the extra MSG on his Chinese food, the time he got even with the laundromat owner. “What’s the big deal? I’m just going to put a little concrete in the washing machine.”

Kramer, the main delight and attraction, if not the star, of one of TV’s best shows ever, nine seasons, dozens of perect episodes.

“I don’t play Kramer,” actor Michael Richards once said of himself in an interview. “He plays me . . . It’s like I’m channeling him. I put on those shoes and the outfit and push my hair up a little, and he’s there.”

But who is there, exactly? Was this stuff always percolating, unknown and unimagined? Will Kramer, like Mel, now blame the bottle, drugs, or Tourette’s Syndrome-in-extremis, and head for rehab?

“When I get drunk and do drugs I have sex with strangers and regret it in the morning,” says one local bachelor suspicious of the addiction-made-me-do-it defense. “I don’t turn into Kramer, the KKK years.”

Meanwhile, like millions of Americans, here I am with my Seinfeld DVD collection, Seasons 1-6; with a dozen of the Channel 25 (7 p.m.) re-runs recorded on my DVR, right before “The Office,” right after “Sponge Bob.”

I can’t count the nights we’ve sat around relishing every Kramer raised eyebrow, every lunatic plot and plan, even if we’ve already seen it 10 times. But how can you ever revel in Kramer now? Or Seinfeld, period?

Perhaps this is the Seinfeld Curse, Part II. Part I: the show’s alumni, with the exception of Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Elaine), who won an Emmy this year, have not gone on to bigger and better things.

The Michael Richards Show lasted a mere eight episodes, from Oct. 24 to Dec. 19, 2000. Critics panned it; viewers stayed away. Since then Richards has appeared only in a made for TV movie, “David Copperfield,” an indie film I’ve never heard of, and, apparently, comedy clubs.

Seinfeld creator Larry David, star of HBO’s “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” based Kramer on a real person, Kenny Kramer, who gives tourists The Kramer Reality Tour of New York, $37.50. Stories are circulating now that a sympathetic David, routinely accused of racism by characters on his own show, will give Richards a chance to redeem himself on an episode he’ll write for Richards. Possible title: “Curb Your Racism.”

Others point to remakes of TV classics we know Kramer won’t be co-starring in: “Good Times,” “Diff’rent Strokes,” “Sanford & Son,” “The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air” and “What’s Happening!” are among them.

If I hadn’t seen this video myself, I’d find all this amusing. But I did, and there was nothing amusing about Kramer Friday. It was just creepy, painful, really disturbing. It’s ruined him and, horribly, the show that made him.

http://news.bostonherald.com/columnists/view.bg?articleid=168325
____________________________________________________________ _____
#4 - Critic's Notebook
Bewildered-Sounding Man and Bewildering Words
By Virginia Heffernan The New York Times November 22, 2006

The hangdog apologia performance of Michael Richards was not unlike the racist rant he was nominally apologizing for: spontaneous, convincing, rambling and not funny at all. But as was not the case in his freak-out, these effects worked to his advantage on Monday night.

It helped that for the chastening on “The Late Show With David Letterman,” where he appeared via satellite to explain the murderous-sounding bigotry he had expressed onstage in Los Angeles on Friday night, he no longer looked furious and fired up. Instead he appeared ashen, like a transplant candidate or an arrested priest. In this state Mr. Richards explained, extenuated and mumbled.

And while he spoke, a minor show-business miracle took place: the actor known almost exclusively as Kramer on “Seinfeld” managed, as he has not been able to do in his post-“Seinfeld” career, to fumble his way into a new and surprisingly credible — if unsympathetic — persona. This persona didn’t try to wheedle his way back into our good graces, to show us a saint where there had been a sinner, or a teetotaler where there had been a drunk. Instead Mr. Richards was simply an angry white man laid bare.

As he put it in his act: “This shocks you. It shocks you. To see what’s buried beneath.”

No overprocessed doublespeak on a Teleprompter seemed to supply his talking points. Unlike more pro-forma apologizers — Senator George Allen and Mel Gibson — Mr. Richards, after all, did not have a whole lot to lose. He hardly had the publicist Howard Rubenstein running off a copy of his firm’s best “truly sorry, humbly repent, Hazelden” breast-beating memo.

The first clue that Mr. Richards was winging it, without a damage-control team, came with his use of the term “Afro-Americans” to describe the hecklers to whom he had said what he called “nasty things” during his comedy act at the Laugh Factory in Los Angeles. These are the people to whom he shouted: “Shut up! Fifty years ago, we’d have you upside-down” and impaled with a fork. And then, with obscene intensifiers, he had gone on to insult the hecklers, over and over, using a savage racist epithet, and defending his right to do so.

If “Afro-Americans” was meant to show that Mr. Richards had righted his ship, it didn’t work that way: the term, which after “blacks” and before “African-Americans” had briefly been the one that white people used to sound contrite or serious, now sounds out of step and even comic. One of the first replies on YouTube to the clip of the video, in fact, said, “AFRO American??” And then, “lol.”

But there was much more in Mr. Richards’s freewheeling apology to parse. Though many viewers who commented on the clip seemed interested in his non-sequitur Hurricane Katrina reference, his halting analysis of his strategy as a comedian may reveal more about his racist comments.

“You know,” Mr. Richards said at one point, seeming to address Mr. Letterman directly, “I’m a performer. I push the envelope. I work in a very uncontrolled manner onstage. I do a lot of free-association” — he slurred the word a bit — “and spontaneous. I go into character.”

That fairly simple point seemed, in the delivery, important. In the Laugh Factory clip, which was cut, framed and semiliterately subtitled by AOL’s entertainment site, TMZ.com, Mr. Richards begins by saying, “Shut up! Fifty years ago ...” and then the material becomes unpublishable. But viewed with the possibility in mind that he’s creating characters, it’s easy to see a trace of parody in the way he hams up his racist word, shaking his fist like the leader of a lynch mob.

A second later, when he retreats into another voice, one of hushed horror — “Ooh, Ooh” — it certainly seems as though the hang-’em-high character has been at least partly that, a character.

To Mr. Richards’s credit, he didn’t spend too much time in his appearance with Mr. Letterman on the question of whether he is or is not a racist. Sure, he delivered this magisterially messed-up sentence: “You can’t — I don’t — I know peop — people could — blacks could feel — what he’s — I’m not a racist. That’s what’s so insane about this.”

But what he emphasized so hard there, he seemed to retract a moment later. “And yet,” he said, looking caught. “It’s said!”

Ooh — that passive voice. “It’s said.” That can’t feel good.

Then Mr. Richards caught his breath for one last time. “It comes through! It fires out of me! Even now, in the passion, and the — and the — that’s here, as I — as I — confront myself.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/22/arts/television/22heff.html?ref=television
____________________________________________________________ _____
#5 - Critic's Notebook
Backlash of the 'Borat' effect
Letterman's audience takes Michael Richards' apology for his racist tirade as a joke
By Paul Brownfield The Los Angeles Times November 22, 2006

Two big-time media operations came correct on the same day — Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., which claimed Monday to be listening to America's outrage when it canceled the "If I Did It" book and TV publicity stunt starring O.J. Simpson, and Jerry Seinfeld's "Seinfeld," which brought off a bizarre and discomfiting public apology Monday night for cast member Michael Richards, a.k.a. Kramer, who appeared on "The Late Show With David Letterman" to express contrition for a racist tirade onstage Friday at the Laugh Factory.

The "Seinfeld" apology — Seinfeld in studio with Dave, Richards via satellite from what appeared to be a therapist's waiting room in L.A., identified as Television City — looked for all the world like a bit.

Indeed, the studio audience (at least those who, having queued up all afternoon for the Letterman taping, hadn't seen or heard about the cellphone video making the rounds on the Internet and cable TV) tittered and guffawed as Richards apologized for saying "some pretty nasty things to some Afro-Americans."

"Stop laughing; it's not funny," Seinfeld could be heard admonishing the audience.

"I'm not even sure this is where I should be addressing the situation," Richards said, referring to the unintentional laughs his deadpan was getting.

CBS was sure. The appearance was teased on the local news and then on "CBS Evening News With Katie Couric," with the "Late Show" getting its highest ratings since last year's Oprah visit, according to the network.

Richards did look properly in turmoil about it all, even though there was no way to avoid the uncomfortable spectacle of "The Late Show" having become some bizarro "Primetime Live." And here, perhaps, was the first recorded incident of the "Borat" effect: guerrilla comedy intertwining with reality until it's a shoelace you can't undo.

You couldn't exactly blame the studio audience, conditioned to think comedy first, reality second, for receiving it all as a gag. Richards, like Sacha Baron Cohen, is more intense character actor than stand-up, with the not-insignificant difference that Cohen's comedy is character-specific, a projection outward to get everyone's guard down and expose a bigoted culture, whereas Richards, if you see the video, was just projectile vomiting, revealing only his own lack of judgment on Friday night.

Naked without an alcohol problem to fall back on, Richards had to attempt a different kind of revisionism, casting the source of his outburst as some combination of bad improv and an anger-management issue. The latter was a risky disclosure that he then broadened to a societal condition (oh no) of corrosive trash-talking, "whether or not it's between me and a couple of hecklers in the audience or between this country and another nation."

Call it "Cultural Learnings of Kramer to Make Benefit Wounds of America."

Richards might be a bad stand-up, a racist pig or both: That wasn't where this interview was going to go. While I have not seen Richards' act, I have been to the Laugh Factory many times; it's a "Mind of Mencia" hotbed, where you can make fun of, say, the mentally retarded with impunity, and immigrant-on-immigrant insults are well within the rules of engagement.

Richards, though, was not only the victim of his stupidity and temper, he also got doubly stung by the speedy distribution of citizen video, which can turn a bad night onstage into the boss' potential problem.

Indeed, it was surprising at first that Seinfeld commented at all on the brewing scandal, because the comedian has never been political in his act and seems generally to dislike stepping outside the burnished world of his career to comment on current events.

To that end, the whole point of "Seinfeld" is that it's a timeless show about self-involvement and uncomfortable confrontation, unlike, say, fellow classics "MASH" or "All in the Family," which are timepieces, connected to sociopolitical eras of American history.

That Seinfeld was helping out a friend on a night when he was supposed to be plugging the DVD release of Season 7 of "Seinfeld" seemed, of course, less than coincidental. As Letterman noted, "Seinfeld" is one of a handful of sitcoms that will be running on TV as long as there is TV, which contextualized the Richards scandal as comparable to Fred Mertz of "I Love Lucy" showing up on YouTube.com in a candid moment, berating his gardener.

"I know how shattered he is about this," Seinfeld said of Richards. "He deserves a chance to apologize."

In the insular stand-up world Seinfeld still uses to define himself, the Richards incident would probably not have escaped the clique of comedians at the bar, waiting to go on. But audiences today have cellphone cameras and know how to use them.

On "The Late Show," Seinfeld also plugged a book called "I Killed: True Stories of the Road From America's Top Comics," a series of first-person stories about life in the trenches of the comedy club world. Seinfeld, who contributed the foreword, told of the night he had a glass thrown at him at Catch a Rising Star. It was a sweet story about the old days that Seinfeld told with ease, and everyone in the audience, you could tell, felt a little better afterward.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-et-richards22nov22,1,4157821.story?coll=la-entnews-tv&ctrack=1&cset=true
____________________________________________________________ _____

Oh well, at least 'Law & Order' won't have to hire a has-been star like Chevy Chase (is Dan Akroyd busy?) to play the part in the inevitable 'Ripped from the Headlines' episode when Richards himself would probably be glad to do it for scale. The question is, can the 'L&O' grill machine spit this one out in time for February sweeps or will it have to wait until May (by which time this story will be as ancient history as Richards' post-'Seinfelf' career)? :o

fredfa

11-22-06, 11:11 AM

Tuesday’s metered market over-night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News the first post in this thread.

fredfa

11-22-06, 11:22 AM

Weekly Nielsen Notebook
Fox's in a pickle but don't count it out
It could still take the season over ABC
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Nov. 22, 2006

That Fox even considered running the aborted O.J. Simpson special, in which the former football player all but confessed to murdering his ex-wife, speaks to just how bad off the network is this fall.

Bad as in way bad. Its new shows are all struggling, several returning ones have fallen off, and its adults 18-49 average is 9 percent behind where it was at this time last year.

But even so, Fox may yet bounce back for its third straight season win among adults 18-49.

In what's become a common pattern, after a dismal fall, Fox last year made up a deficit that seemed also nearly insurmountable, winning by 0.1 over ABC.

And this year it has more upside potential. In January, it will air college football's high-rated Bowl Championship Series for the first time. Last year it aired on ABC, which will will retain the Rose Bowl.

In addition to not having the BCS, ABC will also not be airing the Super Bowl, which gave it a big boost last year.

Fox can also expect another strong showing from “American Idol,” TV’s No. 1 show. Every year media people predict the show will flag, but for the past four years it has grown or at least stayed even. And that also holds for “24,” which is coming off its best season ever among adults 18-49.

“We came out of baseball in a soft state, and we go right into November sweeps trying to rebuild our schedule,” says Preston Beckman, Fox’s scheduling guru. “I think we’ll come out of November only 0.1 behind where we were last November. We’re not happy about it, but we’re sort of accustomed to being in the position.”

Fox's current season-to-date average is 2.9, down from a 3.2 at this time last year. It has yanked or moved three of its new shows, “Vanished,” “Justice” and “Happy Hour,” after they all dipped below a 2.0 rating.

Onetime hit “The O.C.” has lost nearly half its 18-49 audience, and “Prison Break” is down from its first-year average, though to be fair, it has been anchoring a tough Monday 8 p.m. timeslot with virtually no lead-out support. Its Sunday comedy block, though competitive on a tough night, is also down 11 percent.

Fox’s one positive has been the impressive performance of the third-year drama “House,” up a full point from this time last year among 18-49s.

“We find ourselves here every year, for whatever reason,” Beckman says. “Hopefully, by the time ‘Idol’ and ‘24’ come on, and this year with the BCS bowl games to fortify the new year, hopefully we’ll find ourselves right back in the mix.”

Meanwhile, in English-language broadcast ratings for the week ended Nov. 19:

Among adults 25-54: ABC and CBS tied for first at 5.1/12, followed NBC third at 4.2/10, Fox fourth at 2.9/7 and CW fifth at 1.4/3.

Top five (18-49s):
1. ABC’s "Grey’s Anatomy" 8.7;
2. ABC’s "Desperate Housewives" 8.6;
3. CBS’s "CSI" 8.0;
4. ABC’s "Dancing with the Stars" 7.5;
5. ABC’s "Dancing with the Stars Results" 7.1.

Bottom five (18-49s):
91. CW’s "All of Us" 1.3;
92. CW’s "Everybody Hates Chris" 1.2;
93. CW’s "Veronica Mars" 1.2;
94. CW’s "The Game" 1.1;
195. CW’s "America’s Next Top Model Encore” 0.8.

Bottom five (total viewers):
191. CW’s " All of Us " 3.10 million;
92. CW’s "Girlfriends" 2.99 million;
93. CW’s " Veronica Mars " 2.69 million;
94. CW’s "The Game" 2.43 million; 95.
CW’s " America’s Next Top Model Encore " 1.83 million.

Show on the rise: "Dancing with the Stars Results," ABC, Wednesday 8 p.m. More than 27.5 million people tuned in to see the NFL’s all-time leading rusher Emmitt Smith defeat former “Saved by the Bell” star Mario Lopez in the results edition of ABC’s dance-fest. That was a 33 percent viewership gain versus the 20.7 million who tuned in to the previous week’s results show.

Show on the decline: "The Simpsons," Fox, Sunday 8 p.m. Ahh, the power of NFL football as a lead-in. The long-running animated show pulled a 4.3 rating among viewers 18-49 last week, off 17.3 percent from a 5.3 the previous week, when it had the benefit of Fox’s NFL postgame show as a lead-in.

• Ratings courtesy Nielsen Media Research.
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_8696.asp

fredfa

11-22-06, 11:56 AM

fredfa

11-22-06, 12:00 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Music awards give ABC a sweeps lift
Winning the night for the network with a 4.7
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Nov. 22, 2006

“Dancing with the Stars” is now off the air, but ABC continued to lead Tuesday night even without the hit reality show. In fact, it slightly bettered its season-to-date average on the night with the “American Music Awards.”

The “AMAs” averaged a 4.7 adults 18-49 rating from 8 to 11 p.m. last night, according to Nielsen overnights, 0.2 ahead of the network’s year-to-date average on the evening and giving ABC a win on the night.

The show was up 7 percent over last year’s 4.4 final rating. The extra ratings juice should only help to secure ABC’s November sweeps victory. The network was already ahead of NBC, and it still has its powerful Thursday and Sunday lineups to pad that lead.

The “AMAs,” like nearly every award show these days, aren’t what they used to be. Just five years ago, the show averaged a 10.4 household rating on ABC, though up till 2003 the show aired in January. In 2004, ABC move it to the more competitive November sweeps position, and it has aired the two lowest-rated editions since then, including a 7.4 household rating last year.

Last night’s show, while more than enough to win the night among 18-49s, may well join the list. It averaged just a 7.0 in households, barely edging NBC for second place.

ABC was first for the night among 18-49s with a 4.7 average rating and a 13 share. Fox was second at 4.2/11, CBS third at 3.4/9, NBC fourth at 2.6/7, CW fifth at 1.6/4 and Univision sixth at 1.5/4.

ABC led the 8 p.m. hour with a 4.7 for the first hour of the “AMAs.” CBS was second with a 4.2 for “NCIS,” with Univision and Fox tied for third at 2.0, Univision for “La Fea Mas Bella” and Fox for “Standoff.” CW was fifth with a 1.9 for “Gilmore Girls” and NBC sixth with just a 0.9 for an older-skewing special featuring singer Tony Bennett.

Fox took the lead at 9 p.m. with a 6.4 for “House,” followed by ABC with a 5.2 for its second hour of the “AMAs.” CBS was third with a 3.4 for “The Unit,” NBC fourth with a 2.3 for “Law & Order: CI,” Univision fifth with a 1.5 for “Mundo de Fieras” and CW sixth with a 1.2 for “Veronica Mars.”

At 10 p.m. NBC took the lead with a 4.5 average for “Law & Order: SVU.” ABC was second again with a 4.2 for the last hour of the “AMAs,” with CBS third with a 2.7 for “3 Lbs.,” which was down 0.2 from last week’s debut, and Univision fourth with a 1.1 for “Ver para Creer.”

Although it didn’t win one hour among 18-49s, CBS led the night among households with an 8.0 average rating and a 13 share. ABC was second at 7.0/11, NBC third at 6.7/11, Fox fourth at 6.2/10, CW fifth at 2.3/4 and Univision sixth at 2.0/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/printer_8725.asp

HDTVChallenged

11-22-06, 12:36 PM

LOSERS

"30 Rock." In its first night as part of NBC's Thursday lineup, Tina Fey's new sitcom posted its second-smallest audience ever -- a super-sized 5.2 million viewers. For comparison, here's how NBC's other series did on that night: "My Name Is Earl," 9.1 million viewers; "The Office," 8.4 million; "ER," 12.5 million.

That's too bad ... last week's episode was the best of the series so far.

fredfa

11-22-06, 04:20 PM

Bad, bad news for "30 Rock". And Thanksgiving night wouldn't figure to be a help.

And let's not forget the bad omen for the returning "Scrubs".

dad1153

11-22-06, 09:51 PM

Nielsen Notebook
For Court TV, crime as a literary thing
'Murder by the Book' helps boost the network
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLife Magazine November 22, 2006

For years, Court TV has been best known for courtroom coverage of big celebrity trials, and it made for good television when the accused was Michael Jackson, O.J. Simpson or Scott Peterson. Other times, it was pretty ho-hum fare.

But that's been changing, with the emphasis away from the courtroom to encompass all of crime as a genre of storytelling in the fullest sense. The goal: boost ratings but also draw in younger viewers.

It's been a gradual process, but it's been working.

Last year, it introduced a new primetime slogan, “Seriously Entertaining.” Then in January Court TV renamed its primetime “RED,” which stands for “Real, Exciting, Dynamic.”

And over the past two weeks, it has rolled out two new shows that are big departures from its standard forensic series. Both debuted to big ratings.

“Most Shocking,” which premiered on Wednesday, Nov. 8, is a reality show that airs clips of outrageous criminal behavior, such as erratic drivers crashing their cars and dangerous police pursuits.

Its debut had Court TV’s best-ever Wednesday 8 p.m. average among adults 18-49, drawing 727,000. It also was second on basic cable in the timeslot.

Then last Monday, "Murder by the Book" debuted with 1.3 million total viewers, 20 percent above the network’s primetime average. The series focuses on American crime writers, with the debut episode about the unsolved murder in the "The Black Dahlia," in which writer James Ellroy retells the story of his mother's brutal death decades ago in Los Angeles.

For the second straight week, Court TV had its most-watched week in history. The 15-year-old network averaged 1.08 million viewers and 866,000 households in primetime for the week ended Nov. 19, breaking the records of 1.06 million and 850,000 the week before.

The “RED” lineup has often doubled the 18-49 timeslot averages from the same weeknight last year, and it could help Court TV lower its median age yet again, which the network told Media Life last year was one of its goals.

Court TV went from 53 in 2004 to 50 in 2005, and in first quarter it had its best-ever primetime average among 18-49s, averaging 924,000 per night.

Early next year, Court TV will debut its first-ever scripted series, entitled “Til Death Do Us Part.” It’s an anthology of romantic murder mysteries that will be hosted by eccentric film director John Waters.

Meanwhile, in other cable ratings for the week ended Nov. 19:

Top five networks in primetime (18-49s): USA, ESPN, TBS, TNT, A&E

Top five networks in primetime (total viewers): USA, ESPN, TNT, Cartoon Network, TBS

Top movie (18-49s): USA’s “Elf” (Saturday 8 p.m.) 2.08 million

Top sporting event (total viewers): ESPN’s “Monday Night Football (Buccaneers vs. Panthers)” (Monday 8:30 p.m.) 9.6 million

Shows making the top 10 among 18-34s, 18-49s and 25-54s:

1.- ESPN’s “Buccaneers/Panthers” (Monday 8:30 p.m.);
2.- FX’s “Nip Tuck” (Tuesday 10 p.m.);
3.- USA’s “WWE Entertainment” (Monday 10 p.m.);
4.- USA’s “Elf” (Saturday 8 p.m.);
5.- BET’s “BET Hip Hop Awards” (Wednesday 9 p.m.)

Show on the rise: CMT’s “CMT Giants: Reba” (Saturday 8 p.m.) The premiere telecast of this Ms. McEntire celebration attracted 1.7 million total viewers, a 387 percent boost over the network’s average so far this quarter.

Show on the decline: ESPN’s “College Football Thursday” (Thursday, 7:30 p.m.) ESPN’s game between West Virginia and Pittsburgh was still a top-10 program among households, drawing 2.82 million last week. But that was down a sharp 39.2 percent from the 4.64 million households the network attracted for the previous week’s battle of unbeatens between Louisville and Rutgers.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_8699.asp

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:00 PM

TV Notebook
Walters: O'Donnell-Ripa feud is over
Associated Press November 22, 2006

Barbara Walters said Wednesday all is now "well with the world" following a flare-up earlier this week between Rosie O'Donnell and Kelly Ripa on "The View." Ripa called in to the ABC daytime talk show after co-host O'Donnell accused her of making a homophobic comment to Clay Aiken, a guest host on "Live With Regis and Kelly."

Aiken covered Ripa's mouth with his hand during an interview on Friday's show. Ripa, 36, pushed his hand away.

"Oh, I'm in trouble," said the 27-year-old "American Idol" star, to which Ripa responded, "No, I just don't - I don't know where that hand's been, honey."

O'Donnell said Tuesday on "The View": "If that was a straight man, if that was a cute man, if that was a guy that she didn't question his sexuality, she would have said a different thing."

Ripa said O'Donnell misunderstood her remark.

"He's shaking hands with everybody in the audience. I mean, it's cold and flu season. That's what I meant," she said. "And to imply that it's anything homophobic is outrageous, Rosie, and you know better."

"I understand cold and flu season," O'Donnell replied. "I'm just saying from where I sit as a gay person in the world, I have to tell you, that's how it came off to me."

Aiken has been the target of speculation about his sexuality. Tabloid reports earlier this year suggested he had a gay affair. Aiken has never directly addressed the rumors.

Roger Widynowski, Aiken's spokesman at RCA Records, declined comment on the Ripa-O'Donnell flare-up when contacted by The Associated Press.

On Wednesday's "The View," Walters said, "Rosie O'Donnell is one of the kindest, most sensitive people I know. And so is our friend Kelly Ripa. And Rosie and Kelly talked yesterday after the show. Rosie and Clay Aiken have talked. And all is well with the world, and all is well with them."

Walters said her speech was unrehearsed and that O'Donnell was unaware she was going to say something.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/entertainment/television/16078621.htm

____________________________________________________________ _____
You know, it took a co-worker pointing it out for me to realize that O'Donnell may have inadvertedly outed Aiken as a gay person with her outburst even though he's never addressed his sexuality publicly. In the back of my mind (and obviously Rosie's) I've already taken it for granted that Clay Aiken is gay. Rosie coming into Aiken's defense for Ripa's alleged insult felt as natural to me as when Black leaders are sought for comment by the media when a racial controversy (like the Michael Richards incident) erupts. Oh well, the countdown to O'Donnell's eventual implosion that will get her sacked from 'The View' continues. Tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock... :rolleyes:

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:05 PM

Nielsen Notebook
'AMA' Soars for ABC; Bennett Tanks NBC
By James Hibberd TV Week November 22, 2006

Music specials decided the ratings fate of two networks last night.

On ABC, the three-hour "American Music Awards" single-handedly gave the network a Tuesday night ratings victory. The awards show received a 4.7 rating among adults 18 to 49, according to preliminary Nielsen Media Research data, which is an improvement on last year's ceremony.

But while the "Music Awards" hit a high note for ABC, a Tony Bennett special was jeered off the stage at NBC. "Tony Bennett: An American Classic" at 8 p.m. earned a stunning .9, making it NBC's lowest-rated program in the time period in 15 years. After that, the remainder of NBC's lineup fell like dominos, with "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" (2.3) down 26 percent from the previous week and "Law & Order: SVU" (4.5) down 15 percent. Both "L&Os" were the lowest-rated original episodes of the season.

The debacle put NBC in fourth place for the night. In second place was Fox, with "House" at 9 p.m. (6.4) the top-rated program for the night. Its lead-in, "Standoff," had a weak 2.0, matching its series low.

CBS was third with its procedural block, leading off with "NCIS" at 8 p.m. (4.2) earning its best rating since last March, followed by "The Unit" (3.4) and "3 Lbs" (2.7). The latter was down 7 percent from its premiere.

The CW had an on-par "Gilmore Girls" (1.9) and "Veronica Mars" (1.2).

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11115

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:15 PM

Nielsen Notebook
Syndicated Ratings: Dr. Phil Edges Closer to Oprah
By John Heggerton Broadcasting & Cable November 22, 2006

Dr. Phil edged closer to talk leader Oprah in the syndicated ratings for the week ending Nov. 12, the first full week of the November sweeps, with his highest ratings since May 2005.

That was part of a generally buoyant week for talkers and most magazine shows.

Phil was up 11% from the prior week to a 5.9 and was the only talker up over the same week last year, with a 7% bump. He was helped by a 6.6, just making it into his top-five all time ratings performances, for a Nov. 6 episode in which it took a lie detector to settle a family dispute. Oprah still led the way at a 7.2, but that was down 6%.

Also hitting new season highs were Maury, up 4% to a 2.5 for fourth place, and Jerry Springer, up 13% to a season-best 1.8, in sixth place. Springer's ratings are up 29% in the past month, likely do to the buzz generated by his appearance as a contestant on ABC's highly rated Dancing With the Stars.

Live With Regis & Kelly dropped the costumes but held onto their Halloween-week ratings, staying even at a 3.5. Ellen Degeneres was also unchanged from the week before with a 2.1 rating. Rounding out the unchanged trio was Montel at a 1.7.

Tyra Banks was up 15% to a 1.5, while Martha Stewart held steady at a 1.4, though its highest ratings of the season in 10 metered markets, including three of the top 15.

In rookie action, Rachael Ray continued to crush the newcomers, up 5% to a 2.1 and up 20% in the key women 18-49 demo to a 1.2.

Dr. Keith Ablow was well below Ray's 2.1, in second with a 1.1 rating, though that was up 10%. Greg Behrendt followed at a .9, up 13%. Megan Mullally was unchanged at a .8.

In the magazine category, Entertainment Tonight scored its best ratings in eight months with a 5.6, up 4% from the prior week thanks to its coverage of the NOv. 8 divorce filing by Britney Spears. ET was also the only mag to improve its rating over last year at this time, up 2%.

The Spears coverage boosted ratings 20% from the prior week to a 6.0, ET's strongest performance since March 6, the day after the Oscars.

Inside Edition recorded a 3.6, up 6%. ET spin-off, The Insider, took third with a 2.7, up 4%, while Access Hollywood was unchanged at a 2.6 and Extra! scored a new season-high 2.3, up 10%.

Game and court shows were little changed.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6394517.html?display=Breaking+News

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:27 PM

The four major networks' take on how unfair it is to deal with the FCC. Boo-Hoo! :rolleyes:

The Business of TV
Peacock Pecks At Indecency Reg Underpinnings
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable November 22, 2006

NBC has taken aim at the FCC's indecency enforcement regime and powers, arguing that the combination of the V-chip and ratings system is a more narrowly tailored means of giving parents control over content than the FCC's current daytime ban.

When NBC broke with its years-long policy of not using the TV ratings descriptors, it was viewed as a major step toward a challenge of FCC indecency enforcement regulation, with the networks able to make th argument that since they were all using the ratings system and all new TV's had to have a v-chip, the FCC's policy was too broad.

In the Playboy case several years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that an effective program-blocking mechanism was the least restrictive means to protect kids from cable content.

NBC also argues that FCC exceeded its authority by extending its profanity rules to cover fleeting expletives, or even non-fleeting ones that do not have a religious component--i.e. blasphemy.

That was one of several arguments the network made in an extensive brief to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. That court is hearing a challenge by the networks--except ABC--to the FCC's four profanity rulings of last March.

NBC took a broad swipe at the underpinnings of the FCC's entire indecency enforcement regime while it was at it, saying that the Pacifica decision's foundation in the "special" nature of broadcasting had been eroded and that it is "far more restrictive than necessary" to protect children from content their parents don't want them to see or hear.

Any speech restrictions must be the most narrowly tailored means to a compelling government interest.

No NBC show was the subject of a profanity ruling, but the FCC's decision to crack down on profanity is rooted in its decision that NBC's broadcast of Bono's "****ing brilliant" on the Golden Globes several years back was indecent.

The FCC initially concluded it wasn't but was urged to rethink that by legislators.

As did Fox and CBS in their filings, NBC argued that the FCC's decision was arbitrary and capricious, saying the commission's "regulatory somersaults and malleable standards have left broadcasters completely unable to predict whether the Commission will find a particular broadcast indecent or profane, rendering the Commission's enforcement efforts void for vagueness."

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6394564.html
____________________________________________________________ _____

The Business of TV
Fox challenges FCC authority over indecency
By Brooks Boliek Hollywood Reporter November 23, 2006

The government's new policy that is punishing broadcasters for a slip of the tongue is killing live television as it allows the FCC to look over producers' shoulders and edit content, the Fox network told a federal appeals court in New York on Wednesday in a key case challenging commission authority over indecent broadcasts.

In its brief, the network contends that the FCC is doing "serious violence to the First Amendment" with its policy that finds certain words so vile they are automatically actionable under its indecency rules.

"Under the FCC's new policy, virtually any uses of the words '****" and "****" are prohibited, no matter how isolated or fleeting, no matter how inadvertent, and no matter whether they occur spontaneously during live programing," Fox attorneys argue. "The result is the end of truly live television and a gross expansion of the FCC's intrusion in the creative and editorial process. The FCC now second-guesses creative decisions on a show-by-show basis, levying huge fines if the artist or broadcaster has misjudged what the FCC's current commissioners will find offensive."

In particular the case involved Fox's broadcasts of the 2002 and 2003 "Billboard Music Awards." During the 2002 show Cher told the audience "People have been telling me I'm on the way out every year? So **** 'em." While in 2003 Nicole Ritchie said: "Have you ever tried to get cow **** out of a Prada purse? It's not so ****ing simple."

While the commission found that the shows violated the broadcast indecency rules it didn't issue a fine, because the shows predated a policy established in 2004 after Bono said wining a Golden Globe was "really, really ****ing brilliant."

The FCC maintains that its policy is necessary to restrain the Hollywood creative community which would go berserk if not restrained.

"By continuing to argue that it is okay to say the F-word and the S-word on television whenever it wants, Hollywood is demonstrating once again how out of touch it is with the American people," said FCC spokesman David Fiske. "We believe there should be some limits on what can be shown on television when children are likely to be watching."

But the TV networks say that's bull. Newspapers can print whatever words they want, but ones with wide family circulation don't print the words in question. If newspapers can do it, and don't, then why would broadcasters take a different course, argued one network executive.

In their appeal, Fox contends that they, like most of the other networks, aren't demanding that the FCC abdicate its responsibility, but rather exercise it with the restraint shown in the past.

"The FCC's abandonment of its restrained enforcement policy -- which was grounded in (court rulings) and has served the public for three decades -- violates the statute of administrative principles and it does serious violence to the First Amendment."

Since the FCC's decision in the Golden Globes case, the policy has been controversial as broadcasters argue that the commission changed the long-standing policy that held broadcasters blameless for the unplanned utterance of individual words. This case, in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, and another in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia involving CBS's broadcast of the 2004 Superbowl halftime show in which Janet Jackon's breast was bared, both challenge the government's enforcement of its indecency statutes.

As defined by the FCC, material is indecent if it "in context, depicts or describes sexual or excretory activities or organs in a patently offensive manner as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium." While obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment, indecent speech is, as the federal courts and the FCC have ruled that such speech can be safely aired from 10 p.m.-6 a.m.

Fox contends that it had no idea Cher or Ritchie were going to use those words so they should not be held responsible.

The network also questions veracity of the policy's ability to protect children and contends that less-intrusive means like the V-chip exist to implement a policy regulating speech. In speech-regulation cases, the government is required to use the least restrictive means.

It also contends that commission flip-flops on individual shows and violations make it impossible to figure out what exactly the agency means. It pointed out that the commission has said the use of versions of "****" and "****" in the Steven Spielberg movie "Saving Private Ryan" is not actionable while their use in the Martin Scorsese documentary "The Blues: Godfathers and Sons" is.

"The FCC cannot explain why in some cases he perceived merit of the material -- even material that uses expletives prolifically -- saves some broadcasts from a finding of patent offensiveness but not others," Fox wrote.

The core of Fox's argument, however, lies at the damage the commission can do to the rights reserved to First Amendment speakers.

"Instead of legal standards, the commission's contemporary communities standards for the broadcast medium are determined only by the commissions 'collective experience and knowledge'," Fox wrote. "This assertion of 'we-know-it-when-we-see-it' -- or worse, 'we-know-it-when-someone-with-political-influence-over-us-says-we-see-it' -- is not a plainly-expressed legal standard that allowed for predictive judgments by broadcasters."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3ie031ba71561ae18a03758282b9dd5d03
____________________________________________________________ _____
The Business of TV
Alphabet off FCC's case
ABC buckles after agency reverses ruling
By William Triplett Variety November 22, 2006

ABC has withdrawn from the multinetwork court challenge of FCC indecency rulings. Move comes after the agency's recent reversal of a finding against an episode of "NYPD Blue."
Alphabet had joined CBS, Fox and NBC in a legal challenge of four indecency rulings issued in March -- against CBS for a broadcast of "The Early Show" and Fox for two live broadcasts of the Billboard Music Awards, as well as "NYPD Blue." While the Peacock had no ruling to appeal, it nonetheless joined case under amicus status.

But on Nov. 6, the Federal Communications Commission announced that after reviewing the four rulings, it would reverse indecency findings against CBS and ABC, citing legal and procedural reasons.

CBS is still planning on filing a brief -- due tomorrow at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals -- despite the reversal.

But ABC "will not file a brief" and will "not seek to participate in oral argument," Seth P. Waxman, counsel for ABC, wrote in a letter to the clerk of the Second Circuit on Tuesday.

However, since the Parents Television Council has asked the FCC to reverse its reversals, the Alphabet asked the court that its "petition for review be held in abeyance" until the FCC has decided on PTC's appeal.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954348.html?categoryid=14&cs=1
____________________________________________________________ _____
The Business of TV
CBS Says FCC Stacks Indecency Enforcement Deck
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable November 22, 2006

CBS has told a federal appeals court that the FCC's crackdown on broadcast profanity is unjustified, unconstitutional, arbitrary and capricious, saying the FCC should return to a more First Amendment-friendly approach to indecency enforcement.

The commission initially ruled that The Early Show's broadcast of the word "********ter" violated FCC restrictions on indecency and profanity, part of a package of four profanity rulings.

CBS and others sued the FCC over the rulings, after which the FCC asked the court for a chance to review the decisions citing a procedural flaw. It wound up changing its mind and deciding it had not had sufficiently deferred to CBS's assertion that the show was a news program, which has a higher threshold for indecency and profanity findings.

The FCC vacated the finding against The Early Show--and one against ABC--while upholding two against Fox. But CBS remains a petitioner in the case since that finding is being appealed by the Parent's Television Council and thus the FCC could change its mind yet again.

In a brief filed Wednesday with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York, CBS argues that the FCC has for 30 years taken a cautious approach to indecency regulation to "avoid conflict with the First Amendment." Now, it says, it has abandoned its long-established policy of not cracking down on "fleeting, isolated or unintended expletives" that it argues was the "cornerstone" of that restrained policy.

"The FCC's adoption of what amounts to a zero-tolerance approach is a direct repudiation of governing constitutional principles."

CBS argues that the FCC's approach "ignores the significant technological and legal developments since the Supreme Court last considered the issue in 1978."

It also argues that the commission has no evidence that that the broadcasts it found indecent and profane were patently offensive when measured against a national community standard, its effort to unilaterally declare that to be the case notwithstanding.

The FCC has said that "context" is King in deciding what is or isn't indecent, but CBS suggests the commission is dealing that king from the bottom of the deck.

In this proceeding, argues CBS, "the commission has once again demonstrated that it can and does manipulate its 'contextual factors' to reach whatever result it wants in any given case." CBS says the commission has invoked context to "expand infinitely its ability to restrict speech.

CBS stopped short of challenging the underpinnings of the indecency enforcement regime.

In a statement accompanying the court filing, CBS said: "Contrary to the recent statements by the FCC suggesting we are seeking the right to use expletives at will in our programming, all CBS is seeking is a return to the FCC's previous time-honored practice of more measured indecency enforcement."

CBS also filed a brief this week--making similar arguments--in its challenge to the FCC's $550,000 fine for the Janet Jackson/Justin Timberlake Super Bowl reveal. The FCC said of that filing: "“CBS believes there should be no limits on what can be shown on television even during family viewing events like the Super Bowl; we continue to believe they are wrong.”

That would seem at odds with the FCC's characterization of broadcasters' general standard, which it used to justify its own take on community standards. In its revised Nov. 7 decision on the four--whittled down to two--profanity findings, the commission had said: "Taken as a whole, broadcasters’ practices with respect to programming aired during the safe harbor reflect their recognition that airing the “F-Word” and the “S-Word” on broadcast television is generally offensive to the viewing audience and, in the usual case, not consistent with contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium."

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6394506.html

dad1153

11-22-06, 10:38 PM

TV Notebook
Murdoch, Accustomed to Risks, Retreats From One
By Richard Siklos The New York Times November 22, 2006

Rupert Murdoch has built a career on taking risks.

His media programming has filled a lucrative niche by never being afraid to push the limits of taste, typical of his swashbuckling business style.

But his decision to cancel an O. J. Simpson television and book project by subsidiaries of the News Corporation was a rare acknowledgment that there are limits.

“He learned after the fact how far the envelope would push before ripping,” said Todd Gitlin, a professor in the journalism school at Columbia University who specializes in mass communication. “Normally he has a fairly keen sense of the cultural limits — this time he blew it.”

On Tuesday, even as copies of “If I Did It” by Mr. Simpson and published by ReganBooks were en route to bookstores and as publicity for a coming TV special on Fox was under way, Mr. Murdoch scuttled the venture after it generated outrage both within and outside his company.

“I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project,” Mr. Murdoch said in a statement.

“We are sorry for any pain this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson,” Mr. Murdoch added, referring to Mr. Simpson’s former wife and a friend of hers, who were both murdered in 1994. In 1995, Mr. Simpson was acquitted of criminal charges involving their deaths, but was found liable in a later civil trial.

Mr. Murdoch was at his farm in Australia yesterday and unavailable for further comment.

Mr. Murdoch has taken considerable business risks through five decades building a media empire — including borrowing heavily and flirting with insolvency to build a British satellite television business, and starting a fourth major TV network in the United States in the face of daunting competition.

One of his hallmarks — and a recurring source of controversy over the years — has been his boldness in pushing the limits of public taste at his multinational TV and publishing outlets.

In Britain, where he owns the nation’s largest group of newspapers, Mr. Murdoch has stirred controversy over the years, particularly at his tabloid The Sun, which shows a topless woman in each edition. The Sun’s most famous front page headline was the word “Gotcha!” referring to Britain’s sinking of an Argentine battleship with the loss of more than 300 sailors during the Falklands war.

Still, his most audacious fare has been on his Fox TV network in the United States. Two of its hits in the past were the situation comedy “Married With Children” and the early reality hit “Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire,” which probably would not raise eyebrows today.

In recent years, under the guidance of Fox’s executive vice president for alternative programming, Mike Darnell, who also oversaw the O. J. Simpson project, the network has raised the ante for provocative fare. (Mr. Darnell also oversees the network’s major hit, “American Idol.”)

Short-lived Fox programs included one on which magicians revealed their long-held secrets; one called “The Chamber” that had quiz show contestants being terrorized by flames or alligators; “Man vs. Beast” (featuring 44 dwarfs in a tug-of-war against an elephant); “Married by America,” in which viewers voted on which singles would be matched with marital candidates; and, recently, a program called “Who’s Your Daddy” that showed a woman who was adopted as a child trying to figure out which contestant was her real father.

One show proposed by Mr. Darnell that did not get the green light from Fox executives was “Jumbo Jet Crash: The Ultimate Safety Test”, which would have shown an empty jet equipped with cameras hurtling into the desert.

Even while rivals have criticized Mr. Murdoch, they have ended up emulating him. For instance, NBC developed the reality show “Fear Factor,” which made contestants eat insects and perform other repugnant acts. His early championing of so-called tabloid TV through the program “A Current Affair” heralded the era of celebrity obsession.

But rarely has a project sanctioned by Mr. Murdoch and the News Corporation’s president, Peter A. Chernin — as the O. J. Simpson project apparently was — been withdrawn at the last moment.

HarperCollins, the publishing unit of the News Corporation, did cancel a book by the last British governor in Hong Kong, Chris Patten, in 1998. While some interpreted that as a move by Mr. Murdoch to protect his interests in China, Mr. Murdoch blamed publishing executives.

Mr. Murdoch’s decision to scuttle the Simpson special and book came as some Fox affiliates refused to broadcast the program and as on-air personalities on the Fox News Channel criticized it. The show was to be broadcast next week, after the book’s publication on Nov. 30. The Fox network has been having a dismal fall season so far, coming in last among the four big networks.

In general, though, Mr. Murdoch has reveled in the role of being an outsider pushing the limits and has been rewarded financially for doing so. The News Corporation, with movie studio, publishing, television, newspaper and Internet holdings, is worth $67 billion, as its shares have risen nearly 50 percent off their lows in the last year.

“He gives sports junkies sports; he gives conservatives conservative news; he runs a naked woman in one of his newspapers,” said Leo J. Hindery Jr., a longtime media executive. “He’s the most commercial guy you’ll ever meet in media.”

At the company’s annual meeting last month, Mr. Murdoch fielded accusations of “vulgar sexual content” on his Fox network and F/X cable network from a nonprofit watchdog group, the Parents Television Council. “The problem that we have with Fox is that it is the youngest-skewing of the major broadcast networks,” Melissa A. Clark, an official with the council said yesterday. “In addition to having some of the most offensive content on the networks, they are targeting that content to the youngest viewers.”

At the annual meeting, Mr. Murdoch thanked the group for its “thoughtful” comments and said that the people behind Fox were “family people” who were conscious of such concerns. “Perhaps there are occasions when they certainly step over the line, but we do our best,” he added.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/22/business/media/22murdoch.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin

dad1153

11-22-06, 11:07 PM

The New Season
'CSI' stages a Who-dunit with Daltrey
By Jay Bobbin Zap2It.com November 23, 2006

Tonight on "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" (9 p.m., CBS/2), it's a matter of Who as much as what.

CBS' hit Thursday series opens with The Who's classic song "Who Are You?," and tonight's surprise-filled episode - appropriately titled "Living Legend" - features the classic British rock group's lead singer, Roger Daltrey, alongside William Petersen, Marg Helgenberger and the other regulars in a plot based on actual Las Vegas history.

"Mickey Dunn was an old-style mobster who really ruled the town in the 1970s," explains co-executive producer Douglas Petrie, who wrote the script from a story he devised with "CSI" executive producer Carol Mendelsohn. "He was a very charming guy who loved to be photographed. He was the rock star of mob bosses.

"His legend grew when he vanished one night, never to be seen again. He's grown legendary in the way Jimmy Hoffa and Elvis have. No one knows whether he's dead or alive."

The "CSI" premise links that vanishing to several fictional murders. "Ultimately," Petrie says, "what we're going to do is solve the original mystery of the disappearance of Mickey Dunn." The tale also was inspired in part by the 1963 mystery movie "The List of Adrian Messenger," which included cameos by Frank Sinatra, Kirk Douglas and Burt Lancaster.

Similar star power was in mind for the "CSI" puzzler, and Mendelsohn deemed Daltrey a natural for it. "Ever since we first used The Who's music, we'd been talking about inviting Roger to be on the show," she says, "and we just never had the right role. Doug joined the writing staff this season, and there was a meeting of the minds about the kinds of episodes we loved."

An approach that would let Daltrey answer the musical question "Who Are You?" was conceived by Petrie, who notes, "It really goes back to the fun of classics like Agatha Christie mysteries or even the board game Clue, where you're led to continue guessing who's who and what's happening."

Serendipitous scheduling made Daltrey's "CSI" appearance possible. "We knew The Who was on tour," Mendelsohn says, "and we knew this [filming] would be somewhere in the middle of the U.S. portion, so we held our breath and crossed our fingers."

"Roger really came to play," Petrie adds. "We made him jump through hoops that I think would give a seasoned actor pause. There was a pretty fun buzz on the set right through the shoot. Everyone there is a really big [The] Who fan; they know what he's done in the world of rock and roll, and his presence connects us to our most wild and rebellious teenage selves. Everyone who was there had a little more pep, a little more energy and a little more of the best kind of tension."

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/ny-ettvtwo4985971nov23,0,5471889.story?coll=ny-television-headlines

dad1153

11-22-06, 11:33 PM

International TV Notebook
Canadian viewers are debating right to see U.S. fare
By Mark Heinzl The Wall St. Journal November 23, 2006

You can't get the Tennis Channel in Canada. Almost as distressing, you can't get HBO, MTV, ESPN, Showtime, Nickelodeon and a number of other popular U.S. channels.

More precisely, you can get these channels here, but you have to hook up with one of the many distributors who quietly sell equipment that allows the pirated reception of a U.S. satellite-television service, namely Dish Network, run by EchoStar Communications. Either that or you have to pay your bill using a U.S. address, to make the satellite-television company think you are in the U.S. Both are illegal.

Scamming the satellite-television company, of course, is a problem in the U.S. and other countries. But it seems epidemic north of the border. Estimates of the number of Canadian homes with unauthorized satellite service go as high as 700,000 or more -- a lot for a country of 33 million.

Why all the shenanigans to watch television? A lot of popular U.S. content is carried on Canadian television systems and channels, but U.S. satellite services provide more choice and more foreign-language programming. In recent years, Bell Canada's ExpressVu satellite-television service, chockablock with Canadian content (and plenty of pornography), also has been pirated.

Canadian laws prevent U.S. satellite services and various U.S. channels from operating in Canada to protect the local industry. But those laws haven't stopped U.S. signals from spilling over the border, or underground tech whizzes from finding ways to crack scrambled signals. (Since 2004, DirecTV Group has kept its system foolproof.)

This cat-and-mouse game has been going on for years. Many Canadians are hoping for a showdown. Quebec resident Jacques D'Argy, charged in 1998 with selling a DirecTV satellite system, has been battling the case ever since, arguing that the country's constitution gives citizens the right to watch foreign television. "I'd say there's a fair shot" that the Supreme Court will hear the controversial case, says technology lawyer Sunny Handa of Montreal.

Meanwhile, these are dangerous times for satellite pirates. EchoStar and other satellite-television providers, along with Canadian law-enforcement officials, have stepped up their crackdown on businesses and individuals supplying satellite gear. In September, EchoStar, Bell ExpressVu and their signal-security partner NagraStar, arranged police-assisted raids of stores and homes across southern Ontario, confiscated thousands of piracy devices and shut down 17 related Web sites. The same month, five Quebec men were charged with fraud and theft of satellite signals after law-enforcement officials seized the equivalent of about $290,000 worth of piracy equipment and traced $1.15 million of related revenue. The police warned illegal satellite viewers in a news release not to participate in "this social evil."

Ripping off a satellite signal is wrong. But is it evil to allow legitimate competition? It would have been nice to watch Roger Federer take out Fernando Gonzalez live at the Masters Series Madrid final one recent Sunday morning on the Tennis Channel. The local sports channel showed a midnight replay. I set up the recorder and then tried to avoid learning the outcome before watching. An inadvertent look at a paper ruined the surprise.

In this age of global media and competition, what purpose is served by laws that ban outright U.S. satellite television and many popular U.S. channels from Canada's airwaves?

"It's the government telling us that we are prohibited access to expression that comes from a source outside of the country," says Ian Angus, a lawyer who has long represented various satellite distributors in Canada. Canada's broadcast industry has "a history of protectionism bred into the culture," he says.

Defenders of the Canadian restrictions say they are needed to ensure the country sustains a viable domestic market for homegrown writers and actors. The laws also help keep the modest-size Canadian broadcasting industry financially healthy, says ExpressVu President Gary Smith. Whether viewers of U.S. satellite are paying for the service or not, "they all represent leakage of value from the Canadian broadcasting industry," he says.

Yet, opponents of the bans say the U.S. and Canada have free trade in everything from oil to orange juice, and Canada has prospered, so why not television? They would prefer taxing foreign services, or bundling local and foreign channels.

Outside of Vancouver, Richard Rex's Can-Am Satellites store sells DirecTV and Dish Network systems to anybody who wants one. Even though he lost a court battle against ExpressVu several years ago, nobody has shut him down. He thinks the broadcast industry doesn't want him to test the constitutionality of laws that ban foreign television signals. An ExpressVu spokeswoman declined to comment specifically on the case against Mr. Rex.

The top court, says Mr. Handa, will have to address this "delicate balance" between the country's cultural protections and its citizens' freedom of expression.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06326/740507-237.stm

dad1153

11-22-06, 11:37 PM

Critic's Notebook
Thankful for TV? Um, yes, and Goodykoontz lists why
By Bill Goodykoontz The Arizona Republic November 23, 2006

Turkey, stuffing and television.

Now that's a holiday. You can't have too much of any of them.

Make no mistake, television is a big part of the combination. By Friday, we'll be immersed in the holiday season. Shopping, cooking, decorating, more shopping, all that. By the time you come up for air, it'll be February.

Before we embark on that journey, however, today is a good day to slow down, reflect and be thankful. The turkey and stuffing - being thankful for that is a given. But Republic television critic Bill Goodykoontz offers his annual list of TV-related things to be thankful for, as well.

If you'd like to add to the list, or complain about something that's on it, visit goodyblog.azcentral.com.

Now pass the potatoes.

Giving thanks for a feast of TV treats

Another Thanksgiving, another opportunity to be thankful for all of the gifts television gives us.

Sounds pathetic, I know. But really, who's there for us more? The combination of a cable box and a remote control - that'll never let you down.

First thing to be thankful for, then: batteries.

As well as:

• Friday Night Lights.
• NBC's picking up Friday Night Lights for a full season.
• NBC's not picking up 20 Good Years for a full season.
• ABC's not canceling The Nine. Yet.
• The Simpsons. Always and forever.
• The Daily Show. Ditto.
• The Colbert Report, defying the odds and turning a one-trick pony into a great show.
• Keith Olbermann.
• And his "special comments." Glad to hear somebody speak up.
• And his battle with Bill O'Reilly.
• Bill O'Reilly.
• Kidding!
• Really. Just kidding.
• My Name Is Earl.
• The Office.
• Scrubs.
• 30 Rock.
• Having the previous four shows in one two-hour block.
• Veronica Mars.
• Supernatural.
• Borat. Yes, it's a movie, but maybe they'll show it on HBO someday. Too great to ignore.
• Deadspin.com. Also not TV, but it posts video sometimes.
• Caillou.
• Arthur.
• The Backyardigans.
• Wonder Pets.
• Two solid hours of entertainment for your kids while you do something else (see previous four items).
• DVDs of kids' shows (see previous five items).
• Television as baby-sitter. Vastly underrated (see previous six items).
• TiVo. (Alternately, insert DVR of your choice.)
• YouTube (pre-Google).
• Tony Kornheiser. Monday Night Football not his greatest venue - he's better on Pardon the Interruption - but the big leap all ink-stained wretches dream of.
• Pardon the Interruption.
• Dexter.
• And Michael C. Hall.
• Deadwood.
• And Ian McShane.
• Digging into hour upon hour of Battlestar Galactica and becoming a fan.
• Getting Battlestar Galactica fans off your back.
• One more season of The Sopranos. Any month now . . .
• Lost.
• But not Lost getting lost for three months.
• And certainly not replacing it with Day Break.
• Heroes.
• And its Hiro.
• FX programming generally.
• And Rescue Me, The Shield and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia specifically.
• Dan Rather getting another gig.
• Ted Koppel getting another gig.
• Katie Couric getting another gig. Now, a little more hard news to go with the groovy atmosphere, please.
• Meredith Vieira getting another gig - finally, one that really suits her.
• Increasing realization that the best of television is as good as or better than movies.
• Increased self-image of television critics (see above item).
• Smart viewers who demand better shows.
• Networks sometimes - sometimes - listening and giving them what they want. A sunnier view than normal, but hey, it is Thanksgiving, after all.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/arizonaliving/articles/1123goody1123intro.html

fredfa

11-22-06, 11:53 PM

I am thankful that dad1135 so cheerfully (and completely) takes over when I am away.

And for all of you who make this such a rewarding thread to compile day after day just by signing in and reading -- or by adding your comments -- pro or con -- in such a thoughtful and respectful manner.

May your holiday be especially joyful.

DoubleDAZ

11-22-06, 11:57 PM

And believe me, being a right leaning independent, it takes a lot not to be con AND to stay respectful. :)

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

bgooch

11-23-06, 12:19 AM

All a Part of Its Vision
'New Media' Venture Continues With the Broadcast of League Games

By Les Carpenter, Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 21, 2006; E01

CULVER CITY, Calif. -- With a punch of his fingers on a telephone keypad and the snap of his sooty voice, Steve Bornstein can make millions for pro sports' wealthiest league. Network executives gush at the mention of his name, cable titans growl in disgust. Both cringe as he pries open their wallets.

But the NFL's executive vice president for media does not run the league's broadcast empire in luxury. Instead, he sits in the first-floor office of a building that might have been chic in 1978, and lounges on a sofa set that was bought by his assistant on low-bid auction at Jennifer Convertibles. Not far away, just behind a concrete pillar, looms the heart of his NFL Network, two sparkling 11,000-foot studios where football news, analysis and opinion is filmed and then beamed to just over 40 million homes -- a figure that is something short of remarkable for a network that is only three years old.

On Thursday night, word will come from a production booth in one of those studios, a signal will be shot to the sky and Bornstein's NFL Network will broadcast the first of eight Thursday-Saturday league games. It's a bold new venture for the league and the network, though not one that is without its tribulations. The NFL Network is not on three of the country's largest cable companies as they resist what they see as the league's heavy-handedness.

"If somebody else had done it, it would be great," Bornstein said. "But no one has done it. Right?"

The world he oversees is changing every day, faster than anyone in sports could have imagined. And a television network is only a small part. While this year the NFL will bring in $3.73 billion in television deals alone, there is another potentially more lucrative universe out there still mostly untapped, and it involves the Internet, cellphones and iPods. For want of a better term, the NFL calls this "new media" and has pinned hopes on its money-making promise.

It is Bornstein who must take his new network, sift through the haze of this wired planet and find a way to intertwine it all.

In 1980, when Bornstein was in his late 20s, he was brought to Bristol, Conn., to help a four-month-old sports network named ESPN grow. For the next two decades, he oversaw much of the station's development, first in the programming department and ultimately as an executive at ESPN and ABC through the 1990s. It was a stunning rise, that in some ways left those around him agape as ESPN blossomed beyond their wildest dreams.

"Clearly, Steve was somebody for whom the status quo was unacceptable," said John Wildhack, ESPN's senior vice president for programming, acquisitions and strategy, who was with Bornstein for much of the company's surge. "He kept asking, 'How do we do this better? How do we take calculated risks? How do we differentiate ourselves?' "
Peace and Prosperity

When the NFL first approached Bornstein in 2002, after a brief run as president of ABC television, there was no network, just a vision of something the league's 32 team owners felt was necessary yet did not know how to do. To build it they wanted someone who had created a network before, someone who would make their place unique. Bornstein was the obvious choice.

He said he sees a lot of similarities between those early days at ESPN and this new venture. Both have that unrestrained feeling, where every idea is wrought with head-tingling excitement. "Everybody has that razor focus," he said.

And yet when you get past the thrill of starting something that has never been done before, this remains a football network. And a professional football network at that. Unlike ESPN, where the borders stretch from Australian rules football to Sunday morning fishing shows, the NFL Network must live in a more confined world. Even as Bornstein constantly tries to point out that they are a "lifestyle network," not a football network, there is only so much football you can show.

Bornstein points to the exorbitant amount of money CBS, Fox, NBC and ESPN have paid to televise NFL games, repeats some of the anecdotal evidence of how networks have struggled when they dropped football and promises that no matter what next year's top-rated TV show might be, its ratings won't exceed that of the Super Bowl.

"There's no league that's been more successful in any way you measure that success than the NFL," Wildhack said.

But part of the reason for the NFL's triumph is the fact it has been mostly untroubled by labor strife. While baseball, basketball and hockey have been hit with crippling strikes and lockouts, pro football has sailed along, making billions of dollars. That bliss was tested this past spring when an unusual development occurred in the latest negotiation with the NFL Players Association: the owners bickered more with themselves than they did with the players.

The owners of the smallest-revenue teams felt they had fallen far behind those of the biggest money-makers. And even though all the teams equally share the league's enormous television and licensing contracts in addition to being restrained by a firm cap on player salaries, the disparity was showing itself in other ways. Franchises in bigger markets could generate money from suite sales that smaller-market teams couldn't touch.

Ultimately, they came up with a compromise. The players would receive at least 60 percent of every team's revenue, which created a bigger pool for the salary cap. But it caused a problem for the lower-revenue teams like the Buffalo Bills and Jacksonville Jaguars, which might see 70 percent of their intake going to player salaries while the New England Patriots and Washington Redskins would be spending only 60 percent. So to try and make up the difference, they agreed that the 15 highest-revenue teams would pay equally into a pot totaling $30 million to be redistributed to the 17 poorest clubs.

It only adds up to a couple of million for each small-revenue franchise. But at the same time the owners agreed that the 15 larger teams would also give up their profits from the league's new media ventures and share that money with the smaller-market teams as long as those small-market clubs dedicate at least 65 percent of their revenue to player salaries.

This is a confusing, but potentially significant clause.

As it stands now, the owners may take an option that allows them to blow up this latest labor deal in 2009, in part because some of the small-market teams still feel left out in the new contract, unsure how a trickle of money from the richer clubs is going to help them catch up. A potential solution -- and it could be a bit of a long shot -- is if there were a sudden flood of money from new media.

"It could be if new media was something substantial," said Bill Prescott, the Jaguars' chief financial officer.

Yet how much is substantial? No one really knows because no one has a grasp on exactly what new media are going to bring in, partially because the league is only starting to cut deals in this world, signing contracts for podcasts and cellphone telecasts. Just last month, the owners voted to operate the league's Web site, NFL.com, themselves. Previously CBS SportsLine held the contract.

"We hope that that [new media] will be a real contributor and hopefully it will ameliorate some of that" big-market/small-market tension, Jeff Pash, the NFL's executive vice president, said recently after testifying before a congressional antitrust hearing. "And also by bringing it in house we can keep that revenue as a league asset and share it equally among the 32 teams as opposed to having yet another revenue source that exacerbates revenue disparities between teams."

Or as Broncos owner Pat Bowlen said, "If [the media money] is coming from a league-owned asset, then it will be easier to cut it up and give it to the smaller market teams rather than to just take it from the higher-revenue teams."

The burden of this hope falls on Bornstein. He scowls at the suggestion of new media as a solution for the league's future labor woes, partially because he is dealing so much with the unknown. He is fond of saying "my crystal ball is no better than anyone else's," but his expertise is in running networks, not solving league labor disputes. Maybe using cellphones as a way to broadcast games or deliver breaking NFL news is a great idea. Maybe it isn't. Time will tell.

Still he feels it's important to slowly collect these technologies, hire people to develop them and see what they have.

"The league has always been really prescient about getting this stuff right and not be the first one in," Bornstein said. "I think they got it right."

It's a delicate balance. The NFL needs its revenue quickly to try and fill some of the gulf between big- and small-market owners, yet its instincts say not to grab too fast.

"There's going to be peaks and valleys and some acceleration and deceleration [in new media]," said David Katz, the head of sports and studios at Yahoo!, which currently streams NFL games on the Internet overseas. "The NFL has proven to be the best at exploitation and management of their assets. I have no doubt they will continue to be good at what they do."
League Leverage

In a way, Bornstein and the NFL are perfect for each other. Both are audacious, assured and accustomed to getting their way. "With Steve you always knew where he stood," Wildhack said.

So it probably shouldn't come as much of a surprise that in the last television deal, Bornstein and the NFL pulled eight games from the Sunday afternoon lineup and said they were going to place them on Thursday or Saturday and put them up for bid. The Outdoor Life Network (now called Versus) reportedly offered $400 million for those rights. An outlandish sum, if you think about it. But rather than take the easy money, Bornstein and the league decided to put them on the NFL Network, a move that league officials believe drove up the price of the other network's bids.

By putting its own games on TV, the league has leverage, something it has never been shy about using. A few months ago, with the games in hand, it turned to the cable companies and reportedly said the price per customer for the network would rise from 20 cents to 70 cents. The cable companies balked and a fight ensued that has left the NFL Network off three of the country's major cable systems -- Time Warner, Cablevision and Charter, meaning almost all of New York City will not get Thursday night's Denver-Kansas City game, barring a last-minute deal. Bornstein said such a development is unlikely.

The dispute with Time Warner surrounds the company's insistence that it put the network and the games on an expensive sports tier of service that would cost extra for subscribers. The NFL wants to be on the standard tier.

"We would certainly like to carry the network, we have a number of football fans," said Time Warner spokesman Mike Harrad. "But because of the price it's a niche-type service."

What Bornstein won't say, but some league officials will confide, is that the NFL is sure it can win a stare-down with the cable companies. When Thursday night comes and New York can't get the game, the NFL figures enough fans will be so outraged that Time Warner will come crawling to the bargaining table.

Likewise, the two bowl games the NFL Network is showing (the Texas Bowl on Dec. 28 and the Insight Bowl on Dec. 29) are not part of a strategic plan to show college football in the future, a league source said. Rather, the hope is a school from one of the markets served by a holdout cable company will be in the game. And when fans find out they can't watch their beloved State U in its bowl game, the cable operator will be besieged with angry calls.

It's a gamble, but one the NFL is willing to take, figuring fans will have to take sides. Either they choose the league with the highest ratings or the local cable company that is often a monopoly. The NFL thinks it can win that fight every time.

Even if the crapshoot doesn't pay off, the NFL Network has already won. It has managed to take a piece of the lucrative market that its games produce, it has already forced itself onto many of the country's cable systems as well as both its top satellite providers and it has subtly forced football further into the American consciousness.

Rich Eisen, the NFL Network's main anchor who worked seven years at ESPN, knew the NFL Network had changed ESPN when he turned on his old station on the night of the NBA draft in June and ESPN was doing a program ranking the NFL's pass defenses -- just minutes before the NBA's draft.

"I had to look at the bottom of the screen to be sure it was ESPN," Eisen says. "When I was at ESPN, I would say in April, 'We should be doing something on the NFL,' and they laughed at me. Now on the night of the NBA draft, they were doing the best pass defenses in the NFL. We have definitely challenged them, no question."

In his office, Bornstein talks about the station he has built from nothing and about how it will help feed the Internet, cellphones, iPods and whatever else has yet to be invented. He calls these connections "pipes." And he knows these pipes, when filled, and under the NFL's control, have the real potential of making his bosses in the NFL very, very happy.

"I'm a guy that likes winning, right?" he said. "One way you can measure this is: can you make money? I've found personally that's where I can excel."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/20/AR2006112001120_pf.html

bgooch

11-23-06, 12:29 AM

Outlook Dim for NFL Network, MSOs
By Mike Reynolds 11/22/2006 3:56:00 PM

NFL Network will kick off coverage of its first live National Football League game Thanksgiving night, but subscribers to Time Warner Cable, Charter Communications and Cablevision Systems are expected to be shut out from the contest between the Kansas City Chiefs and Denver Broncos.

At press time Wednesday afternoon, all indications were that the parties would not bridge the gaps in their entrenched stands over placement (the network wants analog or digital basic carriage, while operators advocate tier positioning) and cost (about a 70-cent monthly subscriber fee) for the NFL’s in-house channel.

According to a spokesman, NFL Network did not execute a local last-minute advertising blitz against cable operators not carrying the network. It did run an ad in USA Today Wednesday taking a shot at cable operators and touting the games’ availability on DirecTV.

Meanwhile, American Cable Association CEO Matt Polka faxed a pre-Turkey Day missive to NFL Network head Steve Bornstein requesting a change in the service’s game plan.

“Currently, your network allows big cable companies like Comcast and Cox to offer the NFL Network in a variety of tiers and packages to consumers in urban areas such as Chicago; Philadelphia; Washington, D.C.; Phoenix; and Atlanta,” the letter said in part.

“At the same time, NFL Network is refusing to allow the same flexibility to ACA member companies and their customers in areas like Wyandotte, Mich.; Altoona, Pa.; and Wilmington, Vt.,” the letter continued. “Your network's actions to tie independent cable operators’ hands and require carriage of your expensive service only on analog or digital basic forces cable consumers to bear the cost of a service that not all consumers want. On behalf of ACA’s nearly 8 million customers served by its more than 1,000 members, I write to request that the NFL Network change this discriminatory and anti-consumer policy. If the NFL Network is as popular as you say, then give consumers the choice.”

The letter was CCed to all NFL teams and owners, the Federal Communications Commission’s members and many prominent members of Congress.

"While the NFL Network games will be carried by a large number of cable companies, we unfortunately are involved in a commercial dispute with specific cable operators that are acting in their own self-interests -- not in the interests of our NFL fans,” NFL Network said in a prepared statement. “We will continue to discuss the matter with those cable operators in the hope that the problem can be resolved.”

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6394522.html?display=Breaking+News

harley1

11-23-06, 07:40 AM

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO EVERYONE

CSI singing ratings blues

Bill Harris
Sun Media

There are a lot of insensitive remarks one could make about Roger Daltrey appearing on CSI: Crime Scene Investigation.

For example, we could say something along the lines of, “So, is one of the surviving members of the Half-Who going to investigate what happened to the other Half-Who?”

Daltrey, of course, is the lead singer of legendary British rock band The Who. In fact, that’s Daltrey’s voice in the CSI theme song, which is a shortened version of Who Are You.

Wisely or unwisely, depending upon your point of view, Daltrey and Pete Townshend are still touring as The Who.

When Daltrey guest-stars on CSI Nov. 23 (9 p.m. on CTV and 10 p.m. on CBS), he’ll be playing Mickey Dunn, a Las Vegas mobster who disappeared 30-plus years ago.

Mickey’s remains are fished out of a lake with a bullet hole in his skull. Daltrey’s scenes must all be flashbacks, otherwise, that really would be a hell of an acting job, wouldn’t it?

Soon after the discovery of Dunn, a wheelchair-bound man is murdered and a photo he had been carrying shows him with Dunn and three other men.

In the photo, both Dunn and the new victim have X’s on their faces. Does this mean the other three men are targets, too?

The promotional material describes Daltrey’s role as one that “will keep viewers guessing.” As long as it keeps viewers from clicking, CBS and CTV will be happy.

CSI, which is in its seventh season, has taken a huge tumble this year not only in ratings but also in terms of buzz. ABC moved the popular Grey’s Anatomy from Sundays to Thursdays to take a big bite out of CSI, and it’s working like a charm.

So whatever your feelings are about CSI, it’ll be interesting to see if a legend like Roger Daltrey can provide an energy boost for the most influential TV show of this g-g-g-generation.

http://www.calgarysun.com/cgi-bin/publish.cgi?p=162858&x=articles&s=showbiz

harley1

11-23-06, 07:48 AM

Seinfeld censure?
'Do we reject something that is good, even great ... only because we suddenly find out that an actor or a filmmaker is a jerk,' Bruce Kirkland asks

By BRUCE KIRKLAND

For Jerry Seinfeld and his legendary television show, Michael Richards' race-rage meltdown could not have come at a worse time.

Frazzled by hecklers at the Laugh Factory in L.A., Richards lost his mind, repeatedly dropped the N-bomb and suggested that an old-fashioned lynching was in order for his offending African-American audience members.

The fallout -- and the justifiable anger -- was predictable. So was the lame-ass defence mounted on his behalf by apologists, some of whom sound racist themselves. Subsequently, Richards' apology sounded half-hearted, rambling, even insincere.

The comic's gross stupidity may already be career suicide. But something else is happening, too, that has wider ramifications and affects others, including Jerry Seinfeld's legacy and the quality of the memories fans now have for Richards' frizzy-haired character, Kramer.

By coincidence, the eagerly anticipated Seinfeld: Season 7 DVD box set came out on Tuesday, exactly a year after Season 6. The new four-disc set covers what is obviously a classic year for the show. Among the 24 episodes is the now-famous number six, The Soup Nazi. Soup star Larry Thomas cancelled a Toronto promotional appearance this week, surely because of the fallout.

You do not have to have spent much time on the Internet to sense the Richards effect on the fate of Seinfeld. A woman identifying herself as black, and pissed off, posted to the Amazon.com site to announce herself as part of a Seinfeld boycott. Not only does she refuse to buy Season 7, she has already sold her copies of the first six seasons. Her Seinfeld love has turned to hate.

She is not alone. "Anyone who buys this," another customer posted yesterday, "probably is wearing a white sheet over (his) head." He cited himself as white and called Richards "that piece of trash."

In contrast, another person retorts: "I can understand that you people are upset about what happened, but, come on, what does this have to do with the show? Nothing?"

One weak-minded Seinfeld fan who wants no part of a boycott is worried about buying Season 7 when most of the clerks at his video store in L.A. are black.

Herein are the guts of a fascinating and complicated argument about entertainment artifacts. Do we reject something that is good, even great, something we love or admire, only because we suddenly find out that an actor or a filmmaker is a jerk? Or worse?

Does the discovery of Richards' apparent failings as a human being mean Seinfeld is no longer funny?

Are the three Naked Gun movies any less silly-funny because slimeball wife-killer O.J. Simpson co-starred as Nordberg? Did The Pianist thrill any less with its profound Holocaust tale because Oscar-winning Roman Polanski, a convicted statutory rapist, directed it?

There are plenty of other examples: Woody Allen's Match Point is one of his best -- and his followup, Scoop, is one of his worst. In neither case does his weird marital arrangement have anything to do with the quality of the work. Mel Gibson is another human accident that has already happened. He is an anti-Semitic ass who has a new movie, Apocalypto, ready for release. It could be great, even if Gibson acts like he is insane and, like Tom Cruise, follows an extremist religious cult.

Yet I do get the emotional connect. Most entertainment, serious or comic, is meant to engage us at our most vulnerable, even primal centres. Long before we intellectually analyze the story lines in a movie or TV show, we react on deeper levels to the emotional undercurrents.

And those reactions are inevitably affected by real-world circumstances. Discovering what an insufferable prig Tommy Lee Jones is in life made it difficult for me to appreciate his work, yet I still count The Three Burials Of Melquiades Estrada, Jones' directorial debut, as an under-appreciated American classic. For its content.

So what is the message here? I think it is a case of misplaced anger to butcher Seinfeld, the show, because you want to bury Richards, the idiot comic. The Soup Nazi on Season 7 is still wildly amusing. The heart of the show, Jerry Seinfeld, never did anything to deserve a boycott. Even if he did, that would not change the show Seinfeld.

We must be able to see the greater-good value of the best entertainments, even when they are made by people who show their weaknesses at the worst time.

http://torontosun.com/Entertainment/Television/2006/11/23/pf-2460200.html

harley1

11-23-06, 08:00 AM

Broncos aren't part of some fans' feasts

Game at K.C. not available on TV for all

By Patrick Saunders
Denver Post Staff Writer

Cold turkey will be the main dish tonight for some fans across Broncos Nation.

From Rapid City, S.D., to Durango, thousands of fans who don't subscribe to the NFL Network will miss their Broncos fix when their team plays the Chiefs.

In places such as Colorado Springs, Pueblo and much of the Western Slope, only those plugged into higher-tier digital cable or satellite TV systems can watch the NFL Network from the comfort of home. In other Broncos hotbeds, such as Rapid City, some cable companies have balked at carrying the NFL Network, leaving fans out of luck.

"It seems crazy to me that we should have to pay extra money to watch the games," said Rapid City resident Dennis Brouwers, 55, who became a Broncos fan while serving in the Air Force in Cheyenne.

Viewers in the Denver area needn't worry. Fox affiliate KDVR-Channel 31 bought the rights to tonight's game, so even those without cable TV can watch.

According to NFL policy, games are simulcast on a noncable network in the home cities of the teams playing. However, the rule doesn't apply to secondary markets such as Colorado Springs and Grand Junction. Those cities are outside of KDVR's broadcast range.

The NFL Network is available nationwide in about 41 million homes. It has contracts with Comcast, DirecTV, Dish Network and about 160 other cable TV companies. But the NFL Network is at war over subscriber costs with other cable outlets, including industry giants Time Warner Cable, Cablevision and Charter.

Until last Friday, Bresnan Communications, which services about 300,000 customers in Colorado, Wyoming, Montana and Utah, was not going to carry the NFL Network. But a deal was reached that will allow customers with higher-tier digital cable to see the Broncos-Chiefs game. That means Broncos fans in towns such as Grand Junction, Durango, Montrose, Lamar, Cheyenne and Laramie can get the game, but only if they pay for digital cable.

"This was a big sigh of relief for us," said Sean Hogue, Bresnan's regional vice president. "We wanted to be able to show these games to our customers."

Colorado Springs is served by Comcast, meaning that Broncos fans must subscribe to the cable company's higher-tier digital systems in order to get the game.

The cost for the basic cable package - without the NFL Network - is $45.69 a month. Digital Classic, which carries the NFL Network, is $55.64 a month. The NFL Network also is available on DirecTV ($44.99 a month) and the Dish Network ($29.99).

Colorado Springs Broncos fan Gary Ames, 52, upgraded to Comcast's digital cable a few months ago, primarily to get the NFL Network.

"We were already thinking about upgrading, but when I heard I would need it to get the Broncos-Chiefs game, that pretty much made up my mind," Ames said. "A Broncos game against the Chiefs is a big deal, and we always have a big bash for Broncos games."

In parts of South Dakota serviced by PrairieWave Communications, the NFL Network originally was part of basic cable. But when the NFL Network added games to its package, the cost jumped substantially for the cable providers and PrairieWave decided to drop the network.

"I think we are caught in the middle," said Joe Galinanes, head of sales and marketing for PrairieWave. "We would love to carry the games, but we can't afford the price hikes and then have to pass it on to all our customers.

"Passionate NFL fans are not going to be happy customers. After chowing down at Thanksgiving, people are going to want to see the Broncos play the Chiefs. Some people are going to be very surprised."

http://www.denverpost.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?articleId=4708761&siteId=36

harley1

11-23-06, 08:08 AM

NFL Network hit with access issue

By Patrick Saunders
Denver Post Staff Writer

Like a 325-pound defensive tackle, the omnipotent NFL knows how to throw its weight around.

Nothing illustrates that better than tonight's game between the Broncos and Kansas City Chiefs at Arrowhead Stadium.

When football fans sit in front of the television and gobble down their pumpkin pie, they will be watching a game on the NFL's infant network. It is the first of eight Thursday-Saturday games this season produced, directed and televised exclusively by the NFL Network.

But the game behind the games has been as rough as a blindside sack.

The 3-year-old network has been criticized for trying to strong-arm cable TV companies into carrying its product at an exorbitant rate. It's been scolded for blacking out loyal fans who can't get the proper cable connections. It's even been called in front of a U.S. Senate committee to explain its future intentions and answer questions about antitrust laws.

But like a defensive tackle bull-rushing the quarterback, the NFL Network plows ahead, supremely confident in its product and the public's desire for it. Indeed, NFL Network president and CEO Steve Bornstein has called the pro football league "the most popular programming on the planet."

Bornstein said adding prime-time, late-season games to the NFL Network's all-football menu of highlights, pregame shows, analysis and fabled NFL Films productions was the next logical step.

"Football is the perfect 24/7 sport because of its importance to the country," said Bornstein, the former head of ESPN. "And we're excited about presenting everything we do, not just these eight games."

In the Denver area, as well as Colorado Springs and Pueblo, the NFL Network is available on Comcast cable, but only on its digital tier. It's also carried by major satellite providers DirecTV and the Dish Network. And because NFL rules stipulate that over- the-air stations in the home cities can broadcast games, tonight's game will be aired by Denver's Fox affiliate, KDVR-Channel 31. However, viewers out of KDVR's signal range, such as those in Colorado Springs, must have digital cable to get the game or they're out of luck.

Cable TV wars

As of Sept. 1, the NFL Network claimed about 41 million subscribers, very good for a relatively young network but far short of its goal of being in 65 million homes by the time the Broncos and Chiefs hooked up tonight.

As the network attempts to plug into mainstream cable television, there have been plenty of blown fuses. The basic dispute pits the network against some of the nation's biggest cable companies, chief among them No. 2 operator Time Warner Cable, Cablevision Systems Corp. (a New York-area provider) and Charter Communications, who aren't carrying the NFL Network. The root of the feud, of course, is money. Caught in the middle are the fans.

"The NFL Network keeps the pressure on because it believes we will ultimately end up charging all our customers to satisfy the few who want these games," Fred Dressler, executive vice president of Time Warner Cable, told Sports Business News.

Time Warner said it would have to pay $140 million a year to provide the channel to all 13.5 million of its subscribers in 33 states. The cable giant's stance is that the NFL Network belongs on a sports tier, where true NFL fans will pay for it.

The NFL Network used to charge cable companies 20 cents per subscriber per month. After the addition of the eight-game package, it reportedly began charging 70 cents, more than cable staples such as CNN, Discovery Channel and Nickelodeon.
However, The Wall Street Journal reported in April that ESPN charges cable companies more than $2.50 per customer per month.

That's why Broncos owner Pat Bowlen, chairman of the NFL's broadcast committee, disagrees with those blaming the NFL Network for the stalemate.

"What we are asking of the cable companies is not an inflated price," he said. "We are not asking like $2.50 per game. We are right there with everybody else."

The NFL, already set to make $3.7 billion this year from television deals alone, has been aggressively publicizing its position. Seth Palansky, the NFL Network's spokesman, has been quoted extensively. He recently said the network "is the most valuable programming a cable company can offer, and a cable company not carrying live NFL games is like a grocery store not carrying milk."

One NFL newspaper advertisement aimed at Time Warner read: "Don't let Time Warner ruin your football season. You'll miss NFL games if you don't call and demand NFL Network now."

Dressler fired back, telling The New York Times: "To suggest that anybody's season will be ruined for missing eight games is ludicrous."

There had been hopes that the dispute would be settled before the NFL Network televised its first game, today, but there is no end in sight.

What's next?

Last week, at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., wanted to know more about the NFL Network's future.

"We're intrigued, to put it mildly, with what the NFL has in mind," he said during a 90-minute session featuring NFL executive vice president and general counsel Jeffrey Pash.

Pash answered questions not only about how the NFL Network's plans could affect cable and satellite rates, but also whether the NFL televising its own games raises antitrust issues in connection with the Sports Broadcasting Act. Pash said the NFL Network's programming does not conflict with antitrust laws because it's "pro-competitive" and "expands choices for consumers."

Pash, citing the NFL's lucrative relationships with other networks, said it would be years before there would be any other major changes in how games are televised.

Lucrative indeed. Last year, the NFL completed deals with NBC Sports on a six-year, $3.6 billion deal to carry Sunday night games and with ESPN on an eight-year, $8.8 billion contract to televise "Monday Night Football." Two years ago, CBS and Fox extended their Sunday deals for six years, with CBS paying $622 million annually and Fox paying $712 million. DirecTV extended its contract for $3.5 billion over five years.

Bowlen likes the progress the upstart network has shown.

"I'm not at all unhappy with where the NFL Network is at right now," Bowlen said. "I am unhappy that some people won't get to see the game, but I don't think that's our fault."

http://www.denverpost.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?articleId=4708796&siteId=36

shawn12341234

11-23-06, 12:13 PM

is the UF @ FSU in HD?

fredfa

11-23-06, 12:25 PM

Not as far as I know, shawn.

Sorry.

fredfa

11-23-06, 12:42 PM

Wednesday’s updated fast national over night prime-time ratings have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News -- the first post in this thread.

dad1153

11-23-06, 01:11 PM

TV Notebook
'Kramer' apologizes, hires crisis expert
Associated Press November 23, 2006

First he went on national television to apologize for his racial tirade against two black hecklers. Now Michael Richards is taking his contriteness to the next level: he's hired a public relations expert with deep contacts in the black community.
New York publicist Howard Rubenstein took on Richards as a client Wednesday after being contacted by the actor-comedian. He then arranged for Richards to call the Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

"I've known those gentlemen for many years," Rubenstein told The Associated Press.

"Michael apologized profusely. He wants to heal the tremendous wound that he's inflicted on the American public, and on the African-American community," he said.

Jackson, reached by phone, said Richards called "expressing his remorse and his confusion."

"He's embarrassed. He got caught on tape. That's a big part of his anxiety now," said Jackson.

"Clearly he needs some race sensibility training, and some psychiatric help. His anger is volatile and dangerous to himself and others," Jackson said. "I hope he gets the help he needs. But the culture that's producing this kind of animosity toward blacks must be addressed. ... We're increasingly facing cultural isolation in Hollywood, in the movies and in TV."

Jackson added, "We have to evaluate the use of the n-word and categorize it as hate speech, no matter who uses it."

Calls to Sharpton's home and to his National Action Network on Wednesday were not returned.

Richards, who played the kooky neighbor Kramer on the TV show Seinfeld, lashed out at the hecklers last week during a performance at West Hollywood's Laugh Factory. A video of his rant then appeared on TMZ.com.

In a subsequent satellite appearance on David Letterman's Late Show, Richards said his remarks were fueled by anger, not bigotry.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People said in a statement Wednesday that the tirade and anti-Semitic comments by Mel Gibson earlier this year point to a pervasive trend in American culture, and that Richards' declaration "is indicative of the type of denial that too often accompanies racist rhetoric."

Rubenstein, whose media relations firm specializes in "crisis management" according to the firm's website, said he had never met or spoken to Richards before the actor called him.

Clients of Rubenstein's firm include Amazon.com, the New York Yankees, ABC Inc., Walt Disney Co., Time Inc., News Corp., Columbia University, the NAACP Image Awards and Bloomberg L.P., according to the website.

"I've been very involved in the African-American community for 25 to 30 years," Rubenstein said. "It would be a tragedy if this exacerbated our race relations. I hope I can help. ... It's always been an effort on my part to improve African-American and Jewish ethnic relations."

As for reports that Richards shouted out anti-Semitic remarks during another standup comedy routine in April, Rubenstein confirmed his client did, but that he was only role-playing.

"He's Jewish. He's not anti-Semitic at all. He was role-playing, he was playing a part. He did use inappropriate language, but he doesn't have any anti-Semitic feelings whatsoever," Rubenstein said.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-11-23-richards-pr-expert_x.htm

dad1153

11-23-06, 01:19 PM

And believe me, being a right leaning independent, it takes a lot not to be con AND to stay respectful. :)

Wow, let me change that immediately! ;) :p

TV Notebook
Football Overload
Assessing the NFL Network's all-you-can-eat buffet of gridiron programming
By Robert Weintraub Slate.com November 22, 2006

As of this moment, only about 40 million homes receive NFL Network. That means the majority of football fans across the nation won't be able to watch the cable channel's coming-out party: the Thanksgiving night matchup between Denver and Kansas City. If you're one of the unlucky die-hards who doesn't have access to pro football's house organ, you should feel angry and left out—and not just because you'll be missing eight live games this season. Surprisingly, the 24/7 NFL channel fills the long downtime between football Sundays with a lot of great programming.

NFLN's flagship show is the nightly Total Access, usually hosted by former ESPNer Rich Eisen, with Steve Mariucci, Jim Mora, and Deion Sanders, among others, along for amusement. While it is the SportsCenter of NFLN, it's also the network's most disposable show. Tuesday's broadcast, for example, led with news that former Saints backup Todd Bouman had been signed by Green Bay to replace Packers backup Aaron Rodgers. Even if that's the kind of stuff that quickens your pulse, that info is easily available elsewhere. So is the show's mix of analysis, debate, and opinion, which falls in a forest of similar programs on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN News, Fox Sports Net, Comcast regional programming, NBC, CBS, and Fox pregame shows, sports radio, the Internet, etc. This hour doesn't add anything new to the landscape, although to NFLN's credit, there isn't quite as much fake cackling and guffawing as there is in shows featuring Terry Bradshaw and his ilk.

The NFL Network isn't all warmed-over pro football boilerplate, though. The channel's best recurring show, NFL Replay, features 90-minute versions of the previous week's four best games. The traditional telecast is augmented by interviews, previously unseen camera angles, and sound bites from miked-up coaches. One of my favorite games of the season was the first Rams-Seahawks encounter. Seattle drove for a winning field goal at the gun, but not before sweating out a penalty that most everyone thought would result in a 10-second runoff, thus ending the game. (It didn't.) NFL Replay not only allowed me to drink in Rams coach Scott Linehan's hilarious "We won!!" reaction, and the "Wait, we didn't?!?!" follow-up, but mixed in his postgame press conference, a study in disbelief that his team had conjured a way to lose. If you want to be an informed fan, this is valuable stuff, especially if you caught only a few minutes of highlights from the weekend's out-of-market games. (Far more viewers are able to receive the NFL Network than subscribe to DirecTV's NFL Sunday Ticket.)

Point After, which holds down midafternoons, also cuts through the punditry white noise. In a fast-moving three hours, the show whips around to various coach and player press conferences and locker-room soliloquies. While plenty of this is boring, generic stuff, it's worth it to tune in for the give-and-take between a room full of reporters and the icy Bill Parcells. And if you're sick of seeing the same few guys every day on SportsCenter, it's nice to watch interesting players without instant name recognition get to break through the Terrell Owens/Chad Johnson/Peyton Manning/Tiki Barber flying wedge.

That's not all. For front-runners, there's America's Game, a mammoth series that counts down the best Super Bowl champs of all time. For historians, there's the archival footage repository NFL Films Presents, an underrated show often pre-empted during its ESPN run. And for, uh, game-show buffs, there's NFL Cheerleader Playoffs, in which assorted Heathers and Ambers are given a chance to step away from their usual milieu and compete in the 40-yard dash and Scattergories-type mental challenges. It is compelling television, I assure you.

Now, for a warning: If you're not careful, the NFL Network will drive you insane. Sure, the locker-room interviews in Point After are entertaining for a while, but I sincerely hope that nobody's watching for the full three hours. After tuning in all day, I've learned that one's appreciation of the NFL Network decreases in proportion to the amount of time spent with the channel. If you need a fantasy-football fix, for example, it's great to dip in for a while and check on the latest injury reports. But after a few hours, the self-referential ads for the channel you are already watching will drive you buggy. When you can recite the network promos by heart, it's time to get back to mowing the lawn.

Thursday night's Chiefs-Broncos game is not only the NFL Network's first shot at broadcasting a live, regular-season game. It's also the channel's first crack at programming for the casual sports fan. NFLN's choice of announcers, Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth, is certainly promising. Collinsworth knows the rule book, can analyze the X's and O's as well as anyone, and is that rare figure able to retain his likeability even as he rips fan favorites. Gumbel is another rarity in big-time sports TV—an unknown quantity, at least when it comes to doing play-by-play.

While his brother Greg is a veteran game caller, Bryant has always positioned himself as above the mere play-action pass. This image was cemented on the eve of the season, when he opined on his HBO show, Real Sports, that outgoing Commissioner Paul Tagliabue should show Roger Goodell "where he keeps Gene Upshaw's leash." The implication being that Upshaw, head of the NFL Players Association, was a harmless puppy in labor negotiations when pitted against his masters at the league offices. Masters who, incidentally, happen to be signing Gumbel's NFL Network paychecks.

Much ink has been spilled divining Gumbel's motivation for biting the hand that feeds. But whatever shockwaves the commentary caused will be minor compared with a similar bomb dropped on the league's own network, on Thanksgiving night. I'll be on the lookout for a YouTube moment, and I'll be back in this space on Friday for a quick review of the telecast. Happy Thanksgiving, and enjoy the game!

http://www.slate.com/id/2154256/&gt1=8717

dad1153

11-23-06, 01:22 PM

Monday’s updated fast national over night prime-time ratings have been posted just under the HD Football listings near the top of Ratings News -- the first post in this thread.

Fred, did you mean to say 'WEDNESDAY' instead of 'MONDAY'? Guess somebody is already sauced even before its time to cut the turkey! :rolleyes: :p

Also, if you haven't clicked on this thread recently please click on the previous page (#609) to see a handful of posts added in the past few hours (some about the NFL Network's debut tonight and how most of the country's inability to see the Broncos-Chiefs game will tilt the battle between the league and cable).

Happy turkey day everybody, gobble gobble! :(

dad1153

11-23-06, 01:39 PM

TV Notebook
'Lost' Dad
By Don Kaplan New York Post November 23, 2006

Beloved 'Lost' character Hurley's relationship with his dad could be going up in smoke.

Cheech Marin has been cast to play Hurley's father in an episode slated to air in February, according to TV Guide online.

It is understood that Cheech will be seen in one of the series' trademark flashbacks.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11232006/tv/lost_dad_tv_don_kaplan.htm

dad1153

11-23-06, 01:44 PM

Critic's Notebook
Fox makes a silly grab for ratings
By Richard Huff New York Daily News November 23, 2006

O.J. Simpson has his cash, Judith Regan has a huge contribution to the recycling yard, and Fox Broadcasting has taken yet another huge kick to the gut.
And, the people who work at Fox Broadcasting and Fox News, which got caught up in this mess, have no one to blame but News Corp.'s version of Tweedledum and Tweedledee, boss Rupert Murdoch and President Peter Chernin.

Those misplaced geniuses, unable to pawn off the Simpson spectacle on another network, decided to put it on Fox Broadcasting, in a last-ditch attempt to grab ratings during the November sweeps.

Now, thanks to Murdoch and Chernin, the Simpson-Regan tete-a-tete goes down as one of the biggest mistakes in broadcast network history. And this from a network that has already has a record of doozies.

The fiasco of "Who Wants to Marry a Multimillionaire" and Rick Rockwell's messy past has nothing on this one.

Fox News anchor/correspondent Geraldo Rivera this week noted how shocked he was at Fox bosses, given this vile Simpson special came after years of Fox Broadcasting working to clean up its image after the previous mishaps.

He's right.

For years Fox struggled to get over its reality-show nightmares, which range from the "Multimillionaire" scandal, to players lying on "Temptation Island," to the cheesy "Married by America," where viewers decided who would get hitched, to an aborted idea of crashing a jetliner as a form of entertainment.

Oh, and don't forget the ill-conceived concept of having an adopted child guess who her real father was on "Who's Your Daddy?"

The network eventually rebounded from those flaps. It gave us the smash hit and family friendly "American Idol" and quality dramas "24" and "House" and "Prison Break."

But, now, thanks to News Corp.'s management, Fox is back in the hole. In one fell swoop of desperation, advertisers, executives at affiliated stations, and even insiders in other divisions can't trust the big cheeses will do right by the company in the future.

The ugly announcement, and ultimate retreat from Simpson's chat, cut down Fox at a time when it's struggling to get through a bad fall in the Nielsen department. The network usually tanks this time of year, and rebounds, ratingswise, in the deep of winter on the backs of Simon Cowell and Kiefer Sutherland.

This year, though, the network is still feeling the effects of one of the lowest rated World Series ever; the network has canceled more than 50% of its new fall shows, and those new ones that remain are low draws.

Stuck with Simpson's garbage, Fox might have gotten a late November Nielsen boost, and maybe even a sweeps win.

But it would have been a short-term ratings gain that anyone with half a brain would have realized didn't matter. And it would have been a financial nightmare, since major advertisers didn't want to be part of it. Hell, some didn't even want to be on the air the same week as O.J.

In short, it would have been a Pyrrhic victory. Instead, Tweedledum and Tweedledee successfully damaged much of what they've built.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/ent_radio/story/474080p-398725c.html

dad1153

11-23-06, 01:55 PM

The Business of TV
Churchill Downs sues TV Games Network
Associated Press November 22, 2006

LOUISVILLE (KY) -- Churchill Downs Inc. is suing its simulcasting partner, accusing the Television Games Network of violating its contract by not finding an overseas venue for racing broadcasts until after the racetrack company signed on with a competitor.

Churchill Downs said the Television Gaming Network, known as TVG, had the rights to find a broadcast outlet overseas for its races, but failed to do so during the nearly 10 years it held the contract. After TVG officials said they were concentrating on the U.S. market, Churchill Downs teamed with rival Magna Entertainment and Racing UK Limited in February 2000 to form "Racing World," a venue to broadcast Churchill Downs' races in England and Ireland.

Only then did TVG sign on with "At The Races," a British broadcast partner, to telecast Churchill's races overseas, racetrack officials said.

Under the terms of the contract, TVG can't consign to a third party the broadcast rights to races at Churchill Downs properties without the company's permission, said Julie Koenig-Loignon, a spokeswoman for Churchill Downs Inc.

"They cannot do that without our prior consent," Koenig-Loignon said. "It certainly would create in-market competition."

The lawsuit, filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Louisville, seeks unspecified damages of more than $75,000 from TVG.

A spokesman for TVG did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

Churchill Downs Inc. and TVG signed an agreement in 1997, giving TVG the rights to simulcast races both in the United States and internationally from Churchill Downs, with similar agreements covering the other five tracks owned by the company. The contracts included a clause that required TVG to get permission from Churchill Downs Inc., before giving a third party the simulcasting rights, Koenig-Loignon said.

"That did not happen in this case," Koenig-Loignon said.

In the lawsuit, Churchill Downs Inc., called TVG's performance "disappointing," and said it has tried for several years to induce TVG into expanding beyond the 10 to 12 states where it was available, including a move into the overseas market. Instead, TVG got permission and sublicensed the internet broadcasting and wagering to YouBet.com and America TAB in 2001.

In 2005, Churchill Downs' then-CEO Tom Meeker twice asked TVG executives if they planned to only pursue broadcasts in the United States and TVG CEO Ryan O'Hara said yes both times, the lawsuit said.

That's when Churchill Downs Inc. helped form "Racing World," and so far has spent about $750,000 on the project, Koenig-Loignon said. Meeker, in a conference call last month, said "Racing World" will give American racing a global presence as well as serve as a pilot for possible ventures in the future.

"While this effort is targeted at the U.K., and Ireland, it does serve as a blueprint for future deployment in other foreign markets," Meeker said.

Last month, TVG announced that it reached agreement with "At The Races" to simulcast races from Churchill Downs' properties in England and Ireland. In written statements about the deal, TVG touted its affiliation with Churchill Downs and its related tracks, including the Fair Grounds in New Orleans.

The contract between the Fair Grounds and TVG allows races from that track to be simulcast in north America, not internationally, Koenig-Loignon said. Churchill Downs Inc. is unsure what TVG has planned, given that racing at all Churchill Downs tracks but the Fair Grounds closes for winter in the next two weeks.

"We don't know what they are planning," Koenig-Loignon said. "They haven't been forthcoming with their information."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/sports/e3id7ffa77ebb44dca92aca2f356df059ef

dad1153

11-23-06, 02:06 PM

This is the last article that John M. Higgins, business reporter for Broadcasting & Cable, wrote before his untimely passing. If you'd like to read tributes about Mr. Higgins' life/work please click here: http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6393983.html?display=Breaking+News (article too lengthy to be posted in this thread).

The Business of TV
Wall Street Money Shuns TV
By John M. Higgins Broadcasting & Cable November 22, 2006

If you believe in the dictum “follow the money,” last week offered a sad commentary on the state of the television business.

Some of Wall Street’s biggest takeover players jumped at the chance to pour billions of dollars into the lackluster radio business, agreeing to buy giant Clear Channel for $26.7 billion. They can’t, however, muster any enthusiasm for the TV business and immediately put the company’s stations on the block.

Sluggish, ailing radio—battered by satellite services, iPods and repelled listeners—
is a better bet than local TV? The flurry of recent deals involving TV stations offers a chance to see how Wall Street’s presumed “smart-money” players are thinking about the business. A substantial injection of outside money would be a big sign of confidence, evidence that investors without a vested interest in the stations business see a future as bright as the one touted by industry insiders.

Private-equity money was plentiful in the biggest TV auction this year, the $12.3 billion sale of Univision Television. But that was seen more as a vote for the surging Hispanic-media market.

There’s still hope that private equity can juice up the TV market. The biggest chance is the proposed breakup of Tribune Co. and the intended sale of its $4.5 billion TV portfolio. Another is the sale of The New York Times’ $500 million group. Finally, of course, is the Clear Channel sale.

The optimistic TV picture—painted by players from CBS CEO Leslie Moonves to Nexstar CEO Perry Sook—expects stations to boost cash flow by collecting hefty cash payments from cable operators, creating new businesses on digital broadcasting, and using technology to reduce costs, particularly in news production.

The pessimistic picture shows stations struggling to continue growing revenues at an average of 3% or so, surging in an election year only to plunge the following, odd-numbered year. Meanwhile, they’ll be slammed by cable systems getting increasingly sharp at selling local ads; by Websites that start targeting local consumers more successfully, particularly on behalf of car dealers; and by networks that diminish the importance of affiliates by pushing their top primetime hits onto YouTube and iTunes.

Clear Channel, now led by CEO Mark Mays, is best-known for dominating—sometimes abusively—the radio industry. Its TV group is far more modest. Ranked No. 17, it owns 42 stations covering 24 markets, including duopolies.

The company has just two stations in the top 25 markets. The stations—KTFY San Francisco and KVOS Seattle—are hot, but they’re independents, unaffiliated with major networks. Affiliates of strong networks are WKRC Cincinnati (CBS); KTVX Salt Lake City (ABC), which is paired with CW affiliate KUCW; and WOAI San Antonio (NBC).

Mark Fratrik, a VP at broadcasting research specialist BIA Financial, estimates that Clear Channel’s stations generated $315 million last year. One Wall Street executive, asking not to be named, pegs operating cash flow at $100 million. That could translate into a $1.2 billion valuation of the entire group.

The Tribune portfolio has a far more interesting geography. Its 26 stations are in nine of the top 10 markets, 17 of the top 25. Unfortunately, most are affiliates of the CW network, often unable to support a limited news operation. Tribune has many CW stations with just one evening hour of news a day and none in the increasingly lucrative early-morning hours.

“It’s very hard to run a standalone CW affiliate because it’s hard to support news,” says an executive with one top broadcast group. “And that’s where strong stations really make money.”

Tribune is trying to energize its auction by splitting off its three biggest stations and offering them for sale separately. That might trigger big tax bills but might also draw in giant broadcasters that would otherwise be unable to bid or uninterested in bidding, definitely CBS and possibly even Disney’s ABC.

Tribune bankers have begun shopping WPIX New York, KTLA Los Angeles and WGN Chicago, according to the Los Angeles Times. The package is valued at more than $2.5 billion, about 70% of the estimated value of Tribune’s entire 26-station portfolio.

There’s a long list of potential buyers for at least chunks of the group, including Gannett and Hearst-Argyle, which are also interested in Tribune’s venerable newspapers, including the Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times. Other possible shoppers include Cox, Media General and LIN TV.

The most obvious buyers are owners of stations in the same markets, which could operate more efficiently and, hence, justify a higher price than other buyers.

“The duopoly play is always, first and foremost, the compelling play,” says Elliot Evers, managing director of investment banker Media Venture Partners.

But financially, broadcasters would be best-served by a strong vote of confidence by some big private-equity funds. Why should radio guys have all the fun?

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6393269.html

dad1153

11-23-06, 02:25 PM

Critic's Notebook
'Candles on Bay Street' glows and then flickers
By Jim Heinrich Pittsburgh Post-Gazette November 23, 2006

A dozen years ago, Sam was going to give Dee Dee his class ring. Instead, Dee Dee ran off with a drug-dealing lout and vanished from his life.

Later, Sam met Lydia at veterinary school and married her. The lovebirds settled in his northern Maine hometown, setting up practice with the cutest animals outside of a petting zoo.

When Dee Dee, now a candle maker by profession, moves back to town with her 11-year-old son, Trooper, the relationship between Sam and Lydia becomes unsettled, fostering jealousy and lies.

At first, this Hallmark Hall of Fame production, based on a novel by K.C. McKinnon, seems to be the story of a love triangle. About a third of the way into the show, I figured out that it was going to go the tear-jerking route of "Terms of Endearment" or "Beaches." Until the movie goes awry in the final scenes, it's a good show.

As Dee Dee, Alicia Silverstone (of the movie "Clueless") is charming, and she looks and twinkles much like Meg Ryan pre-cosmetic surgery. Eion Bailey and Annabeth Gish are appealing as Sam and Lydia, and young Matthew Knight is a real trouper as Trooper.

Filmed in Nova Scotia, this is a world of traditional family values, where everything is beautiful in its own way, love conquers all and life goes on. For many viewers, it will be welcome, sentimental holiday viewing, as long as a box of Kleenex is within reach.

When Dee Dee begins a candle-making class in her home, half the town signs up and falls in love with her, including the previously wary Lydia. The former free spirit has achieved sainthood.

The best vignette has Sam and his assistant, young Trooper, delivering a foal with OB chains -- not your typical TV scene. Another good scene has Polly Bergen, as the veterinarians' secretary, singing "You've Got a Friend" at a party to an ailing townsperson.

Unfortunately, the final scenes fall apart in over-the-top mawkishness. I winced as Trooper delivered a funeral eulogy that was meant to be touching, and I wondered why the director, John Erman, didn't reshoot a scene in which Bergen flubs the words to the second verse of "Amazing Grace" at the same funeral.

"Candles on Bay Street" isn't one of the best "Hallmark Hall of Fame" productions, but it's one of the most typical.

When: 9 p.m. Sunday on CBS.
Starring: Alicia Silverstone, Eion Bailey, Annabeth Gish.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06327/740540-237.stm

dad1153

11-23-06, 02:35 PM

TV Notebook
Comic Relief '06 Cashes In
By Natalie Finn E! Online November 22, 2006

Laughter may not be a cure-all, but it is apparently a wallet-opener.

The star-studded Comic Relief 2006 telethon raised $4 million in pledges to benefit Hurricane Katrina victims, Comic Relief president and founder Bob Zmuda announced Wednesday

This year's philanthropic laugh-fest, back on HBO after an eight-year hiatus, tapped original hosts Billy Crystal, Whoopi Goldberg and Robin Williams to emcee the event for the ninth time. Additionally, a cleaned-up version of the show, televised live from Caesars Palace on Saturday, aired on TBS with an eight-second delay.

Wayne Brady hosted a remote feed from Harrah's New Orleans. The Harrah's Foundation also donated $250,000 to the relief effort.

Witty celebs ranging from Roseanne Barr and Jimmy Kimmel to Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert—who promised via satellite to match every dollar raised with one Colbuck, which is good anywhere in The Colbert Report studio—worked their darndest to ensure that there was nary a dull moment during the ninth major telecast of Comic Relief, which capped off Las Vegas' weeklong Comedy Festival.

Comic Relief also marked its 20th anniversary as an organization this year. The charity, founded by Zmuda, who is a comedian himself, began as a benefit for Sudanese refugees that aired on the BBC in 1985. Since then, more than 80 telecasts have been produced, including the eight big events on HBO over the years that together have raised more than $50 million.

The funds raised Saturday have been earmarked to help families from New Orleans' devastated lower Ninth Word find low-cost housing, as well as to help care for animals abandoned during Hurricane Katrina and aid future animal rescue operations during times of natural disaster.

Bill Maher, Sarah Silverman, George Lopez, Ray Romano, D.L. Hughley, Rebecca Romijn, Rita Rudner, Lewis Black, Louis C.K., Steve Schirripa, the main Entourage crew (Jeremy Piven, Adrian Grenier, Kevin Connolly, Kevin Dillon and Jerry Ferrara), and Doug Savant, James Denton and Ricardo Chavira from Desperate Housewives were also on hand to discuss the ravages of Katrina and, of course, make people laugh.

Howie Mandel, Stewart and Colbert, and Triumph the Insult Comic Dog dropped by, as well, via video.

http://www.eonline.com/news/article/index.jsp?uuid=4d75d33e-2a83-403a-988a-590a60d91418

dad1153

11-23-06, 02:43 PM

TV Notebook
TV Land is bringing back WB’s High School Reunion
TV.com November 18, 2006

The WB is no more, nor is its reality series High School Reunion, which reunited people who used to go to high school together (even if, in some cases, they weren’t all members of the same graduating class). Its third and final season debuted two years ago this December.

Buried inside a TV Land press release from this week (http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news.aspx?id=20061113tvland01) was a single paragraph that says the show is getting new life on the cable network. TV Land will debut a new season of the show (its fourth) next summer. There will be one-hour episodes, but it isn’t clear how many have been ordered.

The network says the show “finds former classmates and brings them back together 20 years later to pursue unresolved relationships, romance and rivalries.” The new season will be produced by Mike Fleiss and his production company, Next Entertainment.

http://www.tv.com/tracking/viewer.html&********6686&tid=98414&ref_type=101&tag=updates;title;2

dad1153

11-23-06, 02:49 PM

Critic's Notebook
'Molly' is the best 'American Girl' yet
By Cristina Rouvalis Pittsburgh Post-Gazette November 23, 2006

Molly McIntire is a pigtailed klutz, a tap dancer out of sync, a longshot for the star role of "Miss Victory" in the student dance recital.

But that doesn't stop her from practicing and practicing to be the star-spangled lead of a Christmas extravaganza during World War II.

"Molly: An American Girl on the Homefront" is the third of the American Girl movies, following "Samantha" and "Felicity."

And it has the most heart, thanks to Maya Ritter, the actress who plays Molly with just enough endearing awkwardness to make her feel like a spunky little girl -- not a picture-perfect doll plucked off the shelf.

Molly Ringwald stars, too -- but believe it or not, she's Molly's mother. It's jarring to see Ringwald as a traditional 1940s mom, instead of a pretty-in-pink angsty teen.

Like Diane Keaton and Marcia Gay Harden, fine actresses who played the mothers in the two previous American Girl movies, Ringwald doesn't get to act much. But don't blame her. The script has her deliver a bunch of mommy platitudes.

Besides, Molly, the middle child, is a Daddy's girl.

When Molly decides she wants to have a tea party for her ninth birthday party, her mother tells her that it's impossible because of war rationing. Her father comforts her by telling her he will take her out -- just dad and daughter. It is a very sweet moment.

The movie is set in 1944, and the tension is set up when Molly's father, a doctor played by David Aaron Baker, volunteers to go to London to tend to wounded soldiers.

Molly begs her dad not to go -- and she is shown chasing after the train carrying her father to war.

Meanwhile, Molly and her two closest friends idolize their beautiful and kind teacher, Miss Campbell (Sarah Manninen), and her romance with her dashing boyfriend, who is shipping off to war. The two plan to get married once he returns.

Except he doesn't come back.

And there are other tragedies among the people in the community -- and the tension builds. Will Molly's beloved dad come back from the war?

Molly keeps dancing and dancing as she tries to adjust to changes during the war -- a missing father, no ice cream at the soda fountain, turnips for dinner. But the most jarring change is a new roommate, Emily Bennett (Tory Green), a little girl who relocated from London and moved in with the McIntire family.

Instead of saccharine sweetness, this movie shows the two girls eyeing each other warily at first. Molly thinks Emily is a rich snob, and Emily thinks Molly is spoiled.

It is only when Molly finds out the terrible truth about Emily's life in London that she softens and they become fast friends, a metaphor for how the two countries have to pull together to win the war.

It all builds to a tense crescendo. Will Molly become Miss Victory? Will her father come home alive?

We won't give it away.

But this movie has enough realistic plot twists and little-girl heart to keep you and your daughter watching to the end.

When: 8 p.m. Sunday, Disney Channel.
Starring: Maya Ritter, Tory Green, David Aaron Baker.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06327/740542-237.stm

dad1153

11-23-06, 02:54 PM

Normally I'm not one to post press releases, but this time I'll make an exception because I've seen zero media coverage of this November special anywhere else (feel free to point me to one if you see it). Of course I happen to be crazy for this particular show so I want to spread the word around! :)

Press Release
‘THE REAL MATCH GAME STORY: BEHIND THE BLANK’ TO AIR ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 26
GSN Will Run a Match Game Marathon of Classic Episodes Saturday, November 25

(Santa Monica, CA) – On Sunday, November 26 (8:00-9:00 PM, ET), GSN will pay homage to one of the game show greats with an original special THE REAL MATCH GAME STORY: BEHIND THE BLANK, narrated by Jamie Farr. A marathon of “Match Game” classic episodes will air Saturday, November 25 (8:00 – 11:00 PM, ET).

Interviewees include panelists Richard Dawson, Brett Somers, Marcia Wallace, Betty White and Jimmy Walker; numerous staff members from the classic series and one of the last interviews given by the series’ legendary host, Gene Rayburn.

“Match Game” started out as a run-of-the-mill, fill-in-the-blank game show. The questions were simple and contestants had to fill in the blanks: “Every morning, John puts ____ on his cereal.” Faced with cancellation because of low ratings, producers and panelists decided to kick it up a notch and have fun until the end of the season.

Host Rayburn rattled off questions packed with sexual double entendres, unusual for the 1970s. The racy questions made it to the air, the celebrities made it a point to ‘play dumb’ and the results were hilarious. The ratings shot through the roof and CBS un-cancelled the series. “Match Game” became the highest-rated game show in daytime from 1974 to 1976.

“Match Game” redefined the modern game show. It went against convention, appealed to a younger, hipper audience and ushered in a new era of television. The special takes a look at “Match Game” from its rise to fame until its end in 1979 and celebrates one of the most beloved game shows on American television. The original “Match Game” series continues to air as part of the GSN line-up in the mornings, afternoons and evenings.

THE REAL MATCH GAME STORY: BEHIND THE BLANK is produced by Asylum Entertainment. Frank Sinton (“Anything to Win,” “Beyond the Glory”) serves as executive producer.

http://www.gsn.com/corporate/press.php?release_id=237

fredfa

11-23-06, 04:36 PM

dad -- shouldn't the headline of the above read Nov. 25th?

(I mention this only because I'll be travelling on the 25th -- and thus will miss probably the highlight of the entire TV season.)

dad1153

11-23-06, 04:58 PM

Nope, checked the calendar and today's Times. Today (Thursday) is the 23rd so Sunday will be the 26th. Don't worry Fred, GSN will probably repeat this 'Match Game' hour-long tribute a million times and those episodes Saturday are constantly shown on GSN. If they don't then send me your mailing address and I can send you a DVD copy of it (from the one I'll be making for myself). Let me know ahead of time if you'd like a copy though. :)

123HDTV

11-23-06, 05:27 PM

Confirmed it on my DVR... Saturday night is the Match Game marathon.

The other show is Sunday at 8e/5p

dad1153

11-23-06, 07:35 PM

The Business of TV
Sinclair Responds to Denied Motion
By David Cohen MultiChannel News November 22, 2006

Sinclair Broadcast Group Wednesday responded to the denial of its motion by the Federal Court for the Southern District of Iowa Tuesday in the antitrust lawsuit filed against it by Mediacom Communications.

“The decision does not in any way reflect on the merits of the case, but instead merely indicates the court's conclusion that the underlying claim by Mediacom can continue while the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals considers the appeal by Mediacom of the District Court's decision not to grant a preliminary injunction sought by Mediacom,” Sinclair general counsel Barry Faber said in a prepared statement.

“The sole effect of yesterday's judicial decision is to set the date by which Sinclair is required to file an answer to the complaint filed by Mediacom,” Faber added, referring to the court’s order that Sinclair must file an answer to the complaint within 30 days.

“The suggestion by Mediacom that this routine procedural decision by the District Court somehow reflects favorably on the merits of Mediacom's claim indicates either an intentional effort to mislead the public about the status of the litigation, a fundamental misunderstanding of the judicial process or a failure to have read the denial of Mediacom's motion,” Faber said.

Sinclair had filed a motion to stay the proceedings pending Mediacom’s appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals of the District Court’s decision denying a preliminary injunction against termination of retransmission consent by Sinclair.

“Despite Sinclair’s efforts to convince the public that the judge’s ruling on the preliminary injunction disposed of Mediacom’s claim, this decision is confirmation that the court has not rendered a final decision on the merits,” Mediacom senior vice president and general counsel Joseph E. Young said in a prepared statement.

“Mediacom expects to ultimately prevail in its claims that Sinclair violated antitrust laws,” he added. “We look forward to initiating discovery to learn the details of Sinclair's business plan for retransmission consent, its alliances with our satellite competitors and its strategy and tactics with respect to other cable operators. We believe all of this information will support the allegations of our antitrust complaint that Sinclair violated the law in its dealings with us.”

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6393984.html?display=Breaking+News

dad1153

11-23-06, 07:45 PM

Technlogy
HD Growing Pains
Levi Maaia's Multichannel 'Voices' Column Nov. 20, 2006

This holiday shopping year had high expectations for technology vendors but uncertainty about computer upgrades -- with Windows Vista looming, HD set-top wars and digital rights management has put the breaks not only on PC sales, but it could put a damper on HD growth in the cable market, as well.

The digital-video-recorder wars have been on for some time. TiVo, longtime DVR leader, remains at the top of the heap, although it has only recently introduced a high-definition box, which works as a sidecar to a cable or satellite converter.Satellite has had integrated HD DVR technology for a bit longer but few DirecTV subscribers have been willing to foot the expensive upfront cost of this first-generation HD equipment.

Cable companies such as Full Channel have had the option to launch HD DVRs from Motorola, but at their own risk, since the hardware/software combination was less than perfect. Small cable operators have been waiting (not so) patiently for Motorola to improve the DCT-6412 HD DVR.Full Channel chose not to launch the 6412 HD DVR.Having had three 6412’s fail in my own home during testing, it seemed that the potential risks -- financial loss from truck rolls, tarnished consumer reputation from the headaches of troubleshooting the box -- outweighed the gains of being able to say, “We have an HD DVR, too!”

We decided to launch a standard-definition TiVo sidecar last year.It wasn’t high-definition, but the failure rate has proved to be far below that of the 6412.

Finally the summer of ’06 brought the good news of the Motorola DCT-6416, which promised to resolve the many pesky reliability issues of its predecessor. No sooner was it available to independent cable operators through the National Cable Television Cooperative, that it was announced to be obsolete -- doomed before it even left the shipping dock. An FCC ruling on competitive cable converters earlier this year promises to allow other vendors into the set-top converter market by forcing the current players (Motorola and Scientific Atlanta) to eliminate the integration of authorization circuitry within the box.

This is a great idea, but like growing pains, the “HD pains” from the transition have been sharp and unexpected. The FCC’s timeline essentially kills current technology before its replacement arrives in the marketplace, leaving operators and consumers with fewer options for high definition this holiday season.

I suppose we’ll wait (patiently) for the next generation of separable security set-tops, which will hopefully bring diversity to the HD set-top market, just in time for, hmmm … the Fourth of July shopping season?

http://www.multichannel.com/blog/20000202/post/1600005560.html

dad1153

11-23-06, 07:49 PM

The Business of TV
Flip-Flop Goes The Firebrand
Perhaps the Democrats can stem media consolidation's tide of woe
By Bill Gloede's Mediaweek Column Nov. 20, 2006

My good friend Craig has often, and gleefully, characterized my politics as "somewhere right of Attila the Hun." Now, Craig is given to liberal use of hyperbole, but I must admit he is not too far off the mark. My intellectual and political hero is William F. Buckley (no, I am not named for him. My F. stands for Frederick, and besides, I was born before anyone knew who he was.)

As a true-red Republican (libertarian branch), I could not be blamed for falling into sullen disgust as Democrats were swept into power by an electorate weary of war and official corruption. As things were, I was not. Instead, I am hopeful the Democrats might be able to accomplish some good. A good place to start would be to do what they can to halt media consolidation.

It was not long ago that I was a reliable supporter of the sort of deregulation favored by Michael Powell's Federal Communications Commission. I believed that U.S. media companies needed "scale" to compete in a global marketplace, especially since, at the time, the French and the Japanese looked to be conquering Hollywood. The French, of course, proved ridiculous and the Japanese hired Howard Stringer, giving evidence to the notion that they might actually know what they are doing.

Back then, I was convinced that the bigger the media company, the greater the resources upon which it could draw to create good stuff. Heck, the mantra of the day was "content is king."

I had visions, now exposed as delusions, of TV news reports informed by the knowledge, intelligence and skill of print reporters (not pundits!). Movies drawn from scripts adapted from new works of literary merit (at least, thank providence, we have Borat ). The debut of smart and funny TV shows like All in the Family, M*A*S*H and Seinfeld. A wider selection of formats available over terrestrial radio stations. Newspapers and magazines that employed the best writers who would keep an eye on political and business leaders whose natural inclination is toward corruption.

Instead, content is not king. Cash is. We have Dancing with the Stars, a youth culture transfixed by the ineluctably stupid ramblings of itself on MySpace and YouTube and a nation obsessed with Britney Spears' navel. Thousands of competent, productive people have lost jobs. Margins are up, but quality is way, way down. Many of the companies that consolidation was supposed to help are instead struggling. Investment bankers and a handful of mediocre executives seem to be the only parties to have benefited. And corruption is everywhere.

I can't see how consolidation has done anything good for the advertising industry. The media megashops that now dominate advertising buying and planning were born, in part, in response to the "clout" being assembled by increasingly large media combines. It is now debatable whether the old brand-agency media department, or something like it, might be a better place to integrate the advertising message and its delivery.

Content everywhere has been dumbed-down by cost cutting and executive decisions made with the primary goal of increasing short-term financial gain. This has led to an acceleration of audience erosion, particularly in the upper demographic categories. In short, no good has come from media consolidation, unless, of course, you happen to belong to the Mays family, which is now selling Clear Channel, which it controls, to a buyout firm, which, no doubt, will pillage it further after having shelled out $17 billion for the radio equivalent of roadkill.

Many Democrats, to their credit, recognized this ruse long ago and have steadfastly opposed media consolidation. They now need to galvanize their base against an administration and an FCC majority that have historically supported consolidation.

While they are at it, perhaps they should look into the three dozen or so CEOs who have resigned from public companies in recent months after disclosures of stock-option manipulation. While there have been steady press accounts of these resignations and the reasons for them, there has been no public outcry. This is astounding, considering that the sums involved have, in some cases, reached into the tens of millions of dollars.

And if the Dems are looking for new sources of revenue, which I'm certain they are, perhaps a tax on options—say 80 percent or so on any transaction that exceeds more than a $1 million annual gain—might be in order. Let's face it, many, if not most, CEOs are not worth what they are paid. To be sure, most CEO-types are very smart, mildly charismatic people. But Frank Sinatra, Tiger Woods—or even Britney Spears' navel—they are not.

Perhaps the nation should plunder them the way that they have plundered their companies. Don't get me wrong. I'm still a Republican. But I guess I am sullenly disgusted after all. Just not by the Democrats.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/departments/columns/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003409900

dad1153

11-23-06, 08:06 PM

Are you gearing up for some Black Friday sales? Yep, me neither, but this holiday season HDTV sales are poised to move units like mad if the buzz at the AVS Forums dealing with these sets is anything to go by. Case and point?

Technology
Flat-screen TV price wars heat up early
By Jonathan Takiff Philadelphia Daily News November 22, 2006

THE GIZMO: Flat-panel television holiday specials.

THESE PRICES ARE INSANE: "I've never seen it this chaotic," grumbled Hitachi chief marketing officer Kevin Sullivan. "This is like the PC world, and the only winner is the consumer."

Hitachi is now threatening (reports Reuters) to withdraw from the full-scale price war that has broken out among flat-panel TV makers. While the conflict might be lousy for makers and retailers, it's great news for consumers shopping for a high-def TV as their big holiday gift.

LEADING THE CHARGE: In the recent past, lesser brands with second-rate (or nonexistent) reputations were the first to slash prices for high-definition LCD and plasma sets.

But earlier this month, leading plasma set maker Panasonic took a big step backward, reducing the list prices of its 37- to 58-inch widescreen models by $200 to $300. That forced other top-tier makers like Samsung and Hitachi to do likewise. All three brands now have plasma HDTVs in the most popular, 42-inch screen size carrying a list price of $1,799.

And that's hardly the end of it.

In a pre-emptive, pre-Black Friday move designed to pump up the chain's lagging sales, Wal-Mart recently sweetened its deals on electronics. That chain's "derivative" (but essentially the same) model Panasonic 42-inch HDTV set can be had for a hair under $1,400, a discounted price competitors - including Amazon.com - have been quick to meet.

OTHER DEALS: Meanwhile, lower-resolution but still good-quality 42-inch ED (extended definition) sets by Panasonic and other brands will hit price points as low as $999 on Friday - traditionally the biggest holiday shopping day - and possibly straight through the holiday season.

Other manufacturer/retailer specials we've spotted: a 42-inch Toshiba plasma at Sears for $1,199; a 42-inch Westinghouse LCD TV at Best Buy for $999; and a 50-inch Vizio plasma at Circuit City for $1,400.

THE INSIDE WORD: At my recent meeting with Panasonic U.S. chairman and chief executive officer Yoshi Yamada, he denied being a battle protagonist.

"We don't think we are leading the price war. We are offering a very good cost/performance model for the consumer," he said.

Unlike some competitors that don't produce the front end of their flat-panel TV sets, Panasonic is "a vertically integrated business with our own panel factories," explained Yamada. "And the more sets we make, the better we can price them."

Last year, the company couldn't keep up with the demand, "but with the addition of our newest panel factory, which reached full production this July [a facility the size of 24 football fields], we have sufficient capacity to turn out 4 million plasma units a year, enough to meet this year's demand, we think."

As to Wal-Mart and others' discount pricing, "we have no control over that," said the Panasonic executive. However, other sources say that the company can and does put restrictions on the minimum advertised price.

PREPARING BATTLE STATIONS: Similarly huge factory expansion projects also have been undertaken by major producers of LCD flat-panel HDTVs, including Sharp and Samsung-Sony S-LCD.

The added capacity and heightened competition will push down the average selling price for an LCD TV almost 25 percent in 2007, said Westinghouse Digital Electronics president Douglas Woo at the recent iSuppli Flat Information Display conference.

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/entertainment/television/16072586.htm

dad1153

11-23-06, 08:25 PM

Ray Richmond's take on the OJ Simpson and Michael Richards controversies. It's the last time I'm posting about these two unless somebody comes with a unique-enough spin on them to warrant another read. Or somebody gets fired, whichever comes first. :cool:

Critic’s Notebook
A Pre-Thanksgiving Examination Of That Whole O.J. Fiasco
By Ray Richmond The Hollywood Reporter in his blog “Past Deadline” Nov. 22, 2006

I have to admit some lingering disappointment that News Corp. this week decided to dump the HarperCollins book and the two-part Fox TV interview tie-in featuring O.J. Simpson and the outrageously titled joint projects called "If I Did It."

As a friend pointed out, this could well have been transformed into a series of both books and television specials, with Simpson -- as our host -- imagining what it would have been like to commit specific murders from throughout history: Julius Caesar, JFK, the Black Dahlia, Lincoln, the Archduke Ferdinand...the list is really endless.

From what I can gather, it wasn't the fact that Simpson is such a loathsome figure that finally prompted News Corp. chief Rupert Murdoch to pull the plug. He seemed reasonably okay with trading the taint of climbing into bed with one of America's most reviled men for the promise of a ratings windfall. He was also fine with the transparent sanctimony of Regan Books publisher Judith Regan in pulling out the "battered woman" card to justify her participation in such a fiasco.

No, what caused Murdoch to blink was simple dissension in his ranks and in the book world. When a couple of dozen Fox affiliates vowed not to air the broadcast, paired with the growing rejection of the tome by bookstore chains, a simmering advertiser boycott and the bashing of the project by Bill O'Reilly and Geraldo Rivera over Fox News Channel, it proved more than even the tabloid-loving billionaire could bear.

Left in its wake are a whole lot of questions over the propriety of this thing having been slated in the first place. Shockingly, no one now seems to want to claim credit for the idea, though it's fairly obvious Regan at least pushed things forward.

In hindsight, the notion of an O.J. non-confession confession is less unctuous than it is absurd. From Simpson's point of view, he would be earning a reported $3.5 million -- hidden in various ways to prevent it from being seized to pay off his civil judgment -- to hypothetically reflect on a reprehensible crime that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe he committed, anyway.

It's like the disgraced James Frey and his notorious memoir "A Million Little Pieces" in reverse. Frey's was a work of fiction peddled as one of fact. For Simpson, it was reality presented as novel. In so doing, it would serve merely to perpetuate the lie: this is how it would have happened if I'd done the deed (nudge-nudge, wink-wink).

If we look at this as reflective of the quasi-unscripted fabric that now flows so much of primetime's original offerings -- including comedy -- what News Corp. planned with O.J. makes perfect sense. Most TV that's labeled as "reality" is about as real as "The Flintstones," with scripting and story editors and all variety of stagecraft. The would-be Simpson debacle was simply another example of TV's ongoing rope-a-doping of America.

For his part, Simpson admits this was all about the money but still has a tendency to hold reality at arm's length. He told the Associated Press this week, "This was an opportunity for my kids to get their financial legacy. My kids understand. I made it clear that it's blood money, but it's no different than any of the other writers who did books on this case."

Yeah, except for the fact this one was about the kids' dad discussing how he might have brutally murdered their mother. Otherwise, it's identical. Simpson also emphasized, "Would everybody stop being so naive? Of course I got paid. I spent the money on bills. It's gone." Perhaps that's the real issue here. And it feels particularly galling. O.J. continues to profit from this crime, leaving the rest of us effectively bankrupt.
____________________________________________________________ _____
Critic’s Notebook
Revisiting the Michael Richards Controversy
By Ray Richmond The Hollywood Reporter in his blog “Past Deadline” Nov. 22, 2006

I've spoken to, and received numerous comments from, readers and friends weighing in on the Michael Richards controversy. The polarization of the responses presents further evidence of just how vast is the racial divide in this country, something of which most African Americans no doubt are reminded on a daily basis but that we white folks often forget.

The replies have been pretty much split into three camps:

1.- "I've noticed that everyone wants to cut Richards a lot more slack than they cut Mel Gibson -- even though Richards didn't even have the booze excuse!"

2.- "Why is it all right for the black people in the crowd at the Laugh Factory to call Richards a 'Cracker' but it isn't okay for him to refer to them as 'Nigger'?"

3.- "The man has problems that seem far deeper than a few enraged racial epithets, and at least he tried to apologize immediately on national television."

First, about that apology Monday night on "Late Show with David Letterman": it was positively surreal. Richards, sitting by himself, virtually naked, with nowhere to hide, appeared legitimately bewildered and perplexed, speaking of his own invective-spewing rant as if he were discussing the actions of somebody else. It's clear both on the video shot at the club and during his chilling, disjointed appearance with Letterman that he was experiencing some sort of nervous breakdown. I believe the man is probably less a strict racist than an embittered, confused, distraught, unhinged guy in desperate need of intensive therapy.

Does this excuse the words that left his mouth from that comedy club stage? Hardly. And a single apology doesn't erase their impact. But I also don't think it racially insensitive to observe that perhaps this stemmed more from a larger emotional/psychological snap than simple bigotry. Yes, part of Richards' recovery should include diversity counseling to deduce where this racially-targeted rage came from, if it isn't indeed a lifelong mindset. It isn't about letting him off the hook for such a hateful transgression; it's about the larger issue of his mental state and very public implosion.

Again, this hardly excuses Richards' repeated use of what the polite media likes to call "The N-Word," nor does it dismiss the bigotry behind it. But this is obviously about far more than race. It's about the mental state of a man clearly hanging by an emotional thread and who appeared Monday to be in the throes of a sort of mania -- the kind that can lead to suicidal thoughts.

You simply don't often see television infused with the sort of raw emotion evoked during that interview. Letterman was particularly gentle in his questioning. And Jerry Seinfeld -- who obviously engineered the on-camera purge/apology out of concern for his buddy -- showed himself to be a true friend indeed to Richards. It was clear there was a fatherly element at work in Seinfeld's arranging for this interview, obviously conducted without publicist consultation or pre-planning or image makeover artists. There was nothing concocted or superficial about it. And in that sense, it made for an altogether bracing experience.

It took genuine courage for Richards to go on Letterman at Seinfeld's behest when he was in such a fragile and wounded state. And you got the feeling the man was staring not merely into a camera but squarely at his many demons. He didn't have the alcohol excuse, and he didn't concoct one. It was, refreshingly, about a guy trying to take immediate responsibility for his ugly actions and blaming no one but himself. So no matter what else you want to say about him, he showed some guts.

However, as my longtime journalist/author friend Kevin Allman writes on his indispensible blog, Richards did himself no favors by trying to drag the victims of Hurricane Katrina into his Letterman apology. It again speaks to the lack of preparation and advance consultation with publicity types, which proved commendable but also a bit imprudent.

The fact is, I don't know where this racism came from if we're to believe Richards isn't what he appeared to be on that stage. Obviously, something went haywire in his circuitry while being heckled, perhaps his longstanding and well-known anger at having been forever typecast as "Seinfeld's" Kramer. He very much needs to get over it and move on, use his millions to open a theater, take a year-long sailing trip around the world, come to terms with reality, enjoy his wealth and his life. There are worse things than being known as an iconic character from a revered sitcom and having that memory prevent you from landing other work. You've got to know that 99.999% of the Screen Actors Guild membership would take that deal in a heartbeat.

So, to finally answer the issues in order:

1.- If we're cutting Richards more slack than we did Mel Gibson, maybe it's because he isn't hiding behind publicists and statements and put his face out there front and center in the sort of vulnerable fashion that Gibson never has and never will.

2.- It isn't all right for African Americans to refer to white people as "Crackers." But under the chaotic circumstances, it was understandable because the dialogue had grown so horribly ugly due to Richards' deplorable conduct.

3.- If Gibson deserves another chance, Richards certainly does, too. But given the already-tenuous state of his career, I fear he may never get it.

http://www.pastdeadline.com/