Hot Off The Press! The Latest Television News and Info [Text View] - Page 97

fredfa

03-21-07, 11:56 AM

Weekly Nielsen Notebook
Analysis: National Ratings in Prime Time:
Week of March 12-18, 2007
By Marc Berman MediaWeek.com March 21, 2007

Led by the mammoth American Idol, Fox was on the forefront, with a first-place finish in households, total viewers and key adults 18-49, adults 25-54 and adults 18-34 for the week of March 12. Comparably, and excluding households, Fox was off by minor proportions from one year earlier. CBS finished second in the five surveyed categories, with losses of as much as 17 percent among adults 25-54. ABC and NBC shared the No. 3 and 4 spots, with both networks down from the year-ago week, while cellar-dweller The CW remains a noticeable disappointment in year one.

In series-premiere news, the Thursday 10 p.m. battle of ABC’s October Road vs. a preview of NBC’s Raines (which moves into its regularly scheduled Friday 9 p.m. time period on March 30) resulted as follows:

Thursday 10 p.m.
October Road (ABC)
Viewers: 13.93 million (#9 overall), A18-49: 5.6/15 (#5)

Raines (NBC)
Viewers: 10.46 million (#23), A18-49: 2.9/ 8 (#29t)

Comparatively, and ignited by lead-in Grey’s Anatomy, October Road was the third-highest rated scripted series debut this season among adults 18-49 (behind ABC’s Brothers & Sisters and NBC’s Heroes), and it was the top-rated series-opener of the season among women 18-34 (7.9/22). Among adults 18-49, October Road was ABC’s highest-rated Thursday night scripted series debut since March 3, 1994. Worth noting for Raines, meanwhile, was growth out of the debut of sitcom Andy Barker, P.I. (Viewers: #63, 5.96 million; A18-49: #46t, 2.4/ 6 at 9:30 p.m.) of a significant 4.50 million viewers and 21 percent among adults 18-49). Retention for October Road out of Grey’s Anatomy was 61 percent in viewers and 62 percent in the demo.

Over at Fox, the Wednesday 9:30 p.m. time period premiere of ‘Til Death (Viewers: #8, 14.07 million; A18-49: #4, 5.8/15) out of the live American Idol results show hit a series high, of course. But retention out of Idol of just 54 percent in total viewers and 57 percent among adults 18-49 means that returning next season is still iffy. Also on Fox was the Thursday 8 p.m. time period debut of Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader (Viewers: #12, 12.56 million; A18-49: #8t, 4.6/13), the network’s highest rated performance in the hour with regularly scheduled programming in over 8 years, and the Friday 9 p.m. time period debut of The Wedding Bells, a new dramedy from David E. Kelley. The Wedding Bells scored a lackluster 5.75 million viewers (#66) and a 1.8/ 5 among adults 18-49 (#75).

March Madness on CBS, meanwhile, opened at levels close to one year earlier. Take a look:

NCAA Basketball Tournament (CBS)
-Thursday 8-9:30 p.m. – Viewers: 8.88 million (#31), A18-49: 2.9/10 (#29t)
-Thursday 9:30-11 p.m. – Viewers: 8.56 million (#33), A18-49: 3.4/10 (#25)
-Friday 8-9:30 p.m. – Viewers: 8.48 million (#34), A18-49: 2.9/11 (#29t)
-Friday 9:30-11 p.m. – Viewers: 9.09 million (#29), A18-49: 3.6/12 (#18t)

In season-finale news, NBC Friday 8 p.m. game show I vs. 100 earned its renewal stripes with a comfortable 9.13 million viewers (first in the time period behind basketball) and a 2.4/ 8 among adults 18-49 (second behind basketball). Two more episodes of Fox sitcom The Winner signed off on Sunday with 5.55 million viewers (#72) and a 2.7/ 7 among adults 18-49 (#37t) at 8:30 p.m., and 5.14 million viewers (#79) and a 2.6/ 6 in the demo (#41t) at 9:30 p.m. Considering that retention out of a Family Guy encore at 9 p.m. was just 73 percent in total viewers and 74 percent in the demo, say goodbye to this loser.

Recently introduced shows also waiting for the axe to swing are NBC’s The Black Donnellys (Viewers: #55, 6.53 million; A18-49: #44t, 2.5/ 7) and Grease: You’re the One That I Want (Viewers: #51, 6.67 million; A18-49: #71t, 1.9/ 5). But the return of NBC game show Identity (which moves into the Friday 8 p.m. hour this week) netted better results out of 1 vs. 100 with 9.05 million viewers (#30) and a 2.8/ 8 in the demo (#34t). Also returning were two episodes of CBS sitcom The New Adventures of Old Christine, which performed as follows in the Monday 8 p.m. hour.

The New Adventures of Old Christine
Monday 8:00 p.m. – Viewers: 7.59 million (#41), A18-49: 2.4/ 7 (#46t)
Monday 8:30 p.m. – Viewers: 8.34 million (#36), A18-49: 2.9/ 8 (#29t)

Here are the final national ratings for the week of March 12, 2007 (with percent change versus the comparable year-ago period in parentheses for the Big 4 -- the CW is not included), followed by the top 30 ranked programs for the week in total viewers and adults 18-49.

Households:
Fox: 7.0 rating/11 share (no change)
CBS: 6.9/12 (-13)
NBC: 5.4/ 9 (-10)
ABC: 5.2/ 9 (-15)
CW: 2.1/ 3

Total Viewers:
Fox: 11.35 million (- 3)
CBS: 10.73 (-12)
NBC: 8.27 (-10)
ABC: 7.86 (-17)
CW: 3.10

Adults 18-49:
Fox: 4.4 rating/12 share (-12)
CBS: 3.4/10 (-13)
ABC: 2.8/ 8 (-20)
NBC: 2.5/ 7 (-22)
CW: 1.2/ 3

Adults 25-54:
Fox: 4.8/12 (- 9)
CBS: 4.0/11 (-17)
ABC: 3.2/ 8 (-22)
NBC: 3.0/ 8 (-21)
CW: 1.1/ 3

Adults 18-34:
Fox: 3.9/12 (-15)
CBS: 2.8/ 9 (- 7)
ABC: 2.4/ 8 (-11)
NBC: 1.8/ 6 (-31)
CW: 1.4/ 4

• Source: Nielsen Media Research data

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

dad1153

03-21-07, 11:58 AM

Roger Friedman over at Fox News has posted a mini-review of the first two episodes of Season 7 of The Sopranos: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260084,00.html. Needless to say if you'd rather watch these "Sopranos" episodes in the dark do not click to link since there are (minor) spoilers in the story. BTW, last night I saw my first "Sopranos" episode in HD (HBO HD is repeating the last season every Monday at 10PM), the one where Vito rear-ended and then shot the other guy in the back... I'm talking cars and bullets here people! :eek: All I have to say is W-O-W, I'm glad I got the HDTV just in time to see one of my all-time favorite shows bow out in glorious style (and in high definition to boot).

fredfa

03-21-07, 12:02 PM

An added note on the Cox plan to rebate last year's MLB-EI subs $89 if they pay for this year's cost of the basic MLB.com game package....

According to MultiChannel News "...Officials at Time Warner Cable and Cablevision Systems said they don’t plan to follow Cox’s lead and offer an $89 rebate for baseball’s broadband-video package...."

fredfa

03-21-07, 12:10 PM

Ms. Stanley sometimes comes up with some oddball ideas, (and loves to use words which send you scurrying to a dictionary), but she sure can write.
This is a great read.
And how about her opening sentence?
Critic’s Notebook
In the Arms of Scandal, and Ready to Cha-Cha
By Alessandra Stanley The New York Times March 21, 2007

The British use America the way we use rehab.

Before Heather Mills, there was Sarah Ferguson, the divorced Duchess of York, who, after being photographed topless while a suitor sucked her toes, sought refuge in America and became its sweetheart as a spokeswoman for Weight Watchers. The literary model is Marie Melmotte, the daughter of a disgraced London financier who wiped her slate clean by crossing the Atlantic in “The Way We Live Now,” a novel by Anthony Trollope. (No relation.)

Ms. Mills, who became one of the most hated women in Britain after her messy, tabloid-intensive split with Paul McCartney, pulled off an amazing feat on Monday’s live, two-hour season premiere of the ABC hit series “Dancing With the Stars,” a contest that is as much about redemption as it is about the rumba. And it wasn’t just that she managed, despite a prosthetic leg, to perform a graceful fox trot to Irving Berlin’s “Cheek to Cheek.”

Ms. Mills, who was a model when she was hit by a police motorcycle while crossing a London street in 1993, is an animal rights activist and also lobbies against land mines. She was identified on the show as a “charity campaigner,” and throughout it she successfully expunged any trace of her estranged billionaire husband and what the British gossip columns delight in describing as his Heather-hating children.

“I am not taking the competition too seriously,” she said serenely on “Entertainment Tonight” on Monday. “Because my life is so serious, with land mines and animal rights and everything.”

Even “The Insider” skipped the usual paparazzi shots on Monday and showed a clip of Ms. Mills staging a nighttime raid a few weeks ago on a pig farm in Somerset, England, to expose what she described as “disgusting conditions.” The segment wasn’t long enough, however, to make clear why that is such a bad thing in a pigsty. (Ms. Mills and the animal rights group Viva! object to the use of confining pens for sows.)

In short, “Dancing” is the perfect second chance for Ms. Mills, and she is the perfect “Dancing” diva: a celebrity shaking off a cloud of bad publicity and willing to brave a disability and ballroom dance in front of more than 21 million people.

She also proved quite charming off the dance floor, saying that her sparkly, sequined yellow and hot pink ball gown made her feel like “an ice cream sundae.”

ABC ruthlessly advertised her disability with promos that zoomed in on her bag of prosthetic limbs and drumrolled the possibility that she would fall on her face. Ms. Mills was more down to earth, saying in interviews that as a person who learned to ski with one leg, she was fairly confident she could hold her own on the dance floor. She said she hoped her performance would inspire young people who had lost a limb.

And one of the strengths of this peculiar and irresistible show is that even though Ms. Mills’s story trumps all others, by evening’s end, she blended into the larger ensemble.

“Dancing” combines the retro cheesiness of “The Lawrence Welk Show” with the artful kitsch of “Strictly Ballroom.” It brings together a colorful array of celebrities who seem plucked from an episode of “Murder, She Wrote”; this season the contestants include a 1980s supermodel, Paulina Porizkova; a basketball star, Clyde Drexler; a former anchor of “Entertainment Tonight,” Leeza Gibbons; and the actor who played Cliff the Mailman on “Cheers,” John Ratzenberger. He declared he was dancing on behalf of all baby boomers. Younger viewers got an Olympic speed skating champion, Apolo Anton Ohno.

All the contestants are admirably disciplined about rehearsing and staying in character. “You can take the boy out of Kentucky,” the country singer Billy Ray Cyrus said. “But you can’t take Kentucky out of the boy.” Mr. Drexler, the basketball star, obligingly put his cha-cha lessons into hoop terms. “I wasn’t really trying to do everything in practice,” he said. “I live for the game.”

The Czech-born Ms. Porizkova tugged on the Iron Curtain. “Do not question the system,” her partner told her. Ms. Porizkova replied, “That’s what they said in the Communist countries.”

But the deeper appeal of “Dancing With the Stars” is simpler. Dancing, particularly ballroom dancing, is a lost art that everyone has a vestigial feel for in his or her toes. The competition taps into that yearning and weaves around it a melodrama of perseverance, defeat and triumph over adversity — or low expectations.

After Ms. Mills’s performance, Bruno Tonioli, a judge, told her, “You have more guts than Rambo.” Actually, what she really demonstrated is that Americans will always love a Rocky.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/21/arts/television/21watc.html?pagewanted=print

fredfa

03-21-07, 12:15 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
'Idol' brunt: Fox rivals resign to reruns
Two-hour reality episode averages an 11.6
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 21, 2007

“American Idol” continues to stomp the competition on the other Big Five English-language networks, though last night much of that competition was in reruns.

“Idol” averaged an 11.6 adults 18-49 rating from 8 to 10 p.m., according to Nielsen overnights, or 38 percent ahead of the combined 8.4 average of ABC, CBS, NBC and the CW.

Not surprisingly, three of the four networks aired reruns in at least one of those hours, though it’s doubtful they would have fared too much better even with originals. “Idol” more than quintupled the averages for ABC’s “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” CW’s “Gilmore Girls” and NBC’s “Law & Order: Criminal Intent,” all of them repeats.

CBS, whose shows skew older, was the only network to average above a 2.0 at 8 or 9 p.m., airing original episodes of “NCIS” and “The Unit.”

Of course Fox easily finished first for the night among 18-49s as the network posted an 11.6 average rating and a 30 share. CBS was second at 3.3/9, NBC third at 2.1/5, ABC fourth at 1.9/5, Univision fifth at 1.6/4 and CW sixth at 1.1/3.

At 8 p.m. Fox stated the night in the lead with a 10.7 rating for the first half of “Idol.” CBS was second that hour with a 3.6 for “NCIS,” with Univision and NBC tied for third at 1.9, Univision for “La Fea Mas Bella” and NBC for “Dateline.” ABC was fifth with a 1.6 for a repeat of “Videos” and CW sixth with a 0.8 for a “Gilmore” rerun.

Fox led again at 9 p.m., this time with a 12.5 for the second half of “Idol.” CBS was second once again that hour with a 3.3 for “Unit,” with Univision, NBC and ABC all tied for third at 1.7, Univision for “Mundo de Fieras,” NBC for a repeat of “Criminal Intent” and ABC for “Primetime.” That left CW sixth with a 1.3 for “Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll.”

CBS took the lead at 10 p.m. with a 2.9 for a repeat of “CSI,” with ABC and NBC tied for second at 2.5, ABC for “Boston Legal” and NBC for a repeat of “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.” Univision was fourth with a 1.3 for “Ver para Creer.”

Among households, Fox led the night with a 17.2 average rating and a 26 share. CBS was second at 8.0/13, NBC third at 4.6/7, ABC fourth at 4.3/7, Univision fifth at 2.1/3 and CW sixth at 1.7/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10939.asp

HDTVChallenged

03-21-07, 01:07 PM

Strange comments coming from a hardcore fan of the almost-never-watched GSN! :)

...

And let us be brutally honest: the CW really has no reason to exist -- other than to cheaply fill prime-time programming slots of stations which generally are owned in duopolies by major corporations.

So what would be your thoughts if "The CW" were just another "cable" option like say USANetwork or SciFi or TNT?

I only ask because in what is a relatively "neutrally biased" thread, you've displayed quite a hostile take towards "The CW," at one point even predicting that MyNetWorkTV would 'bury The CW by the end of the season.' (or words similar to that ;) ) That's just an observation ... :)

Rakesh.S

03-21-07, 01:32 PM

i'm glad abc finally scheduled traveler, but i'm afraid it's a summer burn off and nothing more..they paid for 6 or 9 episodes and had no room in the midseason schedule.

Shows that should end and go out on top next season -

Prison Break (monday's episode may have been the shark jumping episode)
Lost (testing viewer patience, has gone from top 5 to top 20)
Supernatural (love the show, but i really can't see them coming up with more arcs)
Smallville (it's time...we've been through lana angst for 6 years..let's call it a wrap)

jim tressler

03-21-07, 01:39 PM

why did prison break jump the shark on monday?? I wish they would have ended it after this year.. year 3 seems too drawn out for me.. but non the less, still a good show!

shuttermaker

03-21-07, 01:49 PM

MLB to look into iN Demand's 'Extra Innings' offer

NEW YORK -- Baseball's "Extra Innings" package of out-of-market games might wind up staying on cable television.

IN Demand said Wednesday it will offer to match the terms of DirecTV's $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball on behalf of its owners, who are affiliates of the companies that own Time Warner, Comcast and Cox cable systems.

Full article here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2806948

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:01 PM

So what would be your thoughts if "The CW" were just another "cable" option like say USANetwork or SciFi or TNT?

I only ask because in what is a relatively "neutrally biased" thread, you've displayed quite a hostile take towards "The CW," at one point even predicting that MyNetWorkTV would 'bury The CW by the end of the season.' (or words similar to that ;) ) That's just an observation ... :)

It is certainly a fair observation. I don't think of myself as biased against the CW, but if you do, you are absolutely entitled to your opinion.

I am not hoping to see the CW fail. However, I would like to see more shows I think are imaginative and not just holdovers from the WB and UPN. Come on, if you have just a 12-hour prime-time week and you are programming wrestling for two hours along with Pussycat Dolls and ATM for a few more, you don't need a lot more hours to fill. The bar just isn't that high, and the CW hasn't even managed to come close to crossing it.

Things may get better -- it would be hard to see them getting much worse. And I hope they do. But for now, 14 months after its announced birth, the CW is certainly not living up to anyone's expectations.

And my take on MYNetworkTV was obviously very, very wrong. (From my recollection, your memory of what I said is just about perfect, sadly for me.) :) But then it, in effect, admitted its mistakes and has made a giant U-turn. Not, in my mind, a quality U-turn, but a dramatic change in direction along with aggresive new management.

You surely can';t say that about the CW. It took no chances, it always seemd to take the easy way out. Ir retained fading shows, it didn't really expand the envelope and it provided little of any substance, IMO. And nothing seems to have changed that driftless direction. There seems little sense of urgency.

If the CW were a cable option, it would immediately jump into the front tier of networks. But then it couldn't afford to produce all those shows, so who knows what would happen.

My suspicion is that if the CW were to get a really visionary leader it could do well -- or at least far better. Overall I think the strategy of going after a niche audience doesn't work for networks -- to use the old cliche, that is why it is called broadcasting. If you want the niche, do everything you can to grab a bigger audience and then move toward the niche (a la Fox).

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:11 PM

TV Sports
In Demand Plays Ball
MultiChannel News 3/21/2007

The dugout for Major League Baseball’s Extra Innings out-of-market package just got a little more crowded.

In Demand said Wednesday that it will match the terms of DirecTV’s $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball, including carriage of The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel via the direct-broadcast satellite service.

The programmer added that its offer includes the use of a most-favored-nations provision in order to ensure that all terms are compatible.

Cable operators Time Warner Cable, Comcast and Cox Communications are In Demand affiliates. The service is owned by Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, Comcast In Demand Holdings and Cox Communications Holdings.

“As the current home for Extra Innings for more than 200,000 cable subscribers, we have extended ourselves to do our best to be able to continue to provide this package to baseball fans and our customers," In Demand president Robert Jacobson said in a prepared statement.

"This offer meets all of the conditions set forth by MLB last week,” he added. “Throughout this entire process, our goal has always been to respect the wishes of baseball fans who currently subscribe to Extra Innings through their local cable provider, and we stand ready to execute an agreement before the beginning of the baseball season.”

The first pitch of the 2007 MLB season is scheduled for Sunday night, April 1, when the New York Mets take on the St. Louis Cardinals on ESPN.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6426516

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:16 PM

TV Sports
Cable Ready to Play Ball on Extra Innings Package
By Jon Lafayette Television Week March 21, 2007

The cable industry said it offered to meet DirecTV's terms in order to continue to carry Major League Baseball's Extra Innings out-of-market game package.

DirecTV had hoped to carry Extra Innings exclusively, but after a flurry of protest, it agreed to a two-pronged agreement with MLB, paying $100 million a year for the exclusive and about half that for a non-exclusive package.

As part of the deal, DirecTV agreed to carry a new MLB cable channel to all of its subscribers. DirecTV also will own part of the channel.

In Demand Networks, which is owned by Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox and buys pay-per-view and on-demand programming for cable, said it will pay the same terms as DirecTV for Extra Innings. It also will put the Baseball Channel in the same number of homes as DirecTV does at launch in 2009.

There may be a question about whether the same number of subscribers is the same as the same proportion of subscribers. But with Congress set to look at this and other sports issues at a hearing next week, it may be a rather esoteric point on which to turn down the cable offer, especially since it would mean the Baseball Channel would launch with a record number of subscribers.

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week," Robert Jacobson, president and CEO of In Demand, said in a statement Wednesday. "Throughout this entire process, our goal has always been to respect the wishes of baseball fans who currently subscribe to Extra Innings through their local cable provider, and we stand ready to execute an agreement before the beginning of the baseball season," which is April 2.

EchoStar, which also carried Extra Innings, had no comment.

Officials from Major League Baseball and DirecTV could not be reached for comment.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11747

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:19 PM

TV Sports
In Demand Says It Will Match Offer for Baseball Package
By Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable 3/21/2007

In Demand Networks said Wednesday it will match DirecTV’s offer to carry Major League Baseball’s out-of-market package and yet-to-be launched Baseball Channel on "the same terms contained in the MLB and DirecTV agreement announced recently."

The provider of programming via cable outlets said it will match DirecTV’s seven-year commitment - said to be worth $700 million - and will carry the new channel "with distribution to at least the number of subscribers to which DirecTV launches the channel."

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week," says In Demand Networks president and CEO Robert D. Jacobson.

It is yet to be determined whether Major League Baseball will deem the offer acceptable.

DISH Network has yet to respond to MLB’s offer that all incumbents of the package have until the end of this month to match DirecTV’s terms.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6426531

dad1153

03-21-07, 02:21 PM

kjpjr

03-21-07, 02:24 PM

In Demand Networks said Wednesday it will match DirecTV’s offer to carry Major League Baseball’s out-of-market package.

As a long time subscriber to MLB EI and one who cannot have a dish -- I am so happy I could ****! I hope this all falls together!

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:33 PM

MLB is now sitting pretty atop a pile of cash (for which they don't have to pay federal taxes! :mad: ) from both Direct TV and the cable ops... for a package that sold poorly the year before with very few buyers. The people running the NFL could learn a thing or two about business savvy from MLB's suits.

But far bigger than the money MLB gets is that it will get its baseball channel on at least 30 million homes at startup (and 45 million or so if Dish signs on).

That would probably make the value of the Baseball Network some $2 billion -- or more -- at startup, and add some $70 million or so to the net value of every MLB franchise. [B]THAT[/B[ was the grand slam MLB hit, if indeed the InDemand offer is accepted. And that doesn't count the $6 million annualy in operators fees (at the reported 30 cents per month) that each MLB would receive.

But before breaking out the champagne, we should remember that the InDemand president said just two weeks ago that the DirecTV deal was cleverly constructed to InDemand could not possibly match it.

So we'll have to await the MLB reaction to the InDemand offer.

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:36 PM

According to The Associated Press "...Bob DuPuy, baseball's chief operating officer, said he would have to find out details of iN Demand's offer before commenting...."

Does it seem odd to you that InDemand would announce it agreed to the deal before contacting MLB?

Why not, if it were really going to reach agreement, wait until the agreement was in place?

CPanther95

03-21-07, 02:54 PM

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:54 PM

TV Notebook
Fox Renews Prison Break for Third Season
By A.J. Frutkin MediaWeek March 21, 20-7

Fox has picked up Prison Break for a third season. The serialized action drama ranks number one in its Monday 8 p.m. time period among adults 18-34, and men 18-49.

Created by Paul T. Scheuring, the series stars Dominic Purcell and Wentworth Miller as brothers on the run from the law, the government, and a White House conspiracy.

In its first season, the show's action focused on the brothers' attempt to break out of an Illinois prison. Now in its second season, which ends April 2, escape plans have led them to Panama.

Although plans for the third season storyline are being kept quiet, conjectures have centered on the brothers, along with several fellow escapees, landing back behind bars.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003560761

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:56 PM

The key is "same number of subs" not same percentage of carriage. This was announced in advance to the public because they know it doesn't actually meet the terms of the deal - but they want their subs to think that it does, but MLB shot them down anyway.

Unfortunately, I think I agree. And it probably was done with an eye to next week's Senate Commerce Committee hearing.

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:58 PM

For PR purposes, were I Bob Dupuy, I would immediately answer that I would accept those terms -- even though the carriage of the Baseball Channel is far inferior to what DirecTV is offering -- IF Comcast added Phillies games to MLB-EI and Cox added Padres games (both including all HD presentations, of course.)

Then the ball is back in cable's court (and the RSN exclusivity issue is front and center, where both baseball and DirecTV want it).

steverobertson

03-21-07, 03:22 PM

Saw this on DBS Talk came from ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2806948

Latest news: Bob DuPuy says offer falls short.

IN Demand's pitch to keep "Extra Innings" on cable apparently was out of Major League Baseball's strike zone.

IN Demand said Wednesday it will offer to match the terms of DirecTV's $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball on behalf its owners, who are affiliates of the companies that own Time Warner, Comcast and Cox cable systems. As part of the offer, iN Demand also said it would carry The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel on DirecTV.

However, Bob DuPuy, baseball's chief operating officer, said in a statement Wednesday that iN Demand's offer wasn't adequate.

"The communication sent to our office today by iN Demand is not responsive to that offer," DuPuy said. "In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9."
__________________
Coming this fall: CNN-HD, TBS-HD, FX-HD, USA-HD, TWC-HD - Stay Tuned!

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:31 PM

Thanks, steve.

CPanther95

03-21-07, 03:32 PM

Well, that didn't take very long.

dad1153

03-21-07, 03:32 PM

Does InDemand (or lawmakers like Senator Kerry) have a leg to stand on if it were to sue MLB to stop its exclusivity deal with Direct TV? Does In Demand's counter-proposal consists of only a face-saving fake so they can tell their subscribers when MLB goes exclusive with Direct TV "we tried and they (MLB) shut us down"? Is there any legal avenues for J6P to sue and try to stop the deal? With how much money is at stake its amazing to see these media titans battle to the death for what amounts to loss leaders (like the rights to NFL games) just to make their overall industry (cable, satellite) look good on a TV spot or flyer. The only one that is guaranteed to come out of this a winner is MLB (with Direct TV a potential winner too if it passes Congress scrutiny).

steverobertson

03-21-07, 03:32 PM

Well, that didn't take very long.

You were right on congratulations

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:34 PM

TV Sports
In Demand’s Extra Innings Play Whiffs at MLB
MultiChannel News 3/21/2007

Major League Baseball Wednesday rejected In Demand’s offer to match the terms of DirecTV’s $700 million, seven-year deal with the league, including carriage of The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel via the direct-broadcast satellite service.

“Today Major League Baseball received communication from In Demand,” MLB president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy said in a prepared statement. “The offer to match the terms of the agreement reached by MLB and DirecTV remains open to In Demand and Dish until the deadline of March 31, 2007. The communication sent to our office today by In Demand is not responsive to that offer.”

He added, “In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9.”

In Demand president Rob Jacobson had said earlier Wednesday that the industry would match DirecTV’s price for the package -- reported to be $700 million -- as well as distribute the league’s upstart Baseball Channel to as many subscribers as DirecTV does when the network launches in 2009 through In Demand’s three owners: Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications.

DirecTV has said that it will distribute the network to at least 15 million subscribers as part of its basic programming tier.

Jacobson added that he believes the deal matches the terms and conditions that the league outlined for the industry to secure rights to the Extra Innings package.

“What MLB has said publicly is that they’re looking for similar carriage as DirecTV,” he said. “I think I did them even one better by offering them at least the same amount of carriage as DirecTV just from [In Demand’s owners]. Nothing in any way would prohibit them from calling up Cablevision [Systems], Charter [Communications], Mediacom [Communications], EchoStar [Communications], Verizon [Communications], AT&T and securing even better distribution for the channel."

He added, “With the In Demand partners and DirecTV, it would launch in at least 30 million homes, and if they can get the other [distributors], you’re talking a number that would be the most significant launch of a cable channel in history.”

The first pitch of the 2007 MLB season is scheduled for Sunday night, April 1, when the New York Mets take on the St. Louis Cardinals on ESPN.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6426516.html?display=Breaking+News

CPanther95

03-21-07, 03:36 PM

You were right on congratulations

It only took reading the release with a heavy dose of skeptcism to spot the catch in the fine print. We already had plenty of feedback from all involved that it would be virtually impossible for InDemand to meet the terms proposed - so something had to be hinkey.

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:40 PM

Weekly Cable Nielsen Notebook
USA Gives Other Nets 'Raw' Deal
By Anthony Crupi MediaWeek MARCH 21, 2007 -

USA Network laid claim to yet another prime-time victory last week, averaging 2.59 million viewers on the strength of its Monday night stalwart, WWE Raw.

The two-hour wrestling showcase averaged 5.77 million viewers between 9 p.m. and 11 p.m, and topped the adult 18-49 and 25-54 demos, while taking first and third among adults 18-34.

In addition to delivering the largest average total viewership, USA also swept the top demos, averaging 1.21 million adults 18-49, 1.19 million adults
25-54 and 545,000 adults 18-34.

For the week ended March 18, TNT took second among ad-supported cable nets, averaging 1.78 million viewers in prime, while chalking up its best demo numbers among A25-54, where it placed second with 870,000. The Turner net finished fourth in the A18-49 category, delivering 791,000.

Third place went to TBS, which averaged 1.57 million total viewers throughout the week. The network also fared well among the demos, taking second among both A18-49 (899,000) and A18-49 (870,000), while finishing third among the 18-34 set (479,000). MTV edged TBS out for the number two spot, with 489,000.

A&E grabbed fourth place with 1.46 million viewers, while Fox News Channel edged out News Corp. sibling FX by the merest dermal-dental layer, averaging 1.45 million viewers to FX’s 1.449 million.

FX enjoyed a particularly strong week, thanks to the premiere of its latest drama series, The Riches, which lured 3.84 million viewers Monday night in the 10 p.m. time slot. The Eddie Izzard vehicle also sewed up the week’s third-largest delivery of 18-49s (2.52 million) and 25-54s (2.17 million).

Another program of note was VH1’s penultimate episode of I Love New York, which on Monday night served up 3.7 million total viewers, as well as 2.17 million adults 18-49 and 1.48 million adults 18-34.

Non-ad-supported Disney Channel was a virtual second-place finisher in prime, averaging 2.39 million viewers while winning both the kids 6-11 demo (1.01 million) and ‘tweens 9-14 (860,000). It was Disney’s 102nd consecutive week victory in the former category, and its 98th straight win among the latter.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003560683

kjpjr

03-21-07, 03:43 PM

OK so it is satellite radio but it is a start! And it seems that my excitement aobut MLB EI was short lived!

From Detroit Free Press freep.com
Sirius proposes a la carte radio programming
March 21, 2007

By JEREMY HERRON

ASSOCIATED PRESS BUSINESS WRITER

NEW YORK — Satellite radio customers will get the option to pay a lower price for just the channels they want if the industry’s two big providers are allowed to merge, Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. said today in a securities filing of its bid to buy XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.

The statement comes as Sirius with XM seek to assuage regulatory concerns that their deal, to be paid for with stock valued at $4.7 billion when it was announced Feb. 19, will create a monopoly that would harm consumers.

The Sirius filing said the deal would generate cost savings from efficiencies that could allow the company to offer “a la carte” programming at a price below the current $12.95 per month subscription fee.

An a la carte option would allow customers to pay only for the channels they want to receive. Combined, Sirius and XM currently offer more than 300 channels of programming. But some of those stations are identical and many more feature similar formats and genres.

“Customers may elect to receive fewer channels at a monthly price lower than $12.95; substantially similar programming at the existing $12.95 price; or more channels, including some of the ’best of both’ networks, at a modest premium to the cost of one service,” Sirius said in the Securities and Exchange Commission document.

Sirius also said the combination would increase the diversity of programming by eliminating redundancy that would free space for additional channels.
The filing comes a day after Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin appeared at a Senate subcommittee hearing to face questions about the proposed deal’s effect on the competitive landscape.

During the hearing, Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., questioned Karmazin’s stance that the combined company would face competition from terrestrial radio, MP3 players and Internet radio.

“Satellite radio is a small part of a highly competitive and ever-expanding market for audio entertainment,” Sirius said today.

Kohl also voiced concern that the combined company would raise prices in the future, particularly if it signed exclusive contracts with sports leagues or popular entertainment providers. Karmazin said he was open to regulatory oversight of price increases as a condition of the merger.

Karmazin also told the panel that subscribers would be able to block programming they find offensive if the government approves the deal.

.

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:57 PM

It should be noted that Dupuy specifically said the iN Demand offer fell short in "...nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9.”

So it, at least according to MLB, isn't just the carriage agreement. It also is the money, and who knows what else. But I would assume that if, in the end cable actually matches the carriage agreement and the financial terms, it will get the package.

If Dupuy is to be believed, this was just a grand-standing measure by Jacobson. I would assume it was to take some heat off in Demand before next week's Senate Committee hearings. But now, who knows what it will do. Ut seems to me it adds more heat from disgruntled cable subs who see the sticking points as pretty minor problems.

As I've asked from the beginning of this fiasco, what is the problem with offering to carry a channel two years from now?

There isn't some one of 100+ channels which could be bumped in the next 24 months?

I still believe this is about cable taking a hard line against the NFL Network. Just imagine the uproar this fall if cable agreed to the MLB deal and still refused to carry the NFL Network.

But clearly someone isn't telling the truth. Either in Demand did agree to match the DirecTV deal, or it didn't. Jacobson says it did. DuPuy says it didn't.

I guess we will find out at the Senate hearings who is the liar.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:03 PM

TV Notebook
ABC Announces 11 More Early Pickups for 2007-2008
(ABC News Release) March 21, 2007

ABC Television Network today announced fourteen early pick-ups for the 2007-08 season for new breakout series “Brothers & Sisters,” “Ugly Betty” and “MEN IN TREES,” as well as returning hits “The Bachelor,” “Boston Legal,” “Dancing with the Stars,” “Desperate Housewives,” “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Jimmy Kimmel Live” and “Lost.” The announcement was made by ABC Entertainment President Stephen McPherson at the March Development Meeting in Los Angeles. These series join previously announced “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” “Supernanny” and “Wife Swap,” which have also been renewed for the 2007-08 season.

“We have had a strong year, with two of the season’s breakout hits, ‘Ugly Betty’ and ‘Brothers & Sisters,’ and the solid performance of ‘MEN IN TREES,’” said McPherson. “We are pleased that viewers have invested in these new favorites along with our other returning series. These shows provide us with a substantial foundation to make 07-08 our best schedule yet.”

“Brothers & Sisters”

In this compelling drama about the Walker family, we meet a collection of intertwined and somewhat damaged adult siblings who embrace one another unconditionally while striving to reflect the perceived perfection of their role model parents. In the days ahead, they will navigate waves of temptation, deception and grief.

“Brothers & Sisters” leads its CBS drama competition (“Without a Trace”/”Cold Case”) in Sunday’s
10 o’clock hour this season among adults (18-34/18-49), and dominates its time period with each of the key women demos. The freshman drama stands as the No. 2 new series on any network in its hour this season with Adults 18-49, behind only ABC’s high-rated debut of “October Road” (3/15/07).

“Brothers & Sisters” stars Calista Flockhart as Kitty, Rachel Griffiths as Sarah, Sally Field as Nora Holden, Ron Rifkin as Saul Holden, Patricia Wettig as Holly, Balthazar Getty as Thomas, Dave Annable as Justin, Matthew Rhys as Kevin, John Pyper-Ferguson as Joe, Sarah Jane Morris as Julia, Emily VanCamp as Rebecca Harper and Kerris Lilla Dorsey as Paige.

Ken Olin, Jon Robin Baitz and Greg Berlanti are executive producers. The series is produced by ABC Television Studio.

“Ugly Betty”

The award winning drama from ABC Television Studio, based on the Columbian telenovela “Yo Soy Betty La Fea,” has become an international phenomenon. If you took a moment to get to know Betty Suarez, you’d see how sweet, intelligent and hard-working she is. But few people do, because in the world of high fashion, Betty is the oversized peg in the petite round hole.

The freshman “Ugly Betty” has established itself a competitive second to CBS’ time period veteran, “Survivor,” in Total Viewers, while ranking No. 1 with its core audience of Women 18-34. It has substantially improved the time period, representing ABC's top scripted series in the hour in 12 years.

The series stars America Ferrera as Betty Suarez, Eric Mabius as Daniel Meade, Alan Dale as Bradford Meade, Tony Plana as Ignacio, Ana Ortiz as Hilda, Ashley Jensen as Christina, Becki Newton as Amanda, Mark Indelicato as Justin, Michael Urie as Marc, Kevin Sussman as Walter, Rebecca Romijn as Alexis Meade and Vanessa Williams as Wilhelmina Slater.

Academy Award nominee and Emmy Award winner Salma Hayek is executive producer, along with Silvio Horta, Ben Silverman, Jose Tamez, James Hayman and Marco Pennette.

“MEN IN TREES”

“MEN IN TREES” looks at the relationships between men and women through the eyes of relationship coach Marin Frist, who questions her own advice and resolves to temporarily stay in Elmo, Alaska -- where the ratio of men to women is ten to one -- to get started on her new book… about men.

In its Thursday 10 o’clock time period, "MEN IN TREES" ranks second to NBC’s time period veteran, “ER,” beating CBS’ freshman “Shark” among Adults 18-34. On its most recent original airing (2/15/07), “MEN IN TREES” achieved series-high ratings among Adults 18-49 and with key women.

The series stars Anne Heche as Marin Frist, Abraham Benrubi as Ben Thomasson, Emily Bergl as Annie O’Donnell, Seana Kofoed as Jane, Suleka Mathew as Sara, Derek Richardson as Patrick Bachelor, Cynthia Stevenson as Celia Bachelor, Sarah Strange as Theresa, Lauren Tom as Mai Washington, James Tupper as Jack Slattery and John Amos as Buzz Washington.

Created by Jenny Bicks, Bicks, James Mangold and Cathy Konrad are executive producers of the series, which is filmed in Vancouver, Canada, and is from Tree Line Films, Perkins Street Productions and NS Pictures, Inc. in association with Warner Bros. Television.

“The Bachelor”

“The Bachelor” is the original primetime reality romance series that offers one lucky man and 25 lucky women the unique opportunity to find true love.

“The Bachelor: Rome” was a strong draw with younger viewers, ranking second to NBC’s “Heroes” in Adults 18-34, Women 18-34 and Teens 12-17. The franchise consistently delivers among its core audience of young women, one of the top TV series this season (No. 3).

“The Bachelor” is hosted by Chris Harrison and produced by Next Entertainment in Association with Warner Horizon Television. Mike Fleiss and Lisa Levenson are executive producers. David Bohnert is co-executive producer.

“Boston Legal”

Back-to-back Emmy Award winners James Spader and William Shatner play Alan Shore and Denny Crane, unlikely kindred spirits among the litigators at Crane Poole & Schmidt. Shirley Schmidt (five-time Emmy winner Candice Bergen), a founding partner of the firm, has been coaxed back to bring order to the office. She keeps an eye on all, particularly Denny – with whom she shares a checkered past.

“Boston Legal,” a consistent performer for ABC, generates an extremely upscale audience. The drama stands as the No. 1 TV show this season, based on the concentration of high income viewers in its young adult audience (Adult 18-49 index w/$100K+ annual income).

It stars James Spader as Alan Shore, Julie Bowen as Denise Bauer, Mark Valley as Brad Chase, Rene Auberjonois as Paul Lewiston, Constance Zimmer as Claire Simms, Gary Anthony Williams as Clarence/Clarice Bell, with Candice Bergen as Shirley Schmidt and William Shatner as Denny Crane.

Created by David E. Kelley, Kelley, Bill D’Elia and Janet Leahy are executive producers of the series, which is produced by David E. Kelley Productions in association with Twentieth Century Fox Television, and premiered October 3, 2004.

ja2bk

03-21-07, 04:11 PM

As I've asked from the beginning of this fiasco, what is the problem with offering to carry a channel two years from now?

There isn't some one of 100+ channels which could be bumped in the next 24 months?

I still believe this is about cable taking a hard line against the NFL Network. Just imagine the uproar this fall if cable agreed to the MLB deal and still refused to carry the NFL Network.

I can answer that one. Nothing is wrong if they wanted that one network to be on the digital tier. But, when you are a company trying to transition to digital and someone keeps demanding to be analog (especially a sports network), then it doesn't make sense to agree to it. Cable is trying to save bandwith so they can offer things like more HD channels and other services. Here comes a new network who is demanding to be carried analog which doesn't benefit cable in any way at all. NBA TV is carried on digital tiers. So, as long as you have a league that is okay with it, why can't the others be as well?

Negotiations are about BOTH sides getting something. So far there is NO benefit to cable in that deal.

When you go to McDonalds, they don't tell you that you can't buy pancakes without eggs. Remember who is the buyer in this.

CPanther95

03-21-07, 04:14 PM

When you go to McDonalds, they don't tell you that you can't buy pancakes without eggs. Remember who is the buyer in this.

Try to order your cable channels that way and see how they respond.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:18 PM

I can answer that one. Nothing is wrong if they wanted that one network to be on the digital tier. But, when you are a company trying to transition to digital and someone keeps demanding to be analog (especially a sports network), then it doesn't make sense to agree to it. Cable is trying to save bandwith so they can offer things like more HD channels and other services. Here comes a new network who is demanding to be carried analog which doesn't benefit cable in any way at all. NBA TV is carried on digital tiers. So, as long as you have a league that is okay with it, why can't the others be as well?

Negotiations are about BOTH sides getting something. So far there is NO benefit to cable in that deal.

When you go to McDonalds, they don't tell you that you can't buy pancakes without eggs. Remember who is the buyer in this.

But when you buy a Value Meal you actually save a little.

Oh, and you are not forced to pay extra for chicken nuggets, a shake, apple pie, a salad, a McBurrito and the cookies when all you wanted was a Big Mac, fries and a Coke.

McDonalds certainly does remember who the buyer is. Cable clearly doesn't.

(And I don't think you have answered it: of the 100+ basic channels, there is not a single one in the next 24 months which could be moved to digital if cable really wanted to make this deal?

Do you supose that if Comcast, Time-Warner or Cox come up with a new channel they will be able to find space for it on basic?)

ja2bk

03-21-07, 04:18 PM

Try to order your cable channels that way and see how they respond.

Different argument from this one. When you first ordered cable service, that structure of the entire package was already in place. So, by ordering, you accepted those terms.

In this case, you are trying to re-negotiate something you had previously and the terms are changing. You originally got only pancakes. But, now they tell you that you can't get pancakes anymore unless you agree to buy some eggs (and they don't care if you are full.)

CPanther95

03-21-07, 04:23 PM

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:28 PM

Sure, ja2bk, but when I first got cable I had The Nashville Network and America's Talking and a host of other channels which have changed formats and even their names -- without any agreement from me. And others which have been added, at additional cost to me, which I have had no say over. It has been take it or leave it from American cable companies. (Canadian DBS seems to do quite well with a vastly streamlined tier which offers far more choice and far more savings.)

Cable has not renogitated -- it hasn't had to. Until DBS it has a total monopoly. Now, with a strong DBS sector and telcos rapidly joining the fray, the monopoly is going away, and quickly.

So what is the harm is simply passing legislation forbidding cable carriage demands (inccluding MLB's) to be part of any agreement between networks and providers?

That would allow a la carte, which simply by the behind-doors, closed-to-the-public negoitations between cable/satellite/and telco with their networks they cannot allow now.

If a la carte were allowed, and it is such a disaster. surely Colmcast and friends would be able to convince subscribers of that. If not, I am sure someone, whether it be Charlie Ergen, John Malone, or someone else, would offer a pure a la carte play at substantial savings to the average home which watches some 15 channels a month.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:31 PM

And for students of cable/DBS history, as has been mentioned before:

When Dish and DirecTV tried to get carriage of InHD (also owned by TWC, Comcast and Cox) it was told it had to do so on the same terms as the cable companies: that is, pay a set fee for each digital dubscriber.

At the time cable had about a 10% digital pentration while the DBS companies, of course, were 100% digital.

Funny how when the same deal, in effect, is offered back to those very same companies they scream so loudly.

Karma. It is simply karma.

CPanther95

03-21-07, 04:36 PM

It isn't even as bad as the INHD deal, because in this case, D* is actually offering the channel to 100% of subs and cable is forced to match that. They aren't required to do any more.

If D* wanted to really be pr*cks, they'd draft the deal so that it guaranteed 90% carriage and analog delivery costs 3 times as much as digital delivery.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:40 PM

TV Notebook
ABC Renews “Ugly Betty”, “Grey's Anatomy”, and “Lost” for '07-'08
Marc Berman Media Week March 21, 2007

ABC has announced that 10 more early series pick-ups for the 2007-08 season will join the previously announced America’s Funniest Home Videos, Supernanny and Wife Swap. In addition to renewals for freshman entries Ugly Betty, Brothers & Sisters and Men In Trees are The Bachelor, Boston Legal, Dancing With the Stars, Desperate Housewives, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, Grey’s Anatomy and Lost.

The network has also confirmed that late night Jimmy Kimmel Live will be back. Notably missing are any half-hour scripted comedies.

“We have had a strong year, with two of the season’s breakout hits, Ugly Betty and Brothers & Sisters and the solid performance of Men In Trees,” said ABC Entertainment President Stephen McPherson. “We are pleased that viewers have invested in these new favorites along with our other returning series. These shows provide us with a substantial foundation to make 2007-08 our best schedule yet.”

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003561155

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:41 PM

James Hibberd of Television Week notes in his story on the ABC pickups "....Absent from the list was Monday night underperformer "What About Brian," which is in its second season. "Brian" has averaged a 2.6 rating among adults 18 to 49 this season. Also absent were freshman midseason comedies "In Case of Emergency" and "Knights of Prosperity," though an ABC rep cautioned against reading too much into absences from the list...."

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11750

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:47 PM

A reminder -- after today's “Prison Break” and ABC renewal announcements: you can always find an updated, current list of all renewed (and cancelled) prime-time shows in the third post of the thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=4267598&&#post4267598

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:17 PM

TV Sports
More MLB-EI Details
By Eric Fisher and John Ourand in Sports Business Daily’s “Closing Bell”

“…The dispute centers on two areas. DirecTV has agreed to place MLB’s new channel in 80% of its homes, according to a letter MLB President & COO Bob DuPuy sent to the FCC on Wednesday.

For a deal to happen, MLB is demanding that InDemand commit to make the channel available in 80% of cable's digital basic homes, which is about 40% of the overall subscriber base. Additionally, MLB is balking at InDemand's offer to pay for Extra Innings on an actual sub basis, rather than an upfront guarantee.

‘[They] will need to commit to a fair allocation of the total rights fees for Extra Innings, ... based on the number of digital households that they and DirecTV serve,’ MLB said in its FCC filing.

InDemand countered that it was willing to guarantee a license fee structure based on the aggregate number of Extra Innings subscribers it has. "This is not the proposal of a company that has sour grapes," said InDemand's Rob Jacobson. ‘This is the proposal of a company that wants to be a partner.’…”

ja2bk

03-21-07, 05:18 PM

Networks demanding carriage on a basic tier is not a different argument, and is nothing new. The fact that MLBTV is not popular enough to get the cablecos to agree to it is the only difference.

The analog/digital point you bring up doesn't apply here. MLB is only concerned about the percentage of subs who have access. If a cableco wants to completely transition to digital, they can do so - they just need to put MLB in the basic package.

Just so you all know, I'm not on one side or the other in this, but I am taking an outside view.

I think you forget that the basic package is analog. Until everyone has a tv with a digital tuner in it, any basic package by default is analog. This means the cable co would have to eat up a lot of bandwith that could be used for other nets (HD ones even.)

I understand that MLB wants the widest audience possible. That is the name of the game of any network of course.

But, the flip side is "what makes this deal appealing to the other side?" This is the basic question in any deal. The other side at least has to get the impression they are getting something out of it. My analogy probably wasn't the best with McDs. But, tell me where this deal benefits the cable company?

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:24 PM

Anyhow, according to the "Sports Business Daily" article I just excerpted, the issue is not analog basic subs at all -- it is digital basic subs. And that makes cable's position even less understandable to me.

(And for the record, SBJ has been out in front on this story from day one -- they broke it back in January.)

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:32 PM

Just so you all know, I'm not on one side or the other in this, but I am taking an outside view....But, the flip side is "what makes this deal appealing to the other side?" This is the basic question in any deal. The other side at least has to get the impression they are getting something out of it. My analogy probably wasn't the best with McDs. But, tell me where this deal benefits the cable company?

I appreciate your views. You spell them out clearly and concisely and without rancor.
We all appreciate that kind of honest and hard-fought discussion here.

What is in it for cable is to not lose another foothold to DirecTV, which is clearly positioning itself to be THE place to go for sports fans. They tend to spend lots more than an average home and will pay almost any price for their games.

Chase Carey (and incoming DirecTV owner John Malone) has stated in no uncertain terms that DirecTV intends to do everything it can to corner the sports market.

There were only 230,000 cable MLB-EI subs last year. But if even 20% of them were persuaded to switch to DirecTV this year thsat would be a fairly major hit.

And next year, when DirecTV says it will provide nearly all MLB-EI games in HD, and when there will be 15 million or so more HD households available, the problem will escalate.

So,to sum up, what is in it for cable is to not be shut out of the out-of-market MLB game for the next seven years.

And all it has to do is match the financial and carriage agreement DirecTV has. Not beat it. Match it.

A kicker in all of this is the $$$ figure.

Both MLB and DirecTV have said that if cable gets a share of the package, then the DirecTV payment will fall by a sizable amount. What isn't clear is if DirecTV is paying a sumn based on all subs, or just a set sum. And if that sum would be, say $500 million (for seven years) is that based on its 16 million subs? So would cable have to come up with $1.5 Billion to cover its close to 50 million subs? Or would in Demand's partners just need to match the $500,000?

ja2bk

03-21-07, 05:38 PM

I appreciate your views. You spell them out clearly and concisely and without rancor.
We all appreciate that kind of honest and hard-fought discussion here.

What is in it for cable is to not lose another foothold to DirecTV, which is clearly positioning itself to be THE place to go for sports fans. They tend to spend lots more than an average home and will pay almost any price for their games.

Chase Carey (and incoming DirecTV owner John Malone) has stated in no uncertain terms that DirecTV intends to do everything it can to corner the sports market.

There were only 230,000 cable MLB-EI subs last year. But if even 20% of them were persuaded to switch to DirecTV this year thsat would be a fairly major hit.

And next year, when DirecTV says it will provide nearly all MLB-EI games in HD, and when there will be 15 million or so more HD households available, the problem will escalate.

So,to sum up, what is in it for cable is to not be shut out of the out-of-market MLB game for the next seven years.

And all it has to do is match the financial and carriage agreement DirecTV has. Not beat it. Match it.

A kicker in all of this is the $$$ figure.

Both MLB and DirecTV have said that if cable gets a share of the package, then the DirecTV payment will fall by a sizable amount. What isn't clear is if DirecTV is paying a sumn based on all subs, or just a set sum. And if that sum would be, say $500 million (for seven years) is that based on its 16 million subs? So would cable have to come up with $1.5 Billion to cover its close to 50 million subs? Or would in Demand's partners just need to match the $500,000?

I thank you for the response. I guess the thing I look back to is the fact NBA TV is on digital and didn't seem interested in being carried on the analog tier (or if they did, they didn't fight too hard for it.)

I think the next question to add to your point is what will they expect to paid per sub for the Baseball Channel (not liking that name.)

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:49 PM

Apparently it is about 30 cents per sub. At least that is what has been reported.

One problem we are all having is that we are discussing a topic with some passion but without knowing the details.

(The 80% of digital subs, reported by Sports Business Daily, for example, is a far cry from all basic cable subs.)

By the way, at a major sports business conference today, the NBA had some comments on its digital tier deal. I'll try to dig those comments up.

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:55 PM

fredfa

03-21-07, 06:00 PM

Sorry I missed it, but yesterday marked 700 days until the digital conversion date of February 18, 2009

fredfa

03-21-07, 06:38 PM

TV Sports
MLB: iN Demand's proposal falls short
(MLB.com)

Major League Baseball on Wednesday declined an overture by iN Demand to carry the MLB Extra Innings out-of-market television package, saying that it did not match the conditions of a deal signed earlier this month with DirecTV.

"Today Major League Baseball received communication from iN Demand," MLB president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy said in a statement. "The offer to match the terms of the agreement reached by MLB and DirecTV remains open to iN Demand and DISH until the deadline of March 31, 2007. The communication sent to our office today by In Demand is not responsive to that offer."

iN Demand, a provider of pay-per-view and subscription services jointly owned by cable outlets Time Warner, Comcast and Cox Communications, said Wednesday it would match the terms of DirecTV's reported seven-year, $700 million deal. As part of the offer, iN Demand also said it would carry The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel on DirecTV.

"In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9," DuPuy said.

The DirecTV agreement gives the satellite-television provider exclusive television rights to the Extra Innings package unless another entity matches all of the conditions of the agreement by month's end. The deal calls for the Baseball Channel to be made available to all of its customers; iN Demand's offer, however, limited that number to match only that of DirecTV's customers.

"As the current home for Extra Innings for more than 200,000 cable subscribers, we have extended ourselves to do our best to be able to continue to provide this package to baseball fans and our customers," iN Demand president Robert Jacobson said earlier in a report by The Associated Press.

(This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.)

http://mlb.mlb.com/content/printer_friendly/mlb/y2007/m03/d21/c1853091.jsp

fredfa

03-21-07, 06:42 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Good to go:
“Prison Break” gets a third season
By Ed Bark former Dallas Morning News TV critic at his website unclebarky.com

Fox's Prison Break will be back for a third season, the network announced Wednesday.

It's becoming clearer that the series also will be back in North Texas for most of the filming.

Executive producer Paul T. Scheuring tells tvguide.com, "We'll still be based out of Dallas, with the occasional satellite crew in Florida and Louisiana."

Prison Break publicist Chris Alexander later said in an email, "The production will continue to call Dallas its home. However, we will be doing some shooting over the season in Florida and Louisiana."

In January on the TV Critics Association's midseason "press tour," Fox entertainment president Peter Liguori told unclebarky.com that a third season of PB is "very unlikely to be in Dallas, but we might shoot some stuff in Dallas."

Fox later clarified Liguori's statement, with Dallas-based producer Garry Brown saying, "We don't have any immediate plans to go to a different area for most of Season 3."

The escapist drama, starring Wentworth Miller and Dominic Purcell, has performed well in the national Nielsen ratings, but relatively poorly with D-FW viewers despite originating entirely from North Texas in its second season.

Monday's episode had a 1.9 Nielsen rating with advertiser-craved 18-to-49-year-olds, finishing fourth from 7 to 8 p.m. in D-FW. Nationally, PB had a 3.4 rating in that audience demo, placing third.

PB's second season finale is on Monday, April 2.

http://www.unclebarky.com/abovethefold.html

kizzo

03-21-07, 07:03 PM

VisionOn

03-21-07, 07:03 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Good to go:
“Prison Break” gets a third season
By Ed Bark former Dallas Morning News TV critic at his website unclebarky.com

Fox's Prison Break will be back for a third season, the network announced Wednesday.

I really liked the first season and think the second is okay, but I'm not ready for this to be dragged out for another season. I just want them to end it now. They've already dragged the plotlines wafer thin, the conspiracy evidence has unravelled to the point were there's nothing left and at the rate they've killed off characters they don't have many places to go that we haven't already seen.

How long can you watch someone just run from one place to the next, get almost captured, then run away again? It's not as if they are playing The Fugitive angle and making each week self contained.

fredfa

03-21-07, 07:16 PM

I'm hopefully moving to the North Dallas area soon(I have to fly out for an interview in Dallas next week) so hopefully if I get the job I will see some of the "stars" in the area...

good luck, kizzo -- let us know how it all works out. :)

fredfa

03-21-07, 07:39 PM

TV Sports
iN Demand and MLB Continue Public Battle
By Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable 3/21/2007

Major League Baseball and iN Demand Networks traded public shots Wednesday after MLB on Wednesday said iN Demand’s offer for the out-of-market baseball package was insufficient.

In Demand president & CEO Robert Jacobson fired the latest salvo after MLB let In Demand’s latest offer sail by.

“By rejecting this matching offer, MLB has proven it never intended for iN DEMAND to have a fair and equal opportunity to bid for Extra Innings. We, like many, many others, question MLB’s commitment to its fans by limiting distribution of both Extra Innings and The Baseball Channel. We have offered to carry The Baseball Channel to the same number of subscribers as DirecTV and have offered the same compensation to MLB as DirectTV. Our offer was fully responsive to MLB's requirements and public statements.”

Earlier in the day, MLB chief operating officer Bob DuPuy had issued a statement turning down the In Demand offer.

"Today Major League Baseball received communication from iN Demand. The offer to match the terms of the agreement reached by MLB and DIRECTV remains open to iN Demand and Dish until the deadline of March 31, 2007. The communication sent to our office today by iN Demand is not responsive to that offer. In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9."

The day began with iN Demand Networks saying it will match DirecTV’s offer to carry Major League Baseball’s out-of-market package and yet-to-be launched Baseball Channel on "the same terms contained in the MLB and DirecTV agreement announced recently."

The provider of programming via cable outlets said it will match DirecTV’s seven-year commitment - said to be worth $700 million - and will carry the new channel "with distribution to at least the number of subscribers to which DirecTV launches the channel."

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week," Jacobson said originally.

DISH Network has ’yet to respond to MLBs offer

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6426590

fredfa

03-21-07, 07:46 PM

Assuming this report is correct it becomes very clear that today's events were just a PR stunt by iN Demand.

DirecTV has 16 millions subscribers. The iN Demand tri of TWC, Comcast and Cox have close to 50 million subs.

Therefore, for iNDemand to say it would offer to carry the Basebal Channel to as many subscrivers as Directv, means it would only provbide one third as many of its base subs as DirecTV.

And if it would matched "the same the financial terms" as DirecTV means it would pay about one-third as much per subscriber.

That, of course, is if you can believe anything anyone says about this. Earlier in the day Robert Jacobson said: "This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week."

Apparently that wasn't true. Or else MLB is lying. As I have said before, obviously someone is.

But next week, before the Senate Commerce Committee, Dupuy and Jacobson and others will be under oath. That should be fun.

haubrija

03-21-07, 07:57 PM

Hi fellas... Big fan of this thread... Been looking for this news all day so I thought I'd post it.

Sci Fi Extends 'Battlestar'
By James Hibberd
Sci Fi Channel has increased its fourth season order of "Battlestar Galactica" to 22 episodes.

The order will include a special two-hour "Battlestar" event to air during the fourth quarter of 2007 on Sci Fi, and will also be released on DVD.

Previously, the network announced a reduced "Battlestar" season order of 13 episodes rather than 22. Combined with a slight ratings erosion during the show's current third season, fans worried Sci Fi might cancel the Peabody Award-winning show.

The fourth season will premiere in early 2008. "Battlestar" is executive produced by Ronald D. Moore and David Eick.

Source: http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11755

FYI Previous reports were that if the order was increased to 22, this would be its final season.

fredfa

03-21-07, 08:14 PM

Thanks, haubrija, and welcome to the thread -- feel free to post often.

By the way, have you been switched from Comcast to TWC...and if so, how has it gone?

CPanther95

03-21-07, 08:21 PM

But, the flip side is "what makes this deal appealing to the other side?" This is the basic question in any deal. The other side at least has to get the impression they are getting something out of it. My analogy probably wasn't the best with McDs. But, tell me where this deal benefits the cable company?

Personally, I think the price far outweighs the value. I also think D* is overpaying, but has a "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" approach to exclusive sports programming.

But it's important to remember that MLB isn't really approaching the cablecos with the intent of offering a win-win deal that makes both sides happy. They've made their deal with D* and the rest is just posturing.

ja2bk

03-21-07, 08:25 PM

ja2bk:

(from Sports Business Daily)

Adam Silver, deputy commissioner and COO, NBA, speaking today about NBA TV on a sports tier, said, “We embraced the sports tier, but we subsequently became disappointed with the amount of support cable operators have given to the sports tiers.

But eventually [the issue] will become irrelevant, and it will come down to what they pay us.”

Sir,

I thank you for the level-headed responses. I think they didn't realize they set the tone for future sports league networks and cable carriage. At the time, I think they saw anything as an improvement on being an online only network. Well we will all have to sit back and see how this plays out.

ja2bk

03-21-07, 08:30 PM

Personally, I think the price far outweighs the value. I also think D* is overpaying, but has a "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" approach to exclusive sports programming.

But it's important to remember that MLB isn't really approaching the cablecos with the intent of offering a win-win deal that makes both sides happy. They've made their deal with D* and the rest is just posturing.

That is kind of my point. Who would agree to a deal that gives them the short end of the stick? Of course it happens, but they don't know they got that end until the deal is done. :)

DevOne

03-21-07, 08:32 PM

Letterman Regular 'Bud' Melman Dies

Mar 21, 8:03 PM (ET)

By LARRY McSHANE

NEW YORK (AP) - Calvert DeForest, the white-haired, bespectacled nebbish who gained cult status as the oddball Larry "Bud" Melman on David Letterman's late night television shows, has died after a long illness. The Brooklyn-born DeForest, who was 85, died Monday at a hospital on Long Island, Letterman's "Late Show" announced Wednesday.

He made dozens of appearances on Letterman's shows from 1982 through 2002, handling a variety of twisted duties: dueting with Sonny Bono on "I Got You, Babe," doing a Mary Tyler Moore impression during a visit to Minneapolis, handing out hot towels to arrivals at the Port Authority Bus Terminal.

"Everyone always wondered if Calvert was an actor playing a character, but in reality he was just himself - a genuine, modest and nice man," Letterman said in a statement. "To our staff and to our viewers, he was a beloved and valued part of our show, and we will miss him."

The gnomish DeForest was working as a file clerk at a drug rehabilitation center when show producers, who had seen him in a New York University student's film, came calling.

He was the first face to greet viewers when Letterman's NBC show debuted on Feb. 1, 1982, offering a parody of the prologue to the Boris Karloff film "Frankenstein."

"It was the greatest thing that had happened in my life," he once said of his first Letterman appearance.

DeForest, given the nom de tube of Melman, became a program regular. The collaboration continued when the talk show host launched "Late Show with David Letterman" on CBS in 1993, though DeForest had to use his real name because of a dispute with NBC over "intellectual property."

Cue cards were often DeForest's television kryptonite, and his character inevitably appeared in an ill-fitting black suit behind thick black-rimmed glasses.

DeForest often drew laughs by his bizarre juxtaposition as a "Late Show" correspondent at events such as the 1994 Winter Olympics in Norway or the anniversary Woodstock concert that year.

His last appearance on "Late Show," celebrating his 81st birthday, came in 2002.

DeForest also appeared in an assortment of other television shows and films, including "Nothing Lasts Forever" with Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd.

At his request, there will be no funeral service for DeForest, who left no survivors.

DevOne

03-21-07, 08:41 PM

No word if a seance with 1-800-Collect, will save you up to 44%...

dad1153

03-21-07, 09:49 PM

But next week, before the Senate Commerce Committee, Dupuy and Jacobson and others will be under oath. That should be fun.

C-Span or ESPN? :D

rebkell

03-21-07, 09:53 PM

Hi fellas... Big fan of this thread... Been looking for this news all day so I thought I'd post it.

Sci Fi Extends 'Battlestar'
By James Hibberd
Sci Fi Channel has increased its fourth season order of "Battlestar Galactica" to 22 episodes.

The fourth season will premiere in early 2008. "Battlestar" is executive produced by Ronald D. Moore and David Eick.

Source: http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11755

FYI Previous reports were that if the order was increased to 22, this would be its final season.

I'm glad to see we're going to get another full season, also good to see Men In Trees getting renewed, all in all a pretty good day for my TV viewing future.

fredfa

03-21-07, 10:19 PM

C-Span or ESPN? :D

Maybe both!

fredfa

03-21-07, 11:47 PM

TV Notebook
NBC on more solid ground
Reilly readies for the nation's top media buyers
By Michael Schneider Variety

As he meets with the nation's top media buyers this (Thursday) morning, NBC Entertainment prexy Kevin Reilly is in for a different reception than the one he got a year ago.

The buyers -- in town this week for the annual flurry of network development presentations -- were still questioning the possibility of an NBC ratings recovery last year, when Reilly gave them the first glimpse at shows such as "Heroes" and "Friday Night Lights."

"The advertisers last year looked at us as really sucking wind," Reilly said. "I think they went in with not much evidence that we knew what we were doing."

But Reilly said the network was starting to feel a bit of "a perceptual turnaround."

"I came out of the meeting with the first indication that they gave us credit for showing some life, that NBC was back in the game," he said.

Jump ahead a year: "Heroes" turned into the year's top-rated frosh scripted series, while "Friday Night Lights" and "30 Rock" earned some of the year's highest critical praise. More recently, Reilly renewed his contract at the net, providing some stability in the top programming chair.

Add that to the premiere of "Sunday Night Football" and the strength of returnees such as "Deal or No Deal" and "The Office," and Reilly will have a few more things to brag about as media buyers snack on muffins on the "Deal or No Deal" set in Culver City.

"NBC had a bit of a breakout year," said PHD U.S. managing director John Swift. "The key thing we're looking for them in year two of the rebuilding process is that they're continuing to take chances. NBC last year put a lot of thought into their development and a lot of strategy and they brought a lot of pieces that could be built into their slate."

The Peacock still has a long way to go -- the network is still in fourth place, after all -- and Reilly said he's realistic about NBC's slow rebuild.

"In the fall we were strong, but it's been a tougher second half, in part because of events like the Oscars, the Super Bowl and 'American Idol,'" he said. "We're going to need more pieces to sustain it through the whole season. It feels like we're a cycle away from those pieces."

Reilly now needs to show media buyers that this season's successes weren't flukes -- and that NBC will begin to see better ratings points to match its critical notices.

"Going into last year, it felt like a blank canvas," Reilly said. "So much so that we had to reset the entire schedule. It was really an unknown what our Thursday night would be comprised of. We really had very few tentpoles to hold on to."

This year, Reilly knew to develop shows that might be compatible with fare like "Heroes" or its growing stable of single-camera comedies. The net also knows it has a Sunday platform to promote a certain audience out of. The Peacock has also made clear that it has a mandate to air low-cost, mostly unscripted fare in the 8 p.m. hour.

"We're starting to get some pockets here where we can work a little bit around," he said.

With much left to be filmed, projects already getting early buzz include the femme drama "Lipstick Jungle," based on the Candace Bushnell novel, and the new take on "The Bionic Woman," while early talk on the comedy side includes the quirky alien-themed "Area 57."

Several projects boast female leads, which Reilly said was intentional.

"We tried to broaden out in female appeal this year," he said. "Women do control the dial and have been at the core of ABC's success."

On the comedy side, whether intentionally or not, most of the projects revolve around work or an office setting (a la "The Office"), such as "Area 57," "Business Class," "The IT Crowd" and "Wildlife."

Given its 8 p.m. mandate, Peacock is also aggressively pursuing additional nonscripted fare -- "We're going to up our reality commitment," Reilly said.

Thursday's presentation to media buyers will also include an update on the network's new-media initiatives.

As for the net's overall performance, Reilly continues to make use of Grant Tinker's famous quote, "First be best, then be first."

"The advertisers have acknowledged that they like what we're up to, but that we've got a long way to go," he said. "But no one's saying, 'We don't know what you're doing,' or 'We don't believe in what you're doing.' There's more receptivity there. I feel like I'm no longer on the hot seat, that we got through the first round of auditions."

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117961597&categoryid=14

fredfa

03-21-07, 11:51 PM

TV Sports
iN Demand Swings at MLB-EI Pitch
Baseball: “Strike Two!”
By Paul J. Gough The Hollywood Reporter March 22, 2007

NEW YORK -- Major League Baseball has called the cable industry out on strikes, saying an offer Wednesday to carry the Extra Innings premium package of out-of-market games falls short of terms MLB set two weeks ago.

MLB and DirecTV announced a multiyear agreement March 8 for the Extra Innings subscription package that also guarantees basic-tier carriage of the Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009. EchoStar and In Demand were told they had until March 31 to decide whether they wanted to match that deal to be allowed to continue to offer the games to their subscribers.

On Wednesday, In Demand -- the VOD proxy for cable companies Comcast Corp., Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications -- said it would accept the offer "at consistent rates and carriage requirements, which the league had agreed to with DirecTV." In Demand also said it wanted a "most favored nation" provision to determine comparability.

However, MLB president and COO Bob DuPuy said that In Demand whiffed.

"In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions, among them requirements for carriage of the Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings," DuPuy said.

Carriage of the Baseball Channel would equal the distribution "to at least the number of subscribers to which DirecTV launches the channel," In Demand said. DirecTV committed to launching the channel on 15 million households in 2009.

In a filing with the FCC's Media Bureau on Wednesday, MLB provided more detail about its agreement with DirecTV and what In Demand and EchoStar would have to do to match the terms of that deal. MLB has been under inquiry about the deal and will meet with FCC and lawmakers next week to answer questions.

MLB in its filing said DirecTV has agreed to offer the MLB Channel to 80% of its subscriber base and that EchoStar would have to do the same. In Demand MSOs would only need to commit to a package that includes 80% of its digital subscribers, which works out to 40% of its residential subscribers.

Late Wednesday, In Demand said its response was fully responsive to MLB's offer.

"By rejecting this matching offer, MLB has proved it never intended for In Demand to have a fair and equal opportunity to bid for Extra Innings," the company said in a statement. "We, like many, many others, question MLB's commitment to its fans by limiting distribution of both Extra Innings and the Baseball Channel."

EchoStar wasn't available for comment.

It now appears that the Extra Innings package will be a DirecTV exclusive. DirecTV's Chase Carey said the satellite company had no problem with carrying Extra Innings even if it weren't exclusive, though that would affect some of the enhancements being designed. It also goes without saying that DirecTV would pay MLB less without exclusivity.

Before Wednesday's announcement, MLB's top TV negotiator talked tough at a Manhattan gathering of sports executives.

"What you have here is a big load of sour grapes ... from bidders who participated in a full, fair, equitable and arms-length negotiation, and they lost. They failed to step up to the plate," MLB executive vp Tim Brosnan said during a panel discussion at the World Congress of Sports.

Brosnan said the negotiations were fair and that EchoStar and In Demand were given one more chance to meet the DirecTV offer and stay in the game. But Brosnan said DirecTV's offer of enhancements -- similar to those for NFL Sunday Ticket and NASCAR Hotpass, also exclusive deals for DirecTV -- gave the satellite broadcaster a leg up.

"The avid (fans) demand more than just replays of games," Brosnan said.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3ie291fc1eb5ee48aebc5b540b5397f1bc

dad1153

03-21-07, 11:57 PM

Letterman Regular 'Bud' Melman Dies

Mar 21, 8:03 PM (ET)

NEW YORK (AP) - Calvert DeForest, the white-haired, bespectacled nebbish who gained cult status as the oddball Larry "Bud" Melman on David Letterman's late night television shows, has died after a long illness. The Brooklyn-born DeForest, who was 85, died Monday at a hospital on Long Island, Letterman's "Late Show" announced Wednesday.

At his request, there will be no funeral service for DeForest, who left no survivors.

:( :( :( (sob)!

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:44 AM

TV Sports
MLB, IN Demand Remain Vague About Rights Dispute
In FCC Filing, MLB Mentions Comcast’s Exclusive Philadelphia RSN
By John Consoli MediaWeek

Major League Baseball president and COO Bob DuPuy said today that IN Demand’s offer to match DirecTV’s $700 million, seven-year carriage rights deal, is “not responsive” to the terms set forth by MLB to allow it to match, adding that the offer “fails short of all the material conditions.”

But IN Demand president Robert Jacobson disagreed, stating, “Our offer was fully responsive to Major League Baseball’s requirements and public statements.”

Both sides were vague as to what the points within the deal were matched or not matched specifically, but sources familiar with the situation said that while In Demand offered to match the dollar amount to carry the MLB Extra Innings package of out-of-market games and to launch the MLB Channel, the disagreement is over how the MLB Channel will be carried or distributed.

Through the deal with DirecTV, MLB Channel will be offered on Total Choice, its basic tier. Total Choice on DirecTV reaches over 15 million households in the U.S., and In Demand offered to carry MLB Channel in a similar amount of homes, but all those households would not necessarily be on basic tiers.

In Demand is a partnership between cable operators Time Warner, Comcast and Cox.

“By rejecting the matching offer, MLB has proven it never intended for In Demand to have a fair and equal opportunity to bid for Extra Innings,” Jacobson said in a statement. But a MLB source said, “IN Demand’s offer had to be identical to the terms of the DirecTV deal and it wasn’t.”

The disagreement took place on the same day that MLB sent a 10-page letter to the Federal Communications Commission, providing it with information about its deal with DirecTV, which had been requested by the FCC.

The letter, from DuPuy, states, “We remain hopeful that EchoStar and IN Demand will capitalize on the opportunity” to match the DirecTV deal. DuPuy adds that if those two parties do not make matching offers, “our agreement with DirecTV is fully consistent with the policies adopted by both Congress and the Commission.”

The letter says the while MLB is being taken to task for doing a possible exclusive deal with DirecTV for the Extra Innings package should no one else match, cable operators have done this for sports programming in the past and “Congress has not taken any action to prohibit such contracts.”

The letter cites Comcast doing exclusive cable-only deals for Comcast SportsNet in Philadelphia, which carries Philadelphia Flyers and Philadelphia 76ers games, both owned by Comcast.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003561294

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:48 AM

TV Notebook
HBO: After “Sopranos,” a Need for a Hit
By Bill Carter The New York Times March 22, 2007

With a last burst of episodes starting April 8, “The Sopranos,” will exit the television arena for the final time, leaving millions of fans without their all-time favorite series, and a network, HBO, without its Hall of Fame performer.

In its eight-year run on HBO, “The Sopranos” has set all sorts of new standards for cable television, collecting scores of awards, amassing record-setting audiences and providing perhaps the most precious commodity of all to HBO: cultural impact.

But after the last nine episodes starting April 8, HBO, a unit of Time Warner, will have to carry on without its signature show. Chris Albrecht, the premium cable channel’s chief executive, has been preparing for this denouement for many months. He portrayed the close of “The Sopranos” as, in a way, the completion of the first movement of a long-term artistic venture.

“It sort of cuts both ways,” Mr. Albrecht said in an interview at HBO’s Manhattan headquarters. “On the one hand, we’ll never have anything like that experience again, because between ‘The Sopranos’ and ‘Sex and the City’ and ‘Six Feet Under’ all happening in that short period of time, we came of age in a way we hadn’t before.”

But Mr. Albrecht also said he believed that “the end of ‘The Sopranos’ is really the beginning of something else.”

That something else is going to consist of a months-long splash of new and returning programs, an additional hour of Sunday night shows, an expansion into other days of the week with original series, and an array of high-profile and high-cost special projects.

“We’re going to have more new programs than we have ever had before,” Mr. Albrecht said.

But will any of them be a “Sopranos”? No one at HBO would ever predict that, because no one knew what the channel had in “The Sopranos” before it made its debut. HBO faces a risk, not only because it may disappoint HBO subscribers if no new show measures up to that standard, but also because some other channels have been developing the kind of talked-about shows that HBO has become known for.

Earlier this month, for example, the FX channel — which has styled itself for years as the HBO of basic cable because of successful shows like “Nip/Tuck”— won critical praise for a new series called “The Riches,” about a contemporary family of Gypsies. Some critics wondered if this was the kind of show that would have landed on HBO in an earlier time.

Showtime, the most direct competitor to HBO, has also tried to emulate its far more successful rival by adding more ambitious series, like the suburban comedy “Weeds” and the dramas “Sleeper Cell” and “Brotherhood.” Next month it will introduce an expensive costume epic, “The Tudors,” with Jonathan Rhys-Meyers playing a young and sexy Henry VIII.

None of these channels, though, has yet produced anything close to “The Sopranos” or any other of HBO’s celebrated series. Mr. Albrecht points out that the breadth of the channel’s offering, not “Sopranos” alone, has driven HBO to its current high of 30 million subscribers.

“We are in a unique business,” Mr. Albrecht said, one that has never been dependent on sheer audience size because as a pay-cable channel it is mainly about satisfying customers.

Michael Nathanson, a media analyst for Sanford C. Bernstein, said Mr. Albrecht’s confidence about the channel’s future is probably well placed. He said HBO has been adept at taking advantage of the expanding ways to get programs to viewers, especially through services like video-on-demand.

HBO has taken advantage of that technology, which allows viewers to watch HBO’s shows whenever they want, better than anyone else in the television business, Mr. Nathanson said.

“If you look at it in the traditional way,” Mr. Nathanson said, “you might say HBO should be worried because it might lose viewers if its doesn’t have another ‘Sopranos.’ But its subscriber base keeps growing, and I think it’s because of how well they are doing with video-on-demand.” Mr. Albrecht said HBO was promising its customers the channel would deliver “the goods,” which he defined as “something you can’t get anywhere else.”

In that category, he includes “John From Cincinnati,” a drama that combines the zen of the surfing culture with doses of philosophy, quantum physics and dysfunctional family life. And a visit from what may be an extraterrestrial.

Though that does not sound like a genre that would have built-in appeal — like, say, gangster stories — “John” has been fast-tracked, moving into production quicker than anything HBO has done. It is also getting a blessed push-off on June 10 at 10 p.m. immediately after the final scene of “The Sopranos.”

“John” will emerge as a new signature show for the channel, becoming the 9 p.m. centerpiece of an expanded three-hour Sunday block running through the summer. Previously HBO had filled only the 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. block with original series; starting in June that will begin at 8 p.m.

The show, which stars Rebecca DeMornay and Luke Perry, was created by David Milch, who was behind the HBO drama “Deadwood.” That western series, if not quite earning a place on HBO’s album of greatest hits, had an ardent following. Fans felt blindsided by the news that Mr. Milch and HBO were shutting down “Deadwood” at the end of last season.

That decision was later rescinded and HBO now plans to do two movie versions of “Deadwood” to tie up loose ends. Mr. Albrecht said the experience had taught HBO some lessons about the need to wrap up big serialized dramas, out of obligation to those paying customers who had been devoted to the shows.

Bracketing “John” at 8 and 10 p.m. will be HBO’s two most-talked about returning series, the drama “Big Love,” with its family of increasingly desperate polygamists, and the comedy “Entourage,” which, with its adventures of footloose young men in Hollywood, ranks as HBO’s chief holdover cultural phenomenon.

HBO will be adding a new comedy at 10:30 p.m., “Flight of the Conchords,” about a singing duo from New Zealand encountering life in New York. Larry David’s comedy series “Curb Your Enthusiasm” will also be returning for another season of episodes, early next year.

One new comedy Mr. Albrecht said he expected to make a significant contribution to HBO’s next phase is “12 Miles of Bad Road,” a new show from Linda Bloodworth-Thomason (“Designing Women”), which stars Gary Cole and Lily Tomlin and plays like “Dallas” remade by Christopher Guest.

HBO will use a new scheduling format for a drama called “In Treatment.” Adapted (actually, translated) from a hit Israeli show, the half-hour series stars Gabriel Byrne as a therapist who holds sessions with a different patient each night and then undergoes his own therapy session (with Dianne Weist as the doctor). The other patients, played by, among others, Blair Underwood and a young actress named Mia Wasikowska, will return for appointments on the same nights for 10 weeks.

A somewhat similar premise is the framework for “Tell Me You Love Me,” which traces the lives of couples in therapy, though their sessions will fill only a small part of the hourlong drama. The rest will cover their intimate lives — and the series, which was once titled “SexLife” and stars Sonya Walger and Jane Alexander, will actually uncover a lot of that.

A mini-series kidnapping thriller called “Five Days” was a hit in England, and HBO, which co-produced the series with the BBC, will show it here later this year. But HBO’s most anticipated mini-series in production is “John Adams” based on the biography by David McCullough, produced by Tom Hanks and starring Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney.

Another series returning for its final season is “The Wire,” the crime series set in Baltimore that received lavish critical praise last season. But this Sunday will mark the end of another highly regarded drama, “Rome.”

The audience for “Rome” has grown in its second season, but the decision had already been made to end production, mainly because of high costs. HBO expects to lose perhaps $30 million on the series, but Mr. Albrecht said he would make a deal like that again.

HBO can afford to spend more lavishly than other networks, he said, thanks to its business model. That model, he said, is expected to keep the cash flowing even if one crime family in New Jersey will no longer be delivering those little envelopes stuffed with riches.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/business/media/22hbo.html?pagewanted=print

Iteki

03-22-07, 12:56 AM

rustycruiser

03-22-07, 01:31 AM

While on the subject of Battlestar, has anything ever been mentioned about the show Caprica since its announcement a year back? Or is it dead in the water?

fredfa

03-22-07, 02:33 AM

TV Sports
Baseball Lays Off Cable Operators’ Pitch
By Richard Sandomir The New York Times March 22, 2007

Major League Baseball spurned a revised offer by leading cable operators yesterday to retain the Extra Innings package of out-of-market games, which may now become the exclusive satellite domain of DirecTV.

The rejection sets up two showdowns: one on Tuesday, when M.L.B. and DirecTV officials are to testify before the Senate Commerce Committee about their seven-year, $700 million agreement; and another March 31, the deadline for cable and the Dish Network to meet baseball’s terms.

InDemand — the cable consortium owned by Comcast, Time Warner and Cox — said yesterday that it had offered to renew Extra Innings on the same financial terms promised by DirecTV, and to guarantee the same number of subscribers for the MLB Channel, which is to make its debut in 2009, that have been assured to baseball by DirecTV.

In rejecting InDemand’s offer in less than an hour, Bob DuPuy, M.L.B.’s president, said in a statement that it “falls short in nearly all of the material conditions” laid out in baseball’s deal with DirecTV.

Tim Brosnan, baseball’s executive vice president for business, said in a telephone interview that “the correspondence they sent us amounts to a misleading press release and a failed strategy if their intention is to make a deal and to truly deliver this package to their customers.”

Robert D. Jacobson, the president of InDemand, said by telephone that he was surprised by baseball’s quick rejection of his proposal because “we understood that if we matched the terms of the DirecTV offer, we’d have a deal. We feel we’ve done that.” He added, however, that he was never shown the contract between baseball and DirecTV.

With opening day looming, the sides appear locked into different definitions of how to make a deal. Jacobson used as his guide baseball’s announcement of its agreement with DirecTV, in which InDemand and Dish were invited to make deals “at consistent rates and carriage requirements” as those met by DirecTV. Jacobson interpreted that earlier this month as a requirement to match the 15 million subscribers guaranteed by DirecTV.

But Brosnan said that InDemand and Dish had to guarantee that the channel would be made available to 80 percent of all their digital customers, because that was the terms of the deal with DirecTV, which as a satellite network is all digital. Cable operators have about 32 million digital customers in total.

“We laid all this out in painstaking detail to them in our meeting on March 9,” Brosnan said. “We could not have been any clearer.”

In its offer to baseball yesterday, InDemand said it would match DirecTV’s total subscribers for the channel in 2009, however much it increases from 15 million.

The parties were also split on how to count Extra Innings subscribers and, thus, how to calculate what baseball would be paid for those digital cable customers.

Later in the day, Jacobson issued a statement that said, “By rejecting this matching offer, M.L.B. has proven it never intended for InDemand to have a fair and equal opportunity to bid for Extra Innings.”

Baseball and DirecTV officials were headed to an exclusive deal on Extra Innings when fans who watched out-of-market games on cable voiced their outrage in e-mail messages, chat rooms and petitions. The fans’ anger prompted baseball to give InDemand and Dish 23 days to make a deal. (Dish is still in talks with M.L.B.) But one thing they would not get is a stake in the channel; DirecTV owns 20 percent of it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/sports/baseball/22base.html?pagewanted=print

HDTVFanAtic

03-22-07, 03:55 AM

Assuming this report is correct it becomes very clear that today's events were just a PR stunt by iN Demand.

Shouldn't everyone have known that the second the Press Release came out? CPanther got it - though not in the first 60 seconds :D

Cox's action earlier this week should have been your immediate tip off - they are in no mood to play games - just to get on with business without offering MLB EI.

Yet Cox is one of the big 3 clumped in with inDemand in this deal. Think about it....

COX would have NEVER made the MLB EI Internet Offer this week if it thought this offer was the real deal and they had a chance.

It also explains why another story earlier this week had another cable exec who they would not identify saying the timing was bad for Cox to make their MLB EI announcement.

Clearly, this is to put pressure back on D* and MLB, so they cannot go back to Congress and say "we gave them the opportunity" - or at least given a free pass.

Finally, I will state up front that I have no direct knowledge of this, but I CANNOT imagine that it is not in the contract D*/MLB EI Contract.

As Directv and MLB knew they would offer cable the right to match, I would bet about 99.99999% that the agreement for MLB EI specified that everyone carrying MLB EI could have no exclusive contracts with MLB teams to keep them off MLB EI - i.e. all games would have to be put into the "pool".

Thus Cox San Diego and Comcast in Philly would have had to given D* access to the teams they had exclusive rights with - which is just another reason that inDemand said within hours of the D*/MLB announcement, that it would be impossible to match - as inDemand could not make that happen.

TheRatPatrol

03-22-07, 09:33 AM

Thus Cox San Diego and Comcast in Philly would have had to given D* access to the teams they had exclusive rights with - which is just another reason that inDemand said within hours of the D*/MLB announcement, that it would be impossible to match - as inDemand could not make that happen.
This is exactly why cable companys should not have exclusive rights over local teams. This has me worried that this might happen more with local teams in the future, and that means they won't be available on satellite, but only exclusively in that teams area on that teams local cable company.

This deal is not good for the baseball fans. I guess the fans don't count anymore, just the big money deals. :(

DoubleDAZ

03-22-07, 10:07 AM

This deal is not good for the baseball fans. I guess the fans don't count anymore, just the big money deals. :(Who are you kidding? The fans have not counted for a long time, just look at ticket and concession prices. :) :D :)

fredfa

03-22-07, 10:45 AM

HDTVF: Agree with almost all you say.

But what PR school is iN Demand's Robert Jacobson from?

First he says the deal is constructed so cable can't match it.

Then, after (according to MLB) a lengthy meeting detailing the specifics on March 9, he issues yesterday's press release talking about meeting the MLB requirements "at consistent rates and carriage requirements, which the league had agreed to with DirecTV."

Then later in the day he repeated his initial claim that it was a matching offer, even though he knew it wasn't.

I guess my point is that if Comcast, TWC and Cox had decided not to match the deal, or if it had been engineered so they couldn't match it, why go through this elaborate charade? This has simply allowed MLB and DirecTV to get the Philadelphia and San Diego situations on the table. Those games have been offered on iN Demand, by the way, and the entire iN Demand-DirecTV deal will be rehashed next Tuesday, too.

It seems to me Jacobson, by screaming so loudly, has simply ended up putting the spotlight on cable's own dealings. And the "terrestrial exception" for San Diego and Philadelphia will never really hold up to any public scrutiny. It is a lobbied/paid for exemption (thank you, Arlen Specter) which flies in the face of every other broadcast/cable/satellite legislation, including the FCC approval of the DirecTV takeover by NewsCorp.

At that point, as you'll recall, TWC, Cox and Comcast led a fight to demand NewsCorp not treat DirecTV with any favoritism, and got language in the FCC approval to assure that.

I'd give Jacobson the "Mediacom PR move of the month" for March, hands down. His bosses at TWC, Cox and Comcast should either muzzle him or fire him for his outrageously silly behavior in this case.

I fully realize the corporate big boys are always going to act like bullies when they can get away with it. But they should never get caught lying in public. That is when legislation gets enacted which ends up costing them dearly.

steverobertson

03-22-07, 10:50 AM

Very well put Fred I agree 100% with you on this.

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:14 AM

The Business of Television
News Corp., NBC pull together to challenge YouTube
By Meg James and Dawn C. Chmielewski Los Angeles Times Staff Writers March 22, 2007

Several media giants are teaming up to challenge Google Inc. and its YouTube video-sharing service, seeking to blunt their incursion into the entertainment business.

News Corp. and NBC Universal plan to announce as soon as today that they are creating an online video site stocked with TV shows and movies, plus clips that users can modify and share with friends, according to people close to the negotiations.

The two companies enlisted help from some of Google's biggest Internet rivals. The News Corp.-NBC Universal partnership has deals with Yahoo Inc., Microsoft Corp., Time Warner Inc.'s AOL and News Corp.'s MySpace to place videos in front of their collective audience of hundreds of millions.

Despite Hollywood's dismal track record in creating successful joint ventures, these players see little choice but to band together to compete against Google and Apple Inc., which are becoming powerful distributors of entertainment.

News Corp. and NBC Universal want to control how their shows are watched online and to hold onto advertising dollars migrating to the Web. Google is expected to gobble up nearly a third of all online advertising revenue this year, according to research firm EMarketer Inc.

"You're just pooling resources in the face of the most disruptive force your business has seen ever," said Eric Garland, chief executive of market researcher BigChampagne.

The new venture, which could launch this summer, is envisioned as an advertiser-friendly destination for some of TV's most popular shows, including NBC's "Heroes" and "The Office," and "Family Guy" and "24" from News Corp.'s Fox. The companies also plan to sell downloads of Universal Pictures and 20th Century Fox movies.

But the companies see the service as more than just another video site struggling for an audience. They are also packaging their material and sending it to Yahoo and other sites where millions already gather.

"The media companies don't want to be forced to only work with one distribution entity, in Google," said UBS Warburg media analyst Aryeh Bourkoff. "I don't think it's too late."

The partnership comes a week after Viacom Inc. sued Google for not doing enough to keep its shows off YouTube.

The talks between News Corp. and General Electric Co.-owned NBC Universal have been on-again, off-again since last summer as the two media companies sought to recruit others. They tried to woo Viacom because of its treasure trove of MTV Networks shows that appeal to younger viewers.

But when Viacom headed to court, News Corp. and NBC Universal chose another path. News Corp. President Peter Chernin and NBC Universal Chief Executive Jeff Zucker have made the initiative a top priority, and the talks heated up this week.

"It's better to cannibalize yourself than have the competition do it," said EMarketer CEO Geoff Ramsey.

Time Warner, CBS Corp. and Sony Pictures Entertainment could also supply the service with shows and Web-only video clips in exchange for a cut of the advertising revenue. They have yet to sign on.

For now, the News Corp.-NBC Universal venture will pool videos on its website, syndicate videos to other websites and handle advertising sales.

"This is a tremendous opportunity to get our content out there and leverage relationships better," said a person familiar with the talks. "We're not about blocking our content and not allowing opportunities. We just want to do it in a way that's legal and allows us to get paid."

So far, Google has the edge in attracting online audiences. YouTube, which Google bought in November for $1.65 billion, draws more viewers than the television networks' combined online audience, according to measurement firm Hitwise.

Google executives' disdain for the project is evident in their nickname for the consortium: Clown Co.

"The biggest challenge will be to see how the parents of conglomerates work together in decision-making," said Bourkoff, the media analyst. "Is this going to be a great press release, or will it actually function as a business?"

Hollywood has long been the king of entertainment. It believes that viewers will eventually get tired of the amateur videos that populate YouTube and other video-sharing sites, and that professionally produced material will win out.

TV networks have tried different approaches to dealing with YouTube to gain a bigger presence on the Web. NBC and CBS reached agreements to put some promotional clips on YouTube but also joined Viacom and others in complaining that Google hadn't gone far enough to protect their copyrighted material.

Traditional media companies have been unhappy with how much YouTube was willing to pay and the lack of control they would get over how their clips are displayed.

Not only that, they don't want to help build Google into a bigger monster.

By building their own online entertainment platform, News Corp. and NBC Universal are trying to protect their decades-old way of doing business — controlling not only their programming but the advertising revenue and distribution outlets.

They fear that giving programming to Google and YouTube could weaken their leverage in subsequent negotiations. And they would be ceding one of their most lucrative revenue sources — the distribution pipeline.

People close to the negotiations said that the venture's mission wasn't to create a "YouTube killer." And they didn't rule out eventually striking a deal with Google in an effort to steer even more viewers to the new site.

"We think they could be a terrific distribution partner," said a second executive close to the talks. "We have a strong preference for working with companies that agree to protect intellectual property."

Conversations began last summer between News Corp.'s Chernin and former NBC Universal executive David Zaslav, who has since left to run Discovery Communications Inc. Both wanted to collect some of the companies' best shows and draw upon MySpace's huge audience.

Talks intensified last fall when Google announced it was buying YouTube. By then, News Corp. and NBC Universal saw that their plan to build a video island was too limited. They rejected the "if we build it, they will come" strategy.

"We needed to have hoses to fire people in," said one key architect.

That's when they approached Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL.

Yahoo CEO Terry Semel hinted about the deal Wednesday during a media conference in New York, saying that his company was "going to work much more closely with major content producers" and that an announcement could be expected "very soon."

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/business/la-fi-youtube22mar22,1,6391862,print.story?coll=la-headlines-business-enter

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:17 AM

The Business of Television
MLB Signs on Sharp as High Def TV Sponsor
By John Consoli MediaWeek March 22, 2007

Major League Baseball has entered into a three-year deal with Sharp Electronics under which the Sharp AQUOS line will become the official high-definition television sponsor of MLB. As part of the deal, Sharp will make “significant” advertising commitments to the MLB television rightsholders Fox, ESPN, Turner and DirecTV, as well as to other MLB-produced programming.

In 2006, more than 1,300 MLB games were televised locally in high definition and it is expected that the number will be the same or greater this season. MLB said it is projecting that in 2007, the number of national telecast offered in high definition by Fox and ESPN will total more than 110. As part of its deal with MLB, Sharp will get to show its HD TVs during the MLB game telecasts.

While Sharp has sponsorship agreements with eight MLB teams locally, this is the first time that it is sponsoring a major professional sport on the national level.

Also as part of the deal, Sharp will become the new sponsor of the MLB National League and American League Player of the Month Awards. As part of that process, Sharp will work with MLB to produce vignettes of the honored players each month, which will air on the MLB telecasts. Sharp will also becomes the sponsor of the Hank Aaron Award, given annually to the best offensive player in both leagues.

Bob Scaglione, senor vp and group manager, product and marketing group, Sharp Electronics, said Sharp is expecting to spend in the “hundreds of millions of dollars” over the next three years on various aspects of the sponsorship.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003561561

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:20 AM

The Business of Television
News Corp., NBCU Launch YouTube Competitor
By Mike Shields MediaWeek March 22, 2007

In an unprecedented joint offensive strike aimed at defending the audience of the traditional broadcast networks on the Internet, News Corp. and NBC Universal have announced a partnership to launch a Web video distribution channel that is a direct challenge to YouTube, while at the same time striking revolutionary distribution deals with the Web’s largest media properties.

The new channel, which will house a wealth of network TV shows and movies in a copyright-protected environment, will go live sometime this summer. And in a deal that has more players that the average symphony orchestra, besides creating an unique Web destination for online video the two broadcasting giants have struck sweeping video distribution pacts with Yahoo, MSN, AOL and News. Corp.’s own MySpace to showcase the entirety of the new site’s library of content.

At launch, the new site will host both full-length episodes and short clips from series such as NBC’s Heroes, My Name is Earl, Saturday Night Live and Friday Night Lights, along with Fox’s hit series House, 24, The Simpsons and Prison Break, among others. Unlike YouTube, all shows will be ad supported.

Like YouTube, user-generated content will have a place on the new site, said officials, as fans will be able to create mashups - or edited short clips featuring these networks’ content. However, the big point of differentiation for the new property is that users will not be able to post whatever they want on the site – thus affording News. Corp. and NBC with a level of control not seen on YouTube.

Besides TV shows, users will be able to watch full-length movies on the site, including hits such as Borat, Little Miss Sunshine, and The Devil Wears Prada. Neither company has announced whether these movies will be free to users or available through some sort of pay-per-download arrangement.

But the bigger immediate impact will be on the TV business, and just how online video will be distributed and monetized by big media companies long term, said executives. “This is a game changer for Internet video,” said News Corp. president and COO Peter Chernin. “We’ll have access to just about the entire U.S. Internet audience at launch. And for the first time, consumers will get what they want -professionally produced video delivered on the sites where they live.”

NBCU president and CEO Jeff Zucker emphasized the built-in safeguards as being key for the new site. “This venture supercharges our distribution of protected, quality content to fans everywhere,” he said. “Consumers get a hugely attractive aggregation of a wide range of content, and marketers get a novel way to connect with a large and highly engaged audience.”

Yet it remains to be seen whether the networks can manufacture the attraction of YouTube, which has built a huge audience in less than two years in large part because of its free for all nature. Many observers have been critical of the stance take by companies like Viacom (which is noticeably absent from this partnership), which they say are trying to control user behavior in a medium that doesn’t lend itself to a broadcasting model. "Media companies are eager to pounce on YouTube's distracting legal troubles to offer any alternative to YouTube's dominance in the market,” said Forrester Research media & technology analyst James McQuivey. “But if they aim to create a single site where people have to come to watch their shows, and deprive the rest of the Net of their clips -- then they're missing the point.”

However, while the networks will have to work hard to create awareness for the new site and convince users to choose it over YouTube, the sheer audience power of portals like MSN and Yahoo, along with MySpace will certainly help.

“As the most visited site in the U.S., this deal gives Yahoo’s users unprecedented access to their favorite shows and offers them engaging content in a premium video format,” said Terry Semel, Yahoo chairman and CEO. "We believe that this relationship underscores Yahoo’s respect for content owners and copyrights and positions us as one of the premier distribution sites on the Web for entertainment programming."

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003561570

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:29 AM

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

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:37 AM

The TV Column
'Idol' Has a Plan To Get a Leg Up On 'Dancing'
By Lisa de Moraes Washington Post Columnist Thursday, March 22, 2007

Will Gwen Stefani beat Paul McCartney's dancing one-legged estranged wife in next week's battle of the competition series? Stay tuned Tuesday from 9 to 9:07 p.m.!

After carefully rescheduling "Dancing With the Stars" so as to get it out of the path of Fox ratings monster "American Idol," ABC learned that Fox will expand by seven minutes the allegedly one-hour "Idol" performance show next week -- meaning it will go head-to-head with the first seven minutes of the first results show on this edition of "Dancing."

When ABC announced its new play pattern for "Dancing" in January, ABC Entertainment chief Steve McPherson said in a statement that "the great thing about this air schedule is that fans won't have to choose between the two reality hits this spring."

The fourth edition of "Dancing" debuted Monday to its biggest opening crowd ever -- nearly 22 million viewers. Much credit is going to the casting of Heather Mills -- the show's first one-legged competitor, as show host Tom Bergeron noted frequently. Mills says she's doing the show to inspire children who have lost limbs. Cynics suggest she's also waging an image-repair campaign to neutralize the juicier bits about her that have surfaced during the sometimes acrimonious divorce process.

This is the first time that "Dancing" competitors get to perform two weeks before one is eliminated. This is a direct result of what we like to call the Tucker Carlson Factor. Last edition, Carlson was booted the very first week -- not because he was a lousy dancer, though he was, but so were others on the show. Theory is it was because the former CNN commentator turned MSNBC show host didn't have a big enough fan base -- people simply didn't know who he is, and "Dancing" competitors are eliminated based on how many points they get from voters and the show's judges.

So this week, there was no Tuesday voting results show. Not coincidentally, "Idol" had, as had long been planned, a two-hour performance broadcast on Tuesday. In the early going, when "Idol" is fat with competitors, performance broadcasts tend to run two hours. Next week was to have been the first Tuesday performance show to be a trim one hour.

Word from Fox is the "Idol" producers wanted the extra seven minutes because they have Stefani on board. Trying to jam 10 performances -- and all those ads -- into one hour is tough. And, when you think of it, one more four- or five-minute ad break leaves only about two minutes of actual additional programming.

Fox snagged Stefani to be a guest "mentor" -- they don't like to call them "coaches" -- to the "Idol" competitors as they rehearse their performances of pop tunes next week. Stefani is a big "get" for the show in that she's under 50. Most of the show's guest mentors and judges -- Barry Manilow, Stevie Wonder, Elton John, Diana Ross, Gladys Knight, this week's Lulu and Peter Noone, etc. -- are not. Stefani is just 37.

But Stefani's got stuff to sell. Her second solo album opened soft; released on Dec. 5, 2006, it has sold only about 1 million copies, according to Nielsen SoundScan, though sales picked up as its second single became a hit.

She's also launching a tour, opening next month in Vegas, and on her Web site, almost all cities still show ticket availability (in the Washington area, she'll play the Nissan Pavilion, which holds about 20,000 people).

It's unclear just what Fox will do with the extra minutes on Tuesday. Stefani is not going to perform her single "The Sweet Escape" until Wednesday's results show -- the traditional night for the guest mentors to sing and plug whatever it is they're selling.

Outside Fox, the industry wasn't buying the whole "Idol"-producers-wanted-extra-time-just-'cause thing. Outside Fox, the talk was of Fox's "kill-it-in-the-cradle school" of counterprogramming. Airing "Idol" against the first results show of this "Dancing" edition smells like more of same, the grumbling went.

• • • • • • • • • • •

Three of ABC's freshman series -- none of them sitcoms or serialized dramas -- are among the 13 prime-time series the network announced will be back for the 2007-08 TV season.

The lucky shows are "Ugly Betty," "Men in Trees" and "Brothers & Sisters."

ABC Entertainment President Steve McPherson told advertisers yesterday the list also includes "The Bachelor," "Boston Legal," "Dancing With the Stars," "Desperate Housewives," "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition," "Grey's Anatomy" and "Lost." He also announced next season's return of Jimmy Kimmel's late-night show.

The network already had renewed "America's Funniest Home Videos," "Supernanny" and "Wife Swap."

Advertisers are in Los Angeles this week as the broadcast networks take turns chatting up their program development for next season at the March Development Meetings.

Once upon a time these dog-and-pony shows were open to the news media and a good time was had by all. Then grumpy men took over the broadcast networks and now only NBC allows reporters to attend its presentation. NBC's presentation happens today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032102442_pf.html

Maestro J

03-22-07, 11:42 AM

I'm watching The View right now and I just had to post this off-topic observation. Man, does motherhood agree with Lizzy Hasselbeck or what? Gosh darn, she looks mighty fine. I think Mr. Hasselbeck might want to keep her locked up in the house from now on.

Maestro J

03-22-07, 11:46 AM

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:46 AM

The Business of Television
News Corp., NBCU Launch YouTube Competitor
New site will feature thousands of hours of top video for consumers

(NBC Universal News Release)

NEW YORK, March 22, 2007 -- News Corporation and NBC Universal will launch the largest Internet video distribution network ever assembled with the most sought-after content from television and film, it was announced today by Jeff Zucker, President and Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal and Peter Chernin, President and Chief Operating Officer, News Corporation. The video-rich site will debut this summer with thousands of hours of full-length programming, movies and clips, representing premium content from at least a dozen networks and two major film studios.

AOL, MSN, MySpace and Yahoo! will be the new site's initial distribution partners. Their users, who represent 96 percent of the monthly U.S. unique users on the Internet, will have unlimited access to the site's vast library of content. This media alliance will offer consumers free long- and short-form video and create a compelling platform for advertisers, targeting the rapidly growing audience of online video consumers. Charter advertisers include Cadbury Schweppes, Cisco, Esurance, Intel Corporation and General Motors.

"This is a game changer for Internet video," said Peter Chernin, President and Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation. "We'll have access to just about the entire U.S. Internet audience at launch. And for the first time, consumers will get what they want -- professionally produced video delivered on the sites where they live. We're excited about the potential for this alliance and we're looking forward to working with any content provider or distributor who wants to take advantage of this extraordinary opportunity."

"Anyone who believes in the value of ubiquitous distribution will find this announcement incredibly exciting," said Jeff Zucker, President and CEO of NBC Universal. "This venture supercharges our distribution of protected, quality content to fans everywhere. Consumers get a hugely attractive aggregation of a wide range of content, and marketers get a novel way to connect with a large and highly engaged audience."

At launch, full episodes and clips from current hit shows, including Heroes, 24, House, My Name Is Earl, Saturday Night Live, Friday Night Lights, The Riches, 30 Rock, The Simpsons, The Tonight Show, Prison Break, Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader and Top Chef, plus hits from the studios' vast television libraries, will be available free, on an ad-supported basis, within a rich consumer experience featuring personalized video playlists, mashups, online communities and video search. Plus, the extensive programming lineup will include fan favorite films like Borat, Little Miss Sunshine, Devil Wears Prada, The Bourne Identity and Bourne Supremacy with bonus materials and movie trailers. Post-launch, plans will be considered for acquiring additional content as well as producing and licensing original programming for the new site's audience.

Its launch distribution partners will provide the biggest potential reach of any player on the Internet. Moreover, the new site will actively seek agreements with a variety of additional distribution partners.

"This new venture is further proof that the Internet is now a full-fledged entertainment medium, and we are delighted to serve as a major online distribution partner for the quality content produced by these media powerhouses, as well as a provider of strategic services to the new venture," said Randy Falco, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, AOL.

"This partnership is completely aligned with our continued investment in video on MSN and will allow hundreds of millions of our consumers to tune into a vast library of high-quality, safe and legal online video," said Kevin Johnson, President, Platform and Services Division, Microsoft. "Our alliance proves that you can deliver quality online video entertainment and protect intellectual property and copyright at the same time. We look forward to working together to explore additional opportunities to distribute this content across other Microsoft services and devices."

"By delivering the new site's content to our more than 65 million users, we can build on MySpace's position as a leading destination for online video, and enable content creators to tap into the power of social networking," said Peter Levinsohn, President of Fox Interactive Media. "The ability to embed video clips within over 160 million profile pages will empower members of the MySpace community to view, share and truly interact with some of the entertainment world's most popular content."

"We are excited to be a part of this landmark partnership that connects people to the content they care about. As the most visited site in the U.S., this deal gives Yahoo!'s users unprecedented access to their favorite shows and offers them engaging content in a premium video format," said Terry Semel, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Yahoo! Inc. "We believe that this relationship underscores Yahoo!'s respect for content owners and copyrights and positions us as one of the premier distribution sites on the Web for entertainment programming."

Each distribution partner will feature the site's content in an embedded player customized with a look and feel consistent with each site, making the offering organic to each destination. The new company will offer innovative advertising sales propositions by being able to sell cross-platform -- on-air and on-line. Post-launch, sites affiliated with founding companies, including iVillage and IGN, will also have the opportunity to become distribution partners.

The new company will be located in New York and Los Angeles. A transitional management team led by NBC Universal's Chief Digital Officer George Kliavkoff, along with an experienced group of executives from NBC Universal and News Corporation, will work together to launch the site. The company's permanent management will be announced shortly, along with branding details and additional advertising partners. Each company will devote a significant marketing and promotional budget to the new site's launch.

News Corporation and NBC Universal are creating this strategic alliance at a time when Internet users and advertisers are embracing online video as never before. In January, there were 123 million unique video streamers and downloaders (comScore Video Metrix). In 2005, video streams totaled nearly 18 billion, and that amount is expected to triple by 2010 (AccuStream iMedia Research, 2006). And research firm eMarketer estimates $410 million was spent on online video advertising in 2006, an amount that is expected to almost double this year.

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:53 AM

Yesterday’s fast national over night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have been posted near the top of Ratings News the second post in this thread.

TravelFan1

03-22-07, 11:59 AM

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:59 AM

The 2007-2008 Season
ABC renews 11 shows for next season
Bold statement amid pre-upfront presentations 6
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 22, 2007

After a fall in which ABC took a lot of chances and introduced more than half a dozen new shows, many of which flopped, the network seems to be emphasizing stability for next fall.

Yesterday it renewed 11 programs, including bubble shows “Men in Trees” and “Boston Legal,” giving the appearance of steadiness despite falling ratings this year.

The announcement came as the networks make their pre-upfront presentations to media people, and the message from ABC seems to be that it is not panicking, despite a dismal winter and few new hits on any network this season.

The early pickups for “Men” and “Legal” are somewhat surprising.

Though “Men” has gained since its move from Friday to Thursday night, it’s still losing more than half of its “Grey’s Anatomy” lead-in, and its 3.2 season average is significantly lower than the program that recently took over the 10 p.m. Thursday slot during “Men’s” hiatus.

“October Road” averaged a 5.6 rating last week, more than a point better than “Men” has ever averaged in the slot.

However, the early renewal may be a shrewd move on ABC’s part. With the uncertainty over “Men’s” future, viewers could have decided it wasn’t worth investing time in the show if it wasn’t coming back.

With “Men” assured a place on next year’s schedule, viewers may be more likely to watch, knowing that plotlines will get a chance to play out and there won’t be an unanswered cliffhanger finale. It’s quite a turnaround for the show, which last fall was voted one of the new programs most likely to be axed by BrilliantButCancelled.com.

“Legal’s” return is more about demographics than anything else. The third-year show indexes very highly among affluent households and has helped ABC leapfrog NBC for the highest median income among the Big Four networks, according to Magna Global analysis of Nielsen data.

“Legal” has averaged a 2.7 18-49 rating this year, tied for No. 89 on broadcast.

Of course another way to read the renewal of such low-rated shows is to wonder if ABC’s development slate is weak, leading the network to stick with what it has rather than take a chance on what might be an even weaker show.

The network has averaged a 3.5 18-49 rating and 9 share this season, down 17 percent from last year, when ABC carried the Super Bowl and also had “Monday Night Football.” It jumped to a big lead last fall on the strength of “Dancing with the Stars” and “Grey’s” but has since fallen into third place behind Fox and CBS.

Yet in some ways the network is in better shape than last year. It has become dominant on Thursdays, where it struggled for decades before moving “Grey’s.” “Dancing’s” ratings continue to rise. And it may end up renewing the most new programs of any network this year.

In addition to “Men,” ABC picked up “Ugly Betty” and “Brothers & Sisters” for second years yesterday and left open the possibility of renewing more. NBC may be the only other network to also renew three new shows.

There are still several things that ABC will need to address at May’s upfront, and one is its dire situation with comedies. Its top-rated sitcom, “According to Jim,” is averaging just a 2.5.

And ABC needs to find a stronger Wednesday lead-in for “Lost,” whose ratings have dipped since moving to 10 p.m. in February.

The other shows receiving renewals were: “Lost,” “Desperate Housewives,” “Stars,” “Grey’s,” “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” “The Bachelor” and “Jimmy Kimmel Live.” They join “Supernanny,” “Wife Swap” and “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” which received renewals earlier this year.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10958.asp

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:02 PM

fredfa, you may want to add to your list of upcoming shows the US version of Kitchen Nightmares:

http://www.fox.com/kitchennightmares/

My wife and I do enjoy the British version, which is shown here in the US by BBC America.

Thanks for the reminder, TravelFan1, but it has been in the list for some time and starts June 25.

It's called "Hell's Kitchen" on Fox.

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:10 PM

The 2007-2008 Season
Sci Fi Giving “Ghost Hunters” Fourth Season
Channel Announces Bonus Episodes
(NBC Universal News Release) March 22, 2007

New York, NY – Ghost Hunters, SCI FI's popular reality series, will return to the Channel for an exciting fourth season. America's favorite paranormal plumbers, Jason Hawes and Grant Wilson, will deliver 13 episodes of spine-tingling investigations when the show returns next year. Upcoming episodes will feature the intrepid Ghost Hunters exploring a chilling range of bizarre occurrences that will challenge the most hard-boiled of skeptics.

In an added bonus for viewers, the Ghost Hunters will round out the third season with six extra episodes set to premiere this spring, and an additional six slated for debut this fall. From investigations of stateside hauntings to a tour of Jack the Ripper's London and an exploration of the eerie Lisheen Ruins of Ireland, Jason and Grant leave no metaphysical stone unturned. The 2006 season of Ghost Hunters ranked as the highest-rated and most-watched season in HH ratings and all key demos. Season three also marked the first time audience numbers in the key P18-49 and P25-54 demos averaged over 1 million viewers throughout its run.

SCI FI further announced the 2nd annual Ghost Hunters Live special on Halloween night. The first Ghost Hunters Live, a one-of-a-kind, 6-hour investigative television event, tripled the viewing audience for the time period. From 11 pm on All Hallows' Eve to 5 am the following morning, this supernatural all-nighter kept audiences on the edge of their seat, reporting paranormal sightings via the live interactive "panic button."

The one-hour weekly reality series follows a group of real-life "ghostbusters" as they investigate haunted houses and establishments throughout the country. Enjoying record-high ratings throughout its series run, Ghost Hunters has featured speaking entities, mysteriously moving furniture, ghostly visages and a healthy dose of squabbling within the investigating team. Being scared has never been so much fun!

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:13 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
''Til Death' rises riding on 'Idol's' wake
The sagging Fox sitcom gains in its second week
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 22, 2007

“’Til Death,” the first-year Brad Garrett sitcom that had been wilting on Thursday nights, hit another series high last night, its second week as the lucky lead-out to Fox’s hit show “American Idol.”

“Death” averaged a 5.9 adults 18-49 rating, according to Nielsen overnights, up 4 percent over last week’s 5.7, its previous series high.

“Death” held 58 percent of “Idol’s” lead-in and likely owed its week-to-week growth to “Idol,” which was also up 0.2 from the previous week with a 10.1.

But the fact that “Death” did not slide in its second outing is certainly promising for Fox. “Death” had looked moribund in its old Thursday slot, where it averaged just a 2.2 rating.

While Fox doesn’t yet know if viewers would follow the show to another night, or tune in without “Idol’s” lead-in, it at least can boast broadcast’s top sitcom two weeks running.

Last night’s “Death” also was Fox’s top-rated sitcom in 18-49s in more than a year, since the premiere of “The Loop.” It drew more total viewers, 14.6 million, than any Fox sitcom in more than three years, dating back to a “Simpsons” episode that aired in January 2004. (That excludes a post-Super Bowl “Simpsons” two years ago.)

“Death” rose by about a half million viewers week to week.

Fox was first for the night among 18-49s with a 5.7 average rating and a 16 share. CBS was second at 4.2/11, ABC third at 3.2/9, CW fourth at 2.0/5, NBC fifth at 1.8/5 and Univision sixth at 1.6/4.

CBS started the night in the lead with a 4.1 rating at 8 p.m. for “Survivor,” relocated from Thursday for NCAA basketball game coverage, followed by a 3.4 for Fox for “Bones.”

CW was third that hour with a 2.5 for “America’s Next Top Model,” which won the hour in adults 18-34 with a 3.1. ABC took fourth with a 2.2 average for “George Lopez” (2.1) and a repeat of “According to Jim,” Univision fifth with a 1.9 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and NBC sixth with a 1.8 for “Friday Night Lights.”

At 9 p.m. Fox took the lead with an 8.0 average for “Idol” (10.1) and “Death” (5.9). CBS was second with a 4.3 for “Criminal Minds,” ABC third with a 2.2 average for another “Jim” repeat and a new “In Case of Emergency” (2.2) and NBC fourth with a 1.7 for “Crossing Jordan.” Univision was fifth again that hour with a 1.6 for “Mundo de Fieras” and CW dropped to sixth with a 1.4 for a repeat of “Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll.”

ABC took a turn on top at 10 p.m., leading with a 5.2 for “Lost.” CBS was second with a 4.1 for “CSI: NY,” NBC third with a 1.8 for a repeat of “Medium” and Univision fourth with a 1.4 for “Don Francisco Presenta.”

Fox also led the night among households with a 9.5 average rating and a 15 share. CBS was second at 8.8/14, ABC third at 5.0/8, NBC fourth at 4.0/6, CW fifth at 2.7/4 and Univision sixth at 2.0/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10970.asp

TravelFan1

03-22-07, 12:15 PM

xnappo

03-22-07, 12:21 PM

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:54 PM

The Business of Television
Discovery HD Theater Signs Carriage Deal with Cablevision
By Alex Weprin Broadcasting & Cable 3/22/2007

Discovery Communications and Cablevision have made an agreement that will bring Discovery HD Theater to Cablevision customers. The deal with Cablevision means that Discovery HD Theater is now carried on all the major television distributors.

The Launch comes just days before Discovery premieres their ambitious miniseries, Planet Earth, which took more than five years to shoot, all using HD technology.

“We are delighted to bring this unrivaled viewing experience to Cablevision subscribers with the launch of Discovery HD Theater today and in time for our groundbreaking Planet Earth series,” said Clint Stinchcomb, executive vice president and general manager, Discovery Emerging Networks Group, in a statement.

Discovery HD Theater has more than 1,300 hours of HD programming, including Planet Earth and Discovery Atlas HD. Cablevision is the country’s fifth largest MSO, with 11 million subscribers.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6426876

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:57 PM

hello again fredfa, Hell's kitchen is one show, Kitchen Nightmares is a completely different show. Kitchen Nightmares is the show that Gordon Ramsey goes to a restaurant with financial problems and work with the restaurant owners and staff to improve the financial situation.

I should know not to argue with posters -- they almost always know more than I do about their favorites.

Sorry. I'll add it to the list of upcoming shows.

Thanks again.

steverobertson

03-22-07, 12:58 PM

Boy FNL is really tanking in the ratings what a shame

fredfa

03-22-07, 01:04 PM

Last night's numbers are about what FNL has been getting recently.

But what a(nother!) great episode.

RemyM

03-22-07, 01:42 PM

The Business of Television
Discovery HD Theater Signs Carriage Deal with Cablevision
By Alex Weprin Broadcasting & Cable 3/22/2007
<snip>
Cablevision is the country’s fifth largest MSO, with 11 million subscribers.

Cablevision only has 3,000,000+ subscribers
http://www.cablevision.com/index.jhtml?pageType=investor

Even so, it was great to get DHDT and National Geographic Channel HD this morning.

steverobertson

03-22-07, 01:53 PM

Last night's numbers are about what FNL has been getting recently.

But what a(nother!) great episode.

i didn't realize they were that low I guess with the couple of weeks off I forgot. I agree it was a awesome episode. This is by far my favorite show now it is the quickest hour on tv. The story lines just keep moving just enough while adding new things it really is one of the best shows I have ever watched. The eye candy isn't bad either

Inundated

03-22-07, 02:06 PM

Last night's numbers are about what FNL has been getting recently.

But what a(nother!) great episode.

I can't say I'm "into" FNL now, but I've tuned by on occasion...and usually stuck around. It's a very, very good show...the only thing stopping me from getting more involved is the fact that I haven't made the commitment to it.

steverobertson

03-22-07, 02:10 PM

I can't say I'm "into" FNL now, but I've tuned by on occasion...and usually stuck around. It's a very, very good show...the only thing stopping me from getting more involved is the fact that I haven't made the commitment to it.

You won't regret commiting to this show trust me on that.

dad1153

03-22-07, 02:37 PM

Boy, this thread just isn't the same without news/criticism of Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. Anything resembling a whiff of news/gossip about the show's future or the unaired episodes? We're almost at the end of March, so final details have to be in the works for late April and the May sweeps schedule. I can't believe everybody acts as if this show never existed or generated such buzz (both + and -). :( :( :(

fredfa

03-22-07, 02:48 PM

Nothing at all, dad. Not a whisper.

But Kevin Reilly is speaking at this moment to advertisers and some reporters, so maybe something will come of that.

VisionOn

03-22-07, 02:51 PM

I can't believe everybody acts as if this show never existed or generated such buzz (both + and -). :( :( :(

Yeah but as this is a news thread, comments are related to the stories posted. No story, generally means no discussion. For comments about shows that are not newsworthy I look to the specific show threads, I wouldn't expect to see them here.

fredfa

03-22-07, 02:52 PM

TV Sports
Younger Audience for CBS' NCAA Basketball Tourney
By John Consoli MediaWeek March 22, 2007

A younger audience is watching the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament on CBS so far, with ratings through the first seven telecasts among men 18-24 and men 18-34 up 14 percent each, according to Nielsen Media Research data. Meanwhile, household ratings overall are down 6 percent to 6.2, and total viewers are down 300,000 or 3 percent per telecast, with most of that decline coming from the 25-54 age demo.

Heading into tonight’s “Sweet 16” round of telecasts, ratings among men 18-24 are averaging a 4.2, compared to a 3.7 over the same period last year. Ratings among men 18-34 are averaging a 4.9, up from a 4.3.

Ratings among men 18-49 are flat, averaging a 5.0 both for this year and last year, while ratings for men 25-54 are down 5 percent to a 5.4 from a 5.7.

Among all viewers, ratings among adults 18-49 are flat at 3.6, while ratings among adults 25-54 are down 7 percent to a 3.8.

Overall young viewership is up. Among adults 18-24, ratings are up 5 percent to a 2.9, and among adults 18-34, ratings are up 9 percent to a 3.5.

Total viewers are down to 9.7 million per telecast, compared to 10 million last year for comparable games. Traditionally, viewer interest builds as the tournament gets further along.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003561616

haubrija

03-22-07, 02:53 PM

Thanks, haubrija, and welcome to the thread -- feel free to post often.

By the way, have you been switched from Comcast to TWC...and if so, how has it gone?

fredfa,

I actually dropped cable shortly after the switchover occurred and went strictly OTA. I watch BSG on itunes. But I'm probably getting TWC this week or next for The Sopranos and Entourage. I'm big into HTPC and turned it into a HD DVR for the OTA switch and its actually been kind of liberating. I picked up a ton of network shows and have really dug this past TV season. I'll let you know how TWC goes when I get cable this next week.

fredfa

03-22-07, 03:09 PM

Good luck with TWC.

I'd probably try HTPC, but as long-time readers of this thread know, I am severely computer-challenged.

URFloorMatt

03-22-07, 03:19 PM

Boy FNL is really tanking in the ratings what a shame

I'm really interested to see how NBC treats the show in the off-season. It seems like this could get a significant boost in viewers if they release the Season 1 DVD set early and give people time to catch up.

I hope that's what they do, and then hype the second season premiere to no end. If people tune in, great, it worked. If not, it was still probably worth it to NBC given that it's an NBCU property.

dad1153

03-22-07, 03:32 PM

"FNL Season 1" has already been announced for a DVD Box Set relase in August (same month as "Heroes Season 1").

fredfa

03-22-07, 03:34 PM

Kevin Reilly addressed the marketing fiasco in the Mo Ryn piece I posted yesterday.

For a mass of stories and interviews about FNL, check out Mo's blog:

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

steverobertson

03-22-07, 03:53 PM

Kevin Reilly addressed the marketing fiasco in the Mo Ryn piece I posted yesterday.

For a mass of stories and interviews about FNL, check out Mo's blog:

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

Thanks Fred that was great

dad1153

03-22-07, 06:55 PM

It's a good and profitable time to be an entertainment lawyer in this town. :rolleyes:

The Business of TV
Starz Sues Disney Over Use of Content
By Jon Fitzgerald, TV Week - March 22, 2007

Starz Entertainment sued Walt Disney Co.'s Buena Vista Television unit, claiming the distributor sold movies online that were exclusively licensed to Starz.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in the Central District of California, claims Disney is prohibited from selling films over the Internet before and during Starz's first exclusive license periods under terms of contracts signed in 1993 and 1995, and extended in 2005.

The dispute reflects how Internet distribution of content is creating new disputes over licensing rights.

Disney is selling the films licensed to Starz through iTunes, Walmart.com and other services in a "blatant breach" of the licensing agreement under which Starz pays Disney more than $1 billion for exclusive rights, Starz said.

"Disney has been a great partner. We hope to continue our relationship. But our agreements clearly prohibit them from selling their movies by electronic download over the Internet while they are exclusive to Starz," Starz Entertainment Chief Executive Officer and Chairman Robert B. Clasen said in a statement Thursday. "If Disney is permitted to violate our contract in this manner, it will undermine the integrity of copyright in general which is a cornerstone of our industry."

Disney didn't immediately return a call seeking comment.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11761

dad1153

03-22-07, 07:05 PM

Busy day for NBC's online plans for the near-future.

The New Media
NBC rebooting Web plans, media player
By Andrew Wallenstein, The Hollywood Reporter - March 22, 2007

NBC is taking its "TV 360" approach for another spin.

The peacock will announce a broad set of bold changes to its Internet strategy at its annual program development presentation to advertisers Thursday.

NBC.com will become the first broadcast Web site to adopt social-networking tools similar to those on MySpace, including the ability to embed NBC video clips outside the site.

In addition, the network is fine-tuning its media player, NBC Rewind, and revealing new online content to accompany its summer series, including a continuation of its multiplatform expansion of the hit "Heroes" even after the freshman season ends in May.

During a week in which each of the broadcasters hosts events offering a sneak peek at its primetime pilot choices, NBC also is putting its broadband menu in the spotlight. The goal is establishing a point of distinction among advertisers, who are increasingly interested in spreading their dollars across media.

TV 360 was introduced around this time last year as the rallying cry for distributing video on new platforms. Now TV 360 will evolve to supplement the viewing with the full range of activities Web surfers enjoy, said Jeff Gaspin, president of NBC Universal Cable and Digital Content.

"The whole goal then was to put television online," Gaspin said. "Now we want to make television its own unique experience online."

Beginning as early as June, NBC.com will allow users to embed video on their own sites, create profile pages to which they can upload videos of their own, launch fan groups and receive viewing recommendation from like-minded users.

The social-networking tools will be available only via registration, a key selling point to advertisers looking for users' demographic and behavioral-targeting data.

In keeping with NBC.com's social orientation, even the video player will now incorporate a chat function that allows fellow viewers to communicate together as they watch. The player, which still will be known as NBC Rewind, also will be redesigned to exhibit video in a larger format and a new window that will stream text commentary pertaining to the video being viewed.

NBC also is expanding its "Heroes 360" experience, which was introduced midseason to expand the presence of the hit rookie series. After "Heroes" finishes its run in May, a graphic novel that plays off its story lines will continue, and a new video series that goes behind the scenes of the "Heroes" production will be introduced.

The expansion is being fueled by the healthy reception "Heroes 360" has gotten since coming to the Internet and mobile in late January. NBC is set to report that "Heroes 360" has generated 7 million unique visitors and 27 million video streams.

Other summer series that will get companion content includes new seasons of "America's Got Talent," "Last Comic Standing" and the untitled new series featuring Victoria "Posh" Beckham.

While NBC.com's social-networking tools have been in development for eight months, Gaspin noted that users might find these tools useful at a time when uncertainty looms over the status of programming online because of the tension between media companies and online hubs like Google's YouTube.

"Since we own our own content, and it's not always available where they want it, I think it's important than we give the kind of tools they want, especially if the content is going to be proprietary," Gaspin said.

But he stopped short of suggesting that NBC.com's capabilities had anything to do with persistent rumors that NBC Uni and fellow media conglomerates would band together to create an online alternative to YouTube.

"This has nothing to do with that," Gaspin said. "If it happens, that is a total separate thing."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i4b9ba971311ed450541fc51f3ff10987

dad1153

03-22-07, 07:12 PM

First, did anyone else know ABC's Six Degrees was returning to the schedule this Friday night? I had no idea, and I read this thread religiously. Second, is Perigard reviewing a TV show or Tom Brady's sex life in this review of the return of "Six Degrees" to the schedule? Not exactly Perigard's finest moment in print, IMHO.

Critic's Review
Moynahan’s hot but ‘Six Degrees’ is lukewarm entertainment
By Mark A. Perigard, Boston Herald staff writer March 22, 2007

Bridget Moynahan tries to dodge a nosy reporter and her cad of an ex.

It’s not real life. It just plays that way.

Mrs. Not Tom Brady [stats] is front and center in the return of “Six Degrees” (Friday at 9:01 p.m. on WCVB, Ch. 5). ABC yanked the drama about six strangers making unexpected connections months ago because viewers didn’t connect.

Moynahan, as Patriots Nation knows, is pregnant with Brady’s child. Brady seems happy to have moved on to model Giselle Bundchen.

The episode, which was filmed months ago, seems eerily prescient.

Moynahan’s high-powered advertising exec Whitney has broken up with her cheating boyfriend Roy (Jonathan Cake). But she’s forced to work with him on an ad campaign, and what follows is a series of sitcom encounters that climax when she accidentally shoots an arrow into his leg.

In his hospital room, she confesses, “I wanted so desperately to be part of this perfect couple and marry this perfect guy with the perfect job that I just couldn’t see - didn’t want to see - what was so obvious.”

Moynahan’s good, but I don’t see her keeping this on a highlight reel.

Elsewhere, the other players in this middling drama start to see the threads that tie them together.

Laura (Hope Davis) finds the photo Steven (Campbell Scott) snapped of her grieving publicly and steals the picture from an art gallery wall.

Carlos (Jay Hernandez) realizes Damian (Dorian Missick) holds the key to his client’s innocence. The murder case is disposed of so perfunctorily, it feels like an afterthought.

The mysterious Mae (Erika Christensen) gets three seconds on camera, just to remind us she’s part of the show.

It’s a likable cast. They just don’t have much to do. The episode could have just as easily functioned as a series finale, although ABC has at least two more episodes in the can. The show summaries make the phone book look like a Tom Clancy thriller.

“Six Degrees” and falling. For Moynahan, it probably can’t happen soon enough.

SIX DEGREES Series return Friday at 9:01 p.m. on WCVB (Ch. 5). GradeC-

http://theedge.bostonherald.com/tvNews/view.bg?articleid=189942

fredfa

03-22-07, 07:18 PM

First, did anyone else know ABC's Six Degrees was returning to the schedule this Friday night? I had no idea, and I read this thread religiously...

Yes, anyone who checks out the top of the thread has known. "Six Degrees" has been in the Upcoming TV show list for many weeks now.

Post # 4.

I do my best to keep it continually updated so people don't miss the return of their favorites.

A quick glance at the list every week or so should keep you up to date.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=4278280&&#post4278280

dad1153

03-22-07, 07:23 PM

You know what I mean Fred. Yes, the show is listed in the first posts but mentions from readers or news articles (actual word-of-mouth from people) in new posts on the thread have been close-to-zero. Can't be really surprised though, there's a reason ABC is dumping the show on Friday nights with little promotional push in the middle of March.

fredfa

03-22-07, 07:33 PM

fredfa

03-22-07, 07:41 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Calling it quits
Why people break up with their favorite TV shows
By Vicki Hyman Newark Star-Ledger

The distinct ways the drama "Lost" has done its viewers wrong could easily fill the most dismal of country-western jukeboxes.

Selections might include "You Blew Up My Hatch and Lit Up the Sky (But Why Oh Why Won't You Tell Me Why?)," "Black Smoke Monster Man (You Broke My Heart, and All the Bones in My Body)" and "The Ballad of Jack and Ben (For Once in Your Life, Ask a Relevant Follow-Up Question, We Beg You)."

So the last one's not that catchy. But the frustration is genuine for many of the show's once-ardent fans, who feel they've been made the fool by producers whose intentions were not true. It should be easy to tune out it's just a regularly-scheduled series of electromagnetic signals, after all -- but fans of "Lost" (and other shows that have lost their mojo) can't quite bring themselves to change the channel.

For Chris Rywalt, a Wood-Ridge artist who occasionally writes for the Web site www.teevee.org, "Lost" is like a serial cheater who keeps promising to reform. He's the sap who keeps taking it back. "It keeps on not answering any questions it raised, and coming up with new questions, and forgetting about what happened before," he says. "It never does what it's supposed to do, but I keep coming back. I'm really invested in it."

Christine Armstrong, a stay-at-home mom who lives in Cranford, says she, her husband and her daughter gave up entirely on "Lost" this season, creeped out by the endless torture of the plane crash survivors by the mysterious Others.

Well, almost entirely. She admits she tunes in briefly each week: "Somewhere in the back of my mind, it's like, 'Maybe it got better. Maybe I'm missing something.'" Five minutes is usually enough to convince her she's not ... until the next episode airs.

I have too much invested in this relationship to give it up now. Maybe you've changed. Maybe things will be different this time. Cue another country-western melodrama: I wish I knew how to quit you.

The language of relationships -- and the clichés of breakups are surprisingly apt for the intimacy we feel with television characters, or "media friends," as Joshua Meyrowitz, a University of New Hampshire communication professor, calls them.

"I think people keep watching their once-favorite characters for reasons similar to many people staying in relationships with their once-favorite member of the opposite sex," says Meyrowitz, the author of "No Sense of Place," about television's impact on our culture. "TV shows often become a surrogate family, and most people don't abandon their families, even in hard times."

Rywalt remembers struggling to give up the dramedy "Ed," which he initially loved. "By the last season, I didn't even look forward to it, but I felt like I needed to see it through to the end. I feel like I have to see what happens to the people, these characters, even though whatever drew me to the show in the first place was long gone."

Social psychologists have been taking note of this phenomenon from television's early days. In 1956, Donald Horton and R. Richard Wohl used the term "parasocial interaction" to describe how the mass media create the illusion of face-to-face interaction with viewers. Later research has shown that viewers valued their favorite television characters more than their living, breathing acquaintances, though not as much as close friends.

In a paper published last year in the Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, researchers Keren Eyal and Jonathan Cohen studied the effect of the end of the long-running sitcom "Friends" on nearly 300 undergraduates. They found that the more strongly viewers felt about the show, the more distressed they were after the finale, even up to a week later.

But Eyal, an assistant professor at the University of Arizona, says when shows go off the air in effect, breaking up with the viewer there is often time for the viewers to prepare themselves for the inevitable (or to organize save-the-show campaigns). And though the loss they feel is real, it isn't as severe as it is with real relationships. "When they end, it's not the end of the world," she says, "and that's a good thing." (Take note, "Sopranos" fans.)

For TV-gone-bad, it's a little more complicated. Sure, some cut the cord with the righteousness of the freshly reformed, and some will stand by their shows no matter the nonsensical plot twist of "24" or abrupt character mutation of "Gilmore Girls."

But it's not just the show we are mourning; it's the connection we have forged with other fans, at the watercooler and increasingly, on Internet message boards, blogs and flourishing TV-dissection Web sites. To turn the channel is to exile ourselves from that community, Meyrowitz says.

Armstrong says what she really misses about "Lost" is watching it with her family. "It was this thing we did together every week," she says. "It was so rare that we found something that we all agreed on."

The rules of break-ups do apply to television shows, says Laurie Helgoe, a self-help author and psychologist with a special interest in pop culture (she cites Bob Newhart as an inspiration for her career choice).

"If you really admit it's gone downhill, or it's not fun anymore, or he's not what I thought he was, then you have to face the grief," she says. "It can be easier to just hang on and pretend you have something that you used to have."

Honor what you had with "Desperate Housewives" or "24," Helgoe says. "What so often people do is say, 'Wasn't I dumb? I didn't see he was a jerk.' Rather say, 'That was good,' what was it about it that was good, and to continue to seek that in your life. Look for those qualities in another show."

Why we don't click anymore

• "You've changed": Gilmore Girls

The body snatchers have invaded Stars Hollow. The series creator left in a huff, and we pity the new showrunner, but has he ever watched the series before? The writers flip-flop weekly about their characters' essential natures.

• "It's not you, it's me": Desperate Housewives

The ladies of Wisteria Lane haven't changed, and that's the problem. How many times can Bree fall for the wrong guy? How many times can Lynette emasculate her husband? It's not their fault; we're just over it.

• "I don't like you in that way": Studio 60

This behind-the-scenes look at a "Saturday Night Live"-type sketch show looked great on paper: strong cast, high production values, a lofty pedigree in "West Wing" creator Aaron Sorkin. But there's simply no chemistry there.

• "The timing isn't right": The Office vs. Ugly Betty

That's code for: There's someone else. In this case, you have two stellar shows on at the same time (and you're just not willing to shell out for a TiVo). So who will get the flowers, and who will be sent to the showers?

• "I love you, but I just can't get over (fill in the blank)": Grey's Anatomy

Seriously, fill in the blank: George and Meredith sleeping together. Izzie cutting the LVAD wire. Meredith's near-death three-parter. Some things are just deal-breakers, and a return trip from the afterlife may be one of them.

• "I don't see a future here": Lost

We like a good time as much as the next person, and the enigmatic, action-packed "Lost" certainly provides it. But is this leading anywhere, or in the end, are we going to be left alone, with only unanswered questions to keep us company?

http://www.nj.com/tv/ledger/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-0/117445515884980.xml&coll=1

rebkell

03-22-07, 08:18 PM

fredfa

03-22-07, 08:20 PM

Love?

Hey, I went to see the games here in LA.

(Go Sun Devils!)

rebkell

03-22-07, 08:23 PM

Love?

Hey, I went to see the games here in LA.

(Go Sun Devils!)

You've been living on the edge with those Sun Devils haven't you :)

fredfa

03-22-07, 08:37 PM

They sure have looked lousy for about 65 of 80 minutes.

fredfa

03-22-07, 09:15 PM

Technology Notebook
Cablevision Loses Network DVR Case
By Steve Donohue MultiChannel News 3/22/2007

Cablevision Systems' hopes to deploy a network-based digital video recorder service were set back Thursday, after a federal court ruled in favor of major TV networks and Hollywood studios that had argued that the cable distributor’s network DVR would violate copyright laws.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled in favor of Twentieth Century Fox Film, Universal City Studios, Paramount Pictures, Disney Enterprises, CBS, ABC Inc., NBC studios and Turner Broadcasting’s Cartoon Network and CNN, which sued Cablevision in May.

“We are disappointed by the judge’s decision, and continue to believe that remote-storage DVRs are consistent with copyright law and offer compelling benefits for consumers -- including lower costs and broader availability of this popular technology,” Cablevision said in a prepared statement Thursday night.

The ruling is not only a setback for Cablevision, but for other major cable operators that were hoping to deploy their own network DVRs if Cablevision’s attempt proved successful.

While Comcast, Time Warner Cable and other major cable distributors didn’t follow suit with plans for their own network DVR, some operators cheered the strategy, which could allow cable operators to market DVR services widely and more efficiently than deploying individual DVRs in households.

“I think it’s a great idea and I really applaud the things that [Cablevision chief operating officer] Tom [Rutledge] and Cablevision and doing, including the DVR,” Comcast chief operating officer Steve Burke said March 30. “If it happens, which I predict it will, it’s a tremendous competitive advantage versus satellite …I’m sure the rest of the industry will follow.”

Cablevision first announced plans to deploy a network DVR in March. While the networks and studios sued the company two months later, Cablevision argued that its network DVR product, called “RS-DVR,” wouldn’t violate copyright laws since it would perform similar to DVRs installed in individual homes.

In their lawsuit, Fox, NBC and other plaintiffs argued that Cablevision’s network DVR concept was actually a video-on-demand service -- which requires license deals with programmers -- masked as a digital recorder.

“Cablevision's proposed service is an unauthorized video-on-demand service that would undermine the video-on-demand, download, mobile device and other novel and traditional services that plaintiffs and other copyright owners have developed and are actively licensing into the marketplace,” the plaintiffs complained in the suit.

In its ruling Thursday, the U.S. District Court ruled that Cablevision’s RS-DVR would violate copyright law, since it would rely on technology and hardware embedded in its network.

Some industry observers have said previously that they expected the network DVR case to eventually make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Cablevision said it may appeal the case.

“We are currently reviewing the opinion and assessing all of our options, including an appeal, while we continue to deploy conventional set-top box DVRs,” Cablevision said in a prepared statement.

In the mean time, Cablevision continues to market Scientific Atlanta digital video recorders to its iO: Interactive Optimum digital cable customers. To date, the company has installed DVRs in about 500,000 homes in its New York metropolitan area footprint.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6427148

fredfa

03-22-07, 10:49 PM

TV Notebook
Life without Tony
What will happen to HBO without 'Sopranos'?
By Steven Zeitchik Variety

Call June 11 the first day of the rest of HBO's life -- that is, of life after Tony.

On that day, the Monday morning after "The Sopranos" takes its final bow, the net will for the first time in eight years no longer be guaranteed the subscriber buzz, press accolades and general goodwill that came with the mob phenom.

Which leaves a big question: What next?

Among other things, the net's response is to create a range of smaller, sometimes less-expensive series.

If the odds aren't high that any will replicate the success of a tentpole show like "The Sopranos," execs hope that by gathering so many niches of the HBO viewership, the blitzkrieg of programming can collectively replace the David Chase drama.

"We're trying to be craftier about things we can do," says programming topper Carolyn Strauss. "That will give us the opportunity to target smaller groups with a broader range of shows."

Network chief Chris Albrecht thinks this diversity will have a specific appeal to subscribers. "I'm excited about the volume because you're going to get a lot for your money," he says.

The final season of "The Sopranos" -- which launches with a splashy and expensive preem at Radio City Music Hall this week -- figures to go out with a bang.

And the new run of comedy "Entourage," another pricey, male-oriented show into which "The Sopranos" will lead when it premieres April 8, is almost a shoo-in for more success.

But HBO finds itself in an unusual position: reveling in one of the triumphs in the history of television at the exact moment it frets over what to do when that triumph ends.

" 'The Sopranos' is a once-in-a-lifetime show," Strauss says, a hint of nostalgia in her voice. "To be able to capture the imagination of a very big audience these days is fairly elusive."

Where HBO once owned the summer and fall with shows like "Sex and the City," "Six Feet Under" and the denizens of Bada-Bing, these are chancier times for the pay net powerhouse. "We happen to be coming up on a time when not just 'The Sopranos' but 'Deadwood,' 'The Wire,' 'Rome' and lots of things are reaching their conclusions," Albrecht says.

This June, HBO will embark on a furiously active schedule, even putting a returning show, "Big Love," at 8 p.m. on Sundays, the first time it's had a firstrun series in that slot.

But where "The Sopranos" was designed as a big show in the tradition of mob dramas -- with elaborate promotion and considerable budgets -- the summer and seasons beyond look different.

The crammed slate is full of quirky genres and unexpected programs and formats.

Comedy will come in the cult variety ("Flight of the Conchords"). Half hours will be dramatic ("In Treatment"). Hourlongs will be funny ("12 Miles of Bad Road").

Relationship-drama "Tell Me You Love Me" is said to be so explicit it makes "Sex and the City" look like a Saturday morning cartoon.

Later on, Alan Ball will take on Southern vampires with "True Blood," based on a popular lit series. But fans of the nuanced drama of "Six Feet Under" beware: "It's a very different show than I've done before; it's much more popcorn," Ball says.

Ball has written nearly three episodes, and last week was casting for the pilot in New York; though it hasn't been greenlit, Albrecht says he "would be very surprised" if it didn't go to series.

Unquestionably the net's biggest bet for the summer is the David Milch surfer-drama "John from Cincinnati," on which the net has bestowed high honors by debuting it in the slot following "The Sopranos" finale June 10.

"John" -- about three generations of surfers, shady corporate sponsors and a bevy of colorful sidekicks, hit men, moteliers and junkies -- is a family drama, a subcultural exploration and a mystery all rolled into one. Milch and co-creator Kem Nunn nod to the surfer genre, but also playfully use red herrings and supernaturalism -- "Twin Peaks" by way of "Beverly Hills 90210."

The most enigmatic personality is the title character, whose real name, one quickly suspects, is not actually John and whose origins are likely nowhere near the state of Ohio.

Yet HBO and the creators are hoping fans will also recognize the Milchian trademarks of layered drama and unstinting complexity.

"I'd regret if 'John' was held hostage to any residual resentment there might be about 'Deadwood,' " Milch quips. But then he adds that both contain "themes that have preoccupied me for a long time."

The diversity of the HBO slate isn't strictly informed by creative concerns.

With so many homes equipped with cable and satellite, and system ops marketing the pay nets less, HBO knows it won't grow subs by the millions anymore.

So it is going wider -- and instead of seeking the water cooler, it is going after, perhaps, many smaller water fountains.

"Not everything has to be made on a big budget," Strauss says, noting that the net has even undertaken autopilots--low-cost pilots for which the net might make a bigger production commitment.

With the exception of "John," all the net's new summer series come with relatively lower budgets and less celeb-driven casts. It's a departure for a net whose series hours typically rival or even exceed the cost of network shows.

(The net still has some glossy productions, especially in longform -- e.g., period-drama "John Adams," currently in production in Virginia.)

It also hopes to go younger with "Conchords," based on the youthful comedy of Jemaine Clement and Bret McKenzie, as well and the teenagers (and man-children) at the heart of "John."

"The people that are coming into the category are younger people," Albrecht says. "They're making choices for the first time, and it can't just be their father's choices. So we need to make sure we're not their father's HBO."

An acid test could be "In Treatment." The taut, intimate dramas of the series, an adaptation of the Israeli show "B'Tipul," may earn it critical plaudits as a compelling and subtle work. In it, Gabriel Byrne's character does little but listen and ask questions of his patients. It's a show that cycles through a different patient in four successive episodes. (In the fifth episode of the cycle, Byrne visits his own shrink.) Then it repeats the cycle.

But the show's pleasures are understated and highly verbal. The fact that one has to wait four episodes to follow a character's next move will require dedication even from the patient HBO audience.

"There are few things I can think of that are more difficult than a high-quality, long-running successful series," Albrecht acknowledges.

But as the era of its biggest franchise ends, he's also confident the net can continue to resonate with viewers not despite but because of its experimentation.

"We take more chances than anyone on television. All of that makes us worth paying for."

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117961629&categoryid=14

rebkell

03-22-07, 11:11 PM

TV Notebook
Life without Tony
What will happen to HBO without 'Sopranos'?
By Steven Zeitchik Variety

"I'd regret if 'John' was held hostage to any residual resentment there might be about 'Deadwood,' " Milch quips. But then he adds that both contain "themes that have preoccupied me for a long time."

I'll admit I wasn't too happy about John taking away from Deadwood, right now John has no real appeal to me, HBO seemed a little trigger happy on dropping Deadwood, reminds me of Showtime dropping 'Dead Like Me' and Huff, I was caught completely off guard when Showtime dropped those two and the same when I found out Deadwood wasn't coming back, evidently they are going to at least let Deadwood have some closure, but I have to worry about all the time John will get and take away from a quality Deadwood ending.

rebkell

03-22-07, 11:24 PM

You need to give the women some love this weekend Fred, as far as I know, the rest of the games will all be broadcast in HD:

Saturday, all times Eastern
Greensboro
12:00 pm Bowling Green vs Arizona State(ESPN)
2:30(est) Rutgers vs Duke(ESPN)

Fresno
9:00 pm N.C. State vs Connecticut(ESPN)
11:30 pm(est) Florida St. vs LSU(ESPN)

Sunday
Dayton
12:00 pm Tennessee vs Marist(ESPN)
2:30 pm(est) Ole Miss vs Oklahoma(ESPN2)

Dallas
7:00 pm Georgia vs Purdue(ESPN2)
9:30 pm (est) George Washington vs North Carolina(ESPN2)

The best thing about the women's games(provided you're a women's basketball fan) is that from the sweet sixteen on, no games will overlap, you can watch every game completely. Unlike the men tonight, two games are going on pretty much simultaneously, there is a little time difference, but you could conceivably have both late games end around the same time.

fredfa

03-22-07, 11:52 PM

Don't the Tennessee and Arizona State games conflict on Saturday?

rebkell

03-22-07, 11:54 PM

Don't the Tennessee and Arizona State games conflict on Saturday?

No, Tennessee plays Sunday.

fredfa

03-23-07, 12:26 AM

ahh, good! (I'll have to learn to read those schedules some day.)

Al Shing

03-23-07, 12:51 AM

Mariners, FSN Northwest and Comcast reach high-def TV deal

Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle) - 8:58 AM PDT Thursday, March 22, 2007

All of the Seattle Mariners home games this season will be shown in high-definition television on Comcast's FSN Northwest HD channel.

Two seasons ago, Comcast broadcast some Mariners games in high definition but last season, fans weren't able to see the FSN games in HD.

Comcast customers need to have a HDTV television and rent a special HD digital cable set-top box from Comcast to watch the games in high definition.

"We are fortunate to work with progressive teams such as the Mariners and are proud to partner with them to meet the evolving needs of our fans," said Mark Shuken, FSN Northwest vice president and general manager, in a statement.

The FSN Northwest games will be aired on Comcast's channel 664.

fredfa

03-23-07, 01:33 AM

The Mariners are also reportedly close to a new long-term deal with FSN which will pay them $300 million over 10 years -- ending in 2021 -- the contract would start after the current one ends in 2011.
Glad to see HD is a part of the deal!

HDTVFanAtic

03-23-07, 04:48 AM

HDTVF: Agree with almost all you say.

But what PR school is iN Demand's Robert Jacobson from?

Again, if inDemand did nothing, it gives D*/MLB a free pass next week in DC to say they gave cable the opportunity to match.

By putting out something, the onus is back on D* and MLB in Washington.

You state he met with MLB and I suspect he did. He also states he's never seen D*'s contract with MLB - so if he was told that D* was delievering x% of subs which worked out to 15M subs, he can say he matched the same number. If he has not seen the D* contract, how can one argue he knows the fine print of how that number is arrived?

Then again, how can you match what you don't know the contract states?

I can only guess that's the PR school he's from - and again - this removed D* and MLBs ability to say we gave them the chance to match and they did nothing.

So from that standpoint, I personally believe its the best PR move inDemand could have made.

He took away D*/MLB's free pass.

CPanther95

03-23-07, 09:23 AM

This "offer" is only to save face with their cable subscribers. Pretending to be surprised it was rejected and stating that they felt they had matched D*'s offer is obviously insincere and won't hold up in Washington. Jacobson is on record stating that the MLB proposal is a "de facto exclusive" deal because of the requirement for cable to place MLBTV on their basic tier. They even offered to match the $100 million and guarantee 15 million subs prior to MLB announcing the 30 day period they were stalling the D* deal in order for INHD to respond - and it was shot down.

Offering the same deal again after already being rejected a month ago and knowing that it still did not meet the carriage requirements won't impress anyone involved except their own customers who may not have been following the situation closely. Maybe if he hadn't publically acknowledged which terms of MLB were impossible to meet, he could pretend to be surprised - but that ship has sailed.

fredfa

03-23-07, 11:27 AM

fredfa

03-23-07, 11:46 AM

TV Review
“Planet Earth,” as compelling as it gets
Discovery Channel documentary tells the story
By Andrew Lyons in MediaLifeMagazine.comMar 23, 2007

The risk for nature shows is that unless they find some way to create drama, the casual viewer isn’t likely to stick around. There will always be those nature junkies willing to spend an hour reveling in the mating habits of crickets, but most of us need a bit more.

This was not lost on the creators of “Planet Earth.” They knew they had to come up with something special after five years of filming on 200 locations with some 71 camera people and spending oodles of money.

“Planet Earth” is that something special.

The 11-part behemoth, which debuts on Sunday(* PM ET/PT) on the Discovery Channel and airs over the next five weeks, is first a work of incredible visuals, but what makes this miniseries so impressive is its storytelling. No matter how striking the scenery is in a documentary, it’s always the narrative that holds viewers, and in “Planet Earth” there are dozens of compelling narratives woven through.

Each episode of “Earth” is assigned a theme, like “Ice Worlds” or “Jungles.” The first, entitled “Pole to Pole,” is an introduction to all the parts that will follow, traveling from North to South and exploring everything from polar bears to African elephants.

In capturing the lives of bears, the filmmakers go well beyond “Wild Kingdom" fare, planting their multiple cameras on one bear from the first moment she pokes her head out of the snow after months of hibernation and then becoming her constant companion as she and her baby cubs take their first steps together on their trek to reach the sea ice before it breaks and melts. If they are too slow, too late, they will starve, and the filmmakers turn their saga into a compelling race against time.

We see a herd of elephants, mothers and their babies, push on against a sand storm to the safety of the tree line. We follow one pair as they battle the blinding winds, and after the storm we see they’ve made it to safety.

But another baby elephant has gotten lost. She's following her mother’s tracks but in the wrong direction, back into the desert. The helicopter-mounted camera pulls back to reveal the little calf walking slowly into a dry wasteland. No words are needed to convey nature’s cruelty.

The series repeats this pattern: introducing a world and its inhabitants, focusing on an individual or family, getting to know them, then filming them as they face threats both environmental and predatory.

Each species is captured in such fascinating detail and each creature’s journey is so specific that their stories never bore. The visuals, all shot in high definition, are so crisp, nearly tactile. One super-slo-mo shot of a great white shark jumping out of the ocean to snag an escaping seal is beyond stunning, as the shark floats, seeming almost to fly, in mid-air.

The stories themselves are magnets for empathy. The sight of penguins creating a huge circle to protect their eggs from the freezing Antarctic winter induces shivers. Anxiety mounts as a caribou calf tries to outrun a hungry wolf during a life-and-death chase.

The temptation for animal documentaries is to go for the sensational. Almost everything in “Planet Earth” is done with subtlety and taste. The camera never lingers on death. The music melds perfectly with the images. And Sigourney Weaver’s narration is informative and rarely intrusive.

There is but one real criticism. The filmmakers are a little too self-congratulatory. We are told over and over that this or that image has never been captured before or how a certain cameraman waited 45 days to get that one compelling shot. We are impressed, of course, by the wealth of the experiences, but reminding us of that wealth repeatedly is a bit gauche.

But if that’s the worst thing that can be said about “Planet Earth,” and it is, then it should do pretty well. It deserves to.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10987.asp

fredfa

03-23-07, 11:58 AM

TV Review
“Planet Earth”
Discover glorious 'Planet Earth'
By Jonathan Storm Philadelphia Inquirer TV Columnist

When I was a kid, my father bought a - gasp! - stereo. And the man who sold it to him threw in a free record, They Said It Couldn't Be Done by the Mighty Accordion Band. The cover pictured a gorilla playing an accordion, and read "FULL DIMENSIONAL STEREO" across the top.

My dad would play it for anybody who came by, fiddling with the balance to demonstrate how this new-fangled thingamabob worked, as the guests ooohed and aaahed. The stereo salesman probably made back 100 times the cost of the record.

The Discovery Channel's Planet Earth, premiering (8 PM ET/PT) Sunday, is for high-definition television what that disc was for stereo. With one difference: Where the Mighty Accordion Band actually sounded like it might be composed of gorillas, Planet Earth is a stupendous TV show. Watch it on the black-and-white in the bathroom, and it will still blow you away.

Oh, but my heart longed for HD, as my eyes watched demoiselle cranes flying 20,000 feet up, around the Himalayas, or African elephants swimming gleefully underwater in Botswana's Okavango Delta.

Never before has anyone seen a two-ton great white shark chomping down a seal in one bite in ultra-slow motion, the drops of ocean water frozen like diamonds decorating the dance of death.

The sound of my jaw dropping kept distracting me as I watched.

It took more than five years to film this 11-part series, using cutting-edge technology, and the glorious result renders all previous broad-brush nature shows visually obsolete.

You can't say the same about the sound, unfortunately. George Fenton's symphonic score, played by the BBC Orchestra, is great. (His similar music for Blue Planet won an Emmy in 2002, as did the show itself, for cinematography.) But Sigourney Weaver's narration can be intrusive and uninformative.

It gets pretty annoying to hear Weaver gushing time after time about all of Planet Earth's firsts, while you're trying to watch them on the screen.

Behind-the-scenes codas on each episode demonstrate the difficulties and introduce the crazies who overcame them, and that's enough. Natural history star David Attenborough narrated the British version. Too bad Discovery didn't import him along with the show.

Produced by BBC stalwart Alastair Fothergill and costing well over $20 million, Planet Earth demonstrates what can be done when a country is committed to a reasonable level of financing for public television. Despite a TV industry that is white-shark-sized next to the U.K.'s seal, the series would never have been made in the United States. PBS couldn't even buy it, a fact you'll rue when the ads start piling up at the end of each episode.

The series starts with three hours tonight at 8 and continues with two episodes each Sunday through April 22, which is Earth Day, when Discovery plans an 11-hour marathon. If you're lured away by The Sopranos (which returns April 8), you can catch up to Planet Earth then.

It's impossible to catalog all the wonders in episodes with such simple titles as "Mountains," "Deep Ocean" and "Ice Worlds," but here are three things never before filmed:

A snow leopard hunting in the forbidding mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan. As a sidelight, the film makes clear why it's so hard to find Osama bin Laden there, and, if it's any solace, that he's probably not having a real swell time.

A fabulous luminescent display, half a mile below the ocean surface, by the colorfully named Vampyroteuthis infernalis. That's "vampire squid from hell" to you.

A profusion of polar bears living large on Kong Karls Land, a little Norwegian island at the Arctic end of the Earth, nearly 3,000 miles north of Philadelphia. There was plenty of time to shoot the footage. After the sun rises April 20, it doesn't go down again until Aug. 23.

Where there's talk of ice and polar bears, there must also be talk of global warming, but Planet Earth's method is to show, not preach.

The quiet idea is that it's hard to worry about something if you don't know what's at stake. "If you show people how beautiful a place is, then hopefully they'll care about it," Huw Cordey, one of the producers, told TV critics at their winter meeting in California.

And it's difficult to overstate how beautiful our little island in the universe - the HD shots from space are magnificent - appears in this series.

The biggest helper in the technological cornucopia is a gadget called a Cineflex "heligimbal," which can stabilize extremely powerful lenses to get steady close-up pictures from afar and also pan to show a wider panorama.

Using it, photographers can get broad shots that demonstrate the uncanny pack strategy of African hunting dogs, the hugeness of the semiannual migration of 3 million caribou across the northern tundra, or a stunning, HD closeup of the summit of Mount Everest.

Of course, you need some crazy people to fly more than five miles up to shoot the picture. A trip like that can take your breath away.

Or simply by watching this, you can get the same effect sitting there on the living room couch.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/columnists/jonathan_storm/20070322_Jonathan_Storm___Discover_glorious_Planet_Earth.htm l

Weekly Cable Nielsen Notebook

choskyigragspa

03-23-07, 12:06 PM

TV Review
“Planet Earth,” as compelling as it gets
Discovery Channel documentary tells the story
By Andrew Lyons in MediaLifeMagazine.com
Thanks for these reviews Fred. I'm really looking forward to this series...especially after reading the two reviews.

fredfa

03-23-07, 12:35 PM

First, I have known and known of Tim Brosnan of MLB for years. I have never, ever known him to lie or even try to steer you to believing something that is not totally true.

So when Tim Brosnan says the iN Demand people knew precisely what the terms were that needed to be met after a lengthy meeting on March 9, I believe him.

He has a track record of honesty.

As for Jacobson, first he says the contract was designed not to be matched. Then he says he matched it. Then he says it was designed not to be matched.

Hello, what am I missing here? Just say cable doesn't choose to match it and move on.

But by prevaricating and dragging this farce out for so long, the Cox-Comcast-TWC folks may have brought the San Diego and Philadelphia RSNs back into play. And despite Comcast's buddy Arlen Specter, they really don't want that.

And here is the difference between those two RSNs and, say, MLB-EI or NFL Sunday Ticket: they are owned by operators and DBS has never had a chance to buy the programming -- or even match a price. Cox officials have said numerous times that satellite would "never" get access to San Diego's Channel 4.

And, of course, the Cox/Comcast/TWC trio insisted the FCC require NewsCorp to make all of its programming available to cable as a condition for gaining control of DirecTV. Not to mention its ingenious way of keeping InHD off of satellite: the old digital/analog two card monte game.

Personally I would prefer that MLB-EI be on every carrier. But I would also prefer the cable stepped up to the plate and said (as Comcast's Brian Roberts did with the latest NFL-ST package) that it is simply too rich for cable's blood.

Then move on.

Stop the lying and posturing. Because, John Kerry notwithstanding, the new Congress is probably not going to be as open to big business. And Cox and Comcast have some very big chips they really don't want to have to bet -- their RSNs. And Jacobson's comments may have put those RSN chips in play.

Again, if inDemand did nothing, it gives D*/MLB a free pass next week in DC to say they gave cable the opportunity to match.

By putting out something, the onus is back on D* and MLB in Washington.

You state he met with MLB and I suspect he did. He also states he's never seen D*'s contract with MLB - so if he was told that D* was delievering x% of subs which worked out to 15M subs, he can say he matched the same number. If he has not seen the D* contract, how can one argue he knows the fine print of how that number is arrived?

Then again, how can you match what you don't know the contract states?

I can only guess that's the PR school he's from - and again - this removed D* and MLBs ability to say we gave them the chance to match and they did nothing.

So from that standpoint, I personally believe its the best PR move inDemand could have made.

He took away D*/MLB's free pass.

fredfa

03-23-07, 12:42 PM

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

fredfa

03-23-07, 12:51 PM

Thanks for these reviews Fred. I'm really looking forward to this series...especially after reading the two reviews.

There are a lot of them I have saved up over the past few days. I'll be posting more of the more interesting ones between now and Sunday.

fredfa

03-23-07, 12:59 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
ABC's 'October Road' loses some gas
Second outing of drama averages a 4.9 in 18-49s
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 23, 2007

The second outing of “October Road,” ABC’s new drama in the post-“Grey’s Anatomy” slot, saw mixed results last night. On the one hand, the show was down 16 percent from last week’s strong debut and lost nearly half “Grey’s” lead-in.

On the other hand, it was still well ahead of where “Men in Trees” had been tracking in the same timeslot.

“Road” averaged a 4.9 in adults 18-49, according to Nielsen overnights, down from last week’s 5.8. It held on to 56 percent of the 8.7 averaged by “Grey’s” at 9 p.m., and it won its timeslot handily over NBC’s “Raines” and CBS’s NCAA basketball coverage.

And “Road” was also roughly a point ahead of “Men’s” recent average in the timeslot. The question for ABC is whether the show will continue to sink or whether it will level off. Last night’s episode once again dipped during its second half hour, from a 5.5 to a 4.3, which is never a good sign but isn’t unexpected when a show has a huge lead-in.

While “Men,” which was renewed earlier this week for a second season, lost more than half its lead-in, the show has grown slightly since it took over the 10 p.m. timeslot earlier this season. Meanwhile, “Six Degrees,” the show that began the year in the timeslot, fell almost every week.

ABC still has a few weeks to see how “Road” fares before “Men” returns. Next week it will face CBS’s “Shark” for the first time. That show, which usually wins the timeslot in total viewers, has been off the air for NCAA basketball.

Elsewhere last night, Fox’s “Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?” dipped to a series-low 3.6 at 8 p.m., down 20 percent from last week’s 4.5 and barely winning the timeslot.

And ABC’s “Ugly Betty” fell to a series-low 3.2 two days after being picked up for a second season.

ABC finished first last night among 18-49s with a 5.6 average rating and a 16 share. CBS was second at 3.9/11, Fox third at 2.8/8, NBC fourth at 2.5/7, Univision fifth at 1.6/5 and CW sixth at 1.5/4.

Numbers for CBS are approximate as it carried live game coverage. Overnights measure timeslot and not actual program data.

Fox led the 8 p.m. hour with a 3.6 for “Smarter,” followed closely by CBS with a 3.5 for coverage of the NCAA basketball tournament. ABC was third that hour with a 3.2 for “Ugly Betty,” NBC fourth with a 2.5 for an hour of “My Name is Earl” repeats and Univision and CW tied for fifth at 1.7, Univision for “La Fea Mas Bella” and CW for “Smallville.”

ABC led with an 8.7 rating for “Grey’s Anatomy” at 9 p.m., easily the night’s top-rated show. CBS was second again that hour with a 4.2 for basketball, NBC third with a 2.5 average for “Scrubs” (2.9) and “Andy Barker, P.I.” (2.2), and Fox fourth with a 2.0 for repeats of “Family Guy” and “American Dad.” Univision was fifth with a 1.6 for “Mundo de Fieras” and CW slipped to sixth with a 1.4 for “Supernatural.”

At 10 p.m. ABC led with a 4.9 for “October Road,” followed by CBS with a 3.9 for more basketball. NBC was third that hour with a 2.5 for “Raines,” down from a 2.9 for last week’s premiere, and Univision fourth with a 1.5 for “Aqui y Ahora.”

Among households, ABC led the night comfortably with a 10.0 average rating and 16 share. CBS was second at 6.9/11, Fox third at 4.7/8, NBC fourth at 4.6/8, CW fifth at 2.4/4 and Univision sixth at 2.2/4.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10998.asp

CPanther95

03-23-07, 01:09 PM

Here's a timeline of statements made that show INHD had no reasonable expectation that their offer met MLB's terms.

5 Days before deal was announced:
HDTV Sports
The MLB-DirecTV Extra Innings Deal
DirecTV Promises to Improve Baseball Package, but Others Wonder How
By Richard Sandomir The New York Times March 3, 2007

Robert Jacobsen, the president of In Demand, which is owned by Comcast, Time Warner, Cox and Advance/Newhouse, said in a statement that cable operators had offered M.L.B. a “nonexclusive deal” with “better overall terms than the DirecTV offer,” which would have permitted Extra Innings to be available to at least as many cable and satellite subscribers as it is now.

“It’s hard to believe that M.L.B. would have so little respect for its fans,” Jacobsen said. A cable industry executive who was not authorized to speak publicly said that In Demand had matched DirecTV’s financial offer and that it would make the Baseball Channel, which is to start in 2009, available to slightly more than the 15 million subscribers promised by DirecTV.

The announced deal:
MLB, DIRECTV Extend, Expand Multi-Year Agreement
Thursday March 8, 4:41 pm ET
Deal Includes Launch of The MLB Channel, Carriage Rights to MLB EXTRA INNINGS Package

Additionally, in keeping with MLB's desire to provide as much MLB programming to as many baseball fans as possible, MLB and DIRECTV have agreed to include a provision that allows MLB EXTRA INNINGS to be offered to other incumbents - In Demand and DISH Network - at consistent rates and carriage requirements with a deal to be concluded before the baseball season begins. The provision also requires the incumbents to agree to carriage rights to the MLB Channel proportionally equivalent to DIRECTV's commitment.

TV Sports
MLB, DIRECTV expand multi-year agreement
The Associated Press via ESPN.com

The president of one of those providers, iN Demand's Robert Jacobson, immediately said those terms were impossible for his company to agree to and called it a "de facto exclusive deal."

… Jacobson said the deal contained "conditions for carriage that MLB and DirecTV designed to be impossible for cable and DISH to meet." He said the agreement will "disenfranchise baseball fans in the 75 million multichannel households who do not subscribe to DirecTV" and "represents the height of disrespect and disregard for their loyal baseball fans."

…"The provision also requires the incumbents to agree to carriage rights to the MLB Channel proportionally equivalent to DirecTV's commitment," baseball said in a statement. "Should the incumbents decide not to match DirecTV's commitment, the MLB 'Extra Innings' package will be exclusive to DirecTV."

That appears to mean Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, Comcast iN Demand Holdings Corp and Cox Communications Holdings Inc. -- iN Demand's owners -- would have to agree to carry The Baseball Channel on the same tier as DirecTV and not a narrower one.
TV Sports
MLB pitches DirecTV deal
Satellite broadcaster circles bases
By John Dempsey Variety March 8, 2007

But Major League Baseball and DirecTV have designed the offer "to be impossible for cable and Dish to meet," said Robert Jacobson, prexy-CEO of In Demand, which negotiated with MLB on behalf of Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications, the second-, third- and fourth-biggest cable operators in the U.S.

Jacobson is referring to MLB's demand that cable and Dish agree to place a new 24/7 MLB Channel on the widest-circulated analog tier when the network opens for business in 2009.

Then we get the "offer" which is basically the exact same offer previously rejected, but somehow INHD concludes that it meets all of MLB's conditions:

March 21, 2007, 12:51 PM ET
MLB to look into iN Demand's 'Extra Innings' offerAssociated Press

NEW YORK --IN Demand said Wednesday it will offer to match the terms of DirecTV's $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball on behalf its owners, who are affiliates of the companies that own Time Warner, Comcast and Cox cable systems.

As part of the offer, iN Demand also said it would carry The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel on DirecTV.

"As the current home for 'Extra Innings' for more than 200,000 cable subscribers, we have extended ourselves to do our best to be able to continue to provide this package to baseball fans and our customers," iN Demand president Robert Jacobson said. "This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week."
:rolleyes:

dline

03-23-07, 01:31 PM

FCC To Ask: Do Real Estate Contracts Hinder Cable Competition?
Written and posted by dline

The FCC announced today that it is seeking comment on whether it should restrict cable, satellite, and similar video providers from entering exclusive contracts with the owners of multiple dwelling units (MDUs).

"The Notice tentatively concludes that the Commission has authority to regulate exclusive contracts for the provision of video services to MDUs or other real estate developments where it finds that such contracts may impede competition and impair deployment of those services," the commission said in a press release.

In a separate statement, citing previous FCC studies, Chairman Kevin Martin noted that cable rates have risen 93 percent from 1995 to 2005, while rates for other communications services have declined, and that satellite is not effective enough on its own to keep cable rates down -- the systems need land-line competitors.

Martin fears that real estate contracts may be scaring off those potential competitors.

"Potential competitors seeking to enter the video marketplace have expressed concerns that the use of exclusive contracts for 'multiple dwelling units' ... are barriers to entry, preventing consumers in MDUs from receiving the benefits of video competition," Martin said.

Added Commissioner Michael Copps: "There is no reason why Americans who happen to live in multiple dwelling units (MDUs) should have a narrower range of choices when it comes to video and broadband service than Americans who live in free-standing buildings. Consumers should expect competition wherever they live."

Source: www.fcc.gov

dline

03-23-07, 02:20 PM

In other FCC news, the commission announced an inquiry into how broadband providers are managing their Internet traffic.

There's been concern as of late that some broadband providers may enter contracts with favored business partners, allowing their sites to travel the network at faster speeds than potential competitors. The inquiry seeks information on whether this is happening, how consumers are affected, and whether FCC policies should distinguish between free sites and those which charge for content.

While Chairman Kevin Martin said the FCC is "not aware of any current blocking situations, the Commission remains vigilant in protecting consumers' access to content on the Internet," he said in a statement on the FCC web site. "At the same time, I believe that it is useful for the Commission, as the expert communications agency, to collect a record about the current practices in the broadband marketplace."

Commissioner Michael Copps, a vocal critic of big media companies' power, was much more blunt in his statement.

"We live in a world where a very few concentrated broadband providers exercise powerful and not always consumer-friendly control over the pipes that come into our homes and businesses," he wrote, noting that the vast majority of Americans have only the telephone company and the cable company to choose from, at most.

"...The concentrated providers out there increasingly have the ability - and some think the business incentive - to build networks with traffic management policies that could restrict how we use the Internet," he added.

But Commissioner Deborah Tate said in her statement that she was "skeptical of the present need to impose new rules, or even principles," such as the much-talked-about "net neutrality."

"In many ways, I think this issue has focused too much on the need to define a cure before there has been a disease, or even a high fever," she wrote.

Still, Tate said she supports the inquiry as a "measured step."

Source: www.fcc.gov

fredfa

03-23-07, 02:23 PM

The FCC certainly has a full plate these days.

humdinger70

03-23-07, 02:42 PM

So, all in all, the situation with InDemand and Cox is simple:

We, in San Diego, get to see Padres games, many in HD. The rest of you do not. BWAHAHAHAHA!! :D :D

FYI, it's not just exclusively Cox in San Diego. (That WOULD be a problem). People on San Diego's Time-Warner system (including the newly acquired Adelphia properties) also get that privilege.

steverobertson

03-23-07, 02:48 PM

The FCC certainly has a full plate these days.

It sure looks that way watch your wallet LOL

fredfa

03-23-07, 03:13 PM

fredfa

03-23-07, 05:33 PM

TV Q&A
Ask Matt (from the Ask Matt column at TVGuide.com)
Matt answers your questions about “Rome", "Veronica Mars", "Raines" and "October Road"
By Matt Roush: TVGuide.com TV Critic Friday, March 23, 2007

Question: Now that Rome is winding up its run on HBO, can we give some love to the show? I thought this second season was really great. What a tremendous job by all the cast (James Purefoy as Mark Antony, Kevin McKidd as Lucius Vorenus, Ray Stevenson as Titus Pullo, Polly Walker as Atia). I really enjoyed the intrigues of young Octavian and how everyone underappreciated his ruthlessness. They brought to life a vision of the early Romans that I found original and repelling in its viciousness and hedonism. I wish they had a longer run, but at least they are ending on a high note.— Chris C.

Matt Roush: I really enjoyed this Sunday's finale, which, as usual, plays fast and loose with history but delivers some rousing, raunchy entertainment and a fitting wrap to the story we all care about: what happens with Vorenus and Pullo. I was actually reminded of Lonesome Dove as this final chapter played out, and that's high praise. Overall, I think the show veered a little too heavily into Dynasty camp for its own good. When I screened the first six episodes of Showtime's upcoming The Tudors, about the young Henry VIII (closer in tone to an R-rated Masterpiece Theatre), I found myself preferring that one. But I wonder if it will have a longer run. These historical epics, which really are the last vestiges of the classic TV miniseries, are as risky as they are costly.

Which brings up this related question from Ryan R.: "With HBO seemingly losing all of its best programs, what are the chances of Rome being salvaged? Was it ever planned to go beyond a second season in the first place? With The Sopranos wrapping soon, HBO should be begging for more of this great show."

Fact of the matter: HBO would go begging, period, if it kept this show in production. My understanding is that keeping the international coproduction partnerships intact for the second season was difficult, and without it, not even a deep-pocketed organization like HBO could keep this monster financially afloat. If Rome had made a bigger splash in its first season, I imagine the ambitions for the series might have been different. As it is, the storytelling often felt rushed to get us through the whole Antony/Cleopatra/Octavian situation. But when the second season was greenlighted, it was already determined that there wouldn't be any more. Nothing has happened to change that.

Question: What's your opinion of the CW's stay of execution that allowed Rob Thomas to pitch a completely revamped Veronica Mars? I've never been more than a casual viewer of Veronica Mars, so I don't have an emotional stake in the show's fate, but looking at it with cold, hard logic I have to wonder if this isn't a bad idea. VM fans bought into a teenage noir detective series. Surely transforming the series into an adult procedural could mean the loss of some percentage of the existing fan base. Would it be reasonable to expect an influx of new viewers when they would likely see it as yet another season of a show they already don't watch? Would it perhaps be better to give a series a sendoff as itself rather than "save" it (probably only temporarily) by turning it into something else?— Lisa

Matt Roush: Much as I'd like to see Veronica do the Clarice Starling thing, this all sounds to me like a last-ditch move to keep a faded franchise alive. I seriously doubt that any revamping will grow the show's audience significantly, and depending on how it plays out (I'm confident that Rob Thomas could pull it off), there is a slight chance that some fans of the old Veronica Mars would bail — although that's a pretty loyal fan base, if my mail is any indication. I'm with you that the best bet right now is to find a way to leave current fans satisfied at the end of this season, regardless of what the CW decides to do (or not do) next.

Question: I'm curious to see what your opinion is of Top Design now that the season is well under way. As a huge Project Runway and Top Chef fan, I really wanted to like this series, but I think it's pretty bad. The designers are boring, the judges are boring, the hosts are boring, the challenges are boring. I don't see anyone with the charisma of Tim Gunn or Michael Kors, and I can't remember who the contestants are an hour after the show ends. Plus the judging at times has been incomprehensible. You can't tell what the judges are looking for or why one design is "in" and another "out." Plus, "See you later, decorator" has to rank as the lamest exit line, worse than Martha's goodbye letter on her version of The Apprentice. I can't even say that I'm learning something or getting ideas of my own because they show so little of the design process. How much more fun would it have been if instead of doing the "fake" rooms for those students, the show had gone into a college dorm and had each designer redecorate and organize a student's room? My disappointment with this show was made even stronger when I caught the new HGTV show from the winner of Design Star. I couldn't help but remember how much I liked that show, the judges, the host and the contestants. Now we have Shear Genius, and I'm wondering if Bravo has just run out of luck with their reality shows and should have stopped while they were ahead with Top Chef.— Olivia

Matt Roush: By nature, I still like this sort of skill-based reality-competition show, though I'm skeptical about Shear Genius (about hairdressing), which I haven't seen yet. Which is why I wrote that Top Design review as more of a "trend" review, since I had only the pilot to judge from. Basically, I agree with you. The more I've watched, the less engaged I have become. A lot of it has to do with casting, and this may be the least appealing, least interesting group of contestants we've seen yet in this genre. I wouldn't let most of these designers (except maybe Goil) get near a litter box let alone my home. None of them has the pure charisma of HGTV's David Bromstad, who won the far superior Design Star show. Plus, I'm over Top Design's group-challenge thing, which has dominated too many episodes. That probably has kept many of the players from coming into their own, and the nature of the challenges were also often vague. For instance, the Bacardi party seemed more about rewarding party planning (hiring a bouncer) than about innovative design of a party space. The judging? Largely incoherent. My advice: Stick to HGTV until Top Design is over, and I'll let you know how Shear Genius is once I get around to screening it.

Question: I've enjoyed Six Degrees and I'm glad, but very surprised, that it's coming back. Usually when a show is put on "hiatus," it never returns. Why did ABC decide to bring it back? Is there any chance it will be renewed, or is the network just burning off episodes?— Andrew

Matt Roush: My guess, especially given the Friday time slot, is that this is little more than a burn-off. But I was also surprised to see it back on the schedule before the season was over. Maybe ABC sees something in this that I don't, or maybe the network feels the show can be relaunched and given a fresh start this way. That's how I approached the screener of tonight's first new episode. I'd bailed after two or three in the fall, and after reading recaps to figure out what had happened with Erika Christensen's character (by far my least favorite story line in the pilot), because she only appears for a few seconds this week, it took me no time to figure out where it was going — in part because it's all so contrived. The show still seems smugly self-important, like these whiny New Yorkers are the center of the universe (I live here, and even I know better). But I also found this episode to have a far lighter touch than what I'd remembered in the fall. That's a good sign. And with actors like Hope Davis and Campbell Scott, it's already operating on a higher level than duds like What About Brian and especially the odious October Road (which so does not deserve that Grey's Anatomy lead-in during these precious weeks when CBS has ditched its regular hits for NCAA basketball). Still, the chances that Six Degrees will actually get renewed? Probably pretty slim.

Question: I have heard a lot of people talking about how boring and below-par this season of Battlestar Galactica has been, especially the recent episodes. I myself have really enjoyed this season. The only episode where I found myself yawning in boredom was the Tyrol-Callie lock-in episode. All of the episodes have been building to a giant season finale that I am on the edge of my seat waiting to see. I find fans' lack of interest puzzling. I haven't seen a downshift in quality at all. I compare this to Veronica Mars: I lived and breathed VM during the first year. It was amazing! But this year I had to force myself to watch it at times. I think it has gotten bogged down with Lo-Ve, of whom I used to be a fan. I miss the big season-long arc like they had in the first season, though the same format in the second season didn't work so well. Hopefully it will get renewed.— Christen

Matt Roush: I've heard there has been some bitching and moaning about the last half of the Battlestar season, but thankfully, I've been mostly ignoring it. A few of the self-contained "bottle" episodes were only so-so; I found the one about the dirty doctor pretty forgettable, ditto the airlock crisis (and Adama's marriage flashbacks), which felt like something out of a Star Trek series. But the episode with the labor strike was first-rate Galactica, with strong political and social observations about the hard life aboard this fleet. These last episodes — beginning with the death of Starbuck and throughout Baltar's trial — have been terrific, and Sunday's finale is an absolute jaw-dropper. I can take an off episode here and there on any series as long as it ultimately delivers, and to me, Battlestar does. To your other point: I don't disagree that Veronica Mars has diminished by the season. If it gets renewed, I'll keep watching. But if it doesn't, I'll understand.

Question: Sometimes when the creators of a hit show begin to focus their attention on another project, their first project suffers. Do you think this might be what is happening at 24 this season, while Joel Surnow and Manny Coto are currently trying to get their comedy show for Fox News up and running? (Let's not even get into why anyone would choose the folks behind 24 — which despite its many other merits is one of the most humorless shows in TV history — to do comedy.) Something is terribly wrong at 24, and while they've pulled out of creative nosedives before, it's looking less and less likely this season. For instance, I totally agreed with your recent Dispatch about how much Jean Smart's appearance added to 24. Suddenly I felt like the show had a pulse for the first time since the conclusion of the first four hours of this season, and here were two characters, Martha and Aaron, I actually care about. You'd think that the show's creative team would realize what they have and run with it. But then this week's episode threw all that goodwill out the window and it even felt like it was rubbing loyal fans' faces in how sloppy and lazy the show has become this year. The Martha, Aaron and Charles Logan story was completely ignored, leaving last week's cliff-hanger totally unaddressed. Instead we got the 8,000th CTU-mole story. That's not just sloppy, it almost feels aggressively bad. Worse yet, we get more scenes of the interminable "Is Morris drinking?" story line. And it feels like we're getting less and less Kiefer Sutherland with every episode. Do you think part of the problem might be that some of the forces behind the show are distracted with other projects this year? Or do you have any other theories? I've tried to be patient, but I'm increasingly at a loss as to why I should stick with this season.— Don C.

Matt Roush: I'm not sure the producers' extracurricular projects, however ill-advised, are to blame here. 24 is just having an off season. No conspiracy theories, that's just the way it goes. It started great but peaked early and hasn't yet found its footing again. When this week's episode began and there wasn't even a recap mention of the Logans, I muttered aloud, "Guess that story's over." What a drag. And yes, what a slap in the face. It's not like this is The Sopranos or something, where each episode can be its own disconnected mini-feature. As for the humor thing: I groaned when Chloe crossed the room and kissed Morris to check his breath, causing Morris to do one of those "only at CTU" shakes of the head. How lame. I miss Edgar! Even the crash-landing of the drone wasn't as exciting as I wanted it to be. I am, however, spooked by Powers Boothe doing his best Dr. Strangelove impersonation of Dick Cheney. Given the producers' stab at Fox News "comedy," I keep wondering if this was meant to be funny.

Question: Maybe it hasn't occurred to any of those who complain about the lack of complex portrayals of people of faith on TV that every time TV tries to offer some kind of multilayered approach — like, for example, Nothing Sacred or The Book of Daniel — those shows are loudly condemned by extremist religious groups before they even air. I doubt this encourages the networks to spend time and money developing such shows.— Melina

Matt Roush: Good point, and too true. And they wonder why TV so often depicts religious characters as mad zealots.

Jill made a similar point: "I was interested by the letter you received recently decrying the lack of churchgoing people on American TV. I recently rented The Book of Daniel, and I was struck by how positive this series was toward religion. I understand that the gay son would be too much for many people to accept (not me, but other people). However, this show depicted a family whose faith was very strong. The parents had a solid and realistic marriage, and they supported their children. So many people took issue with all of the dysfunction in this family, and indeed, everyone had "demons" to wrestle with (no pun intended). But don't you think that would make religious people feel better? We all have problems, and we all do things we regret and feel ashamed about, but Jesus in this show was always loving and forgiving (and not in a sappy way, either). Do you think this show would have been more successful if the parents (Daniel and Judith) had not been accepting of Peter, their gay son? Maybe if the show had depicted their journey from prejudice to acceptance, rather than starting out at acceptance, it would have been more 'palatable.'"

I appreciate these comments, because I've always looked on The Book of Daniel as a lost opportunity. It pushed a lot of buttons, and that's how it was designed. And if memory serves, wasn't Peter's sexuality being kept a secret from Daniel's father, among other family members? The show was a risk from the start, but I agree that its overall depiction of religion and of the Jesus character's benign affection for these screwed-up souls was very affirmative. The show never was going to be to everyone's taste, but the way this culture tends to condemn first and watch later (if ever) is obviously frustrating to those who would like at least to try to create something different.

Question: Am I the only person on the planet who enjoys Raines? I think it's interesting and funny, and I have always liked Jeff Goldblum. The previews for this week's show, where the victim doesn't speak English and does the macarena, looks hysterical. I saw in your review that you gave it a 6. Have you seen more episodes? Do you still think it's worth watching?— Marlene W.

Matt Roush: So far, not unlike my ambivalent 6 rating, the reaction in my mail has been mostly mixed. Some were charmed by it. Some thought it was just strange, off-putting, slow or obvious. All of which seems fair. Most are curious to see if it can survive the move to Fridays. (Doubtful.) I watched the first two episodes, all that was sent in advance, before weighing in. I stick to my description that the show is "aggressively quirky," offbeat enough to merit a look but maybe not compelling enough to keep the masses coming back. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised and see it become a Medium-size hit, but that's probably a long shot.

Question: I don't recall a mention of The Dresden Files in your column since it debuted, and I was wondering if your opinion has changed since your review of the show, where you called it "mildly entertaining" and "an agreeably escapist hour." I hadn't thought about the Rockford Files similarity until I reread your review. Dresden does seem to look worse at the end of each episode for trying to do the right thing. The show reminds me of some of the old detective stories, especially The Adventures of Harry Nile (yet another Harry), that I enjoyed listening to on the radio. The Feb. 25 "Bad Blood" added even more depth to the lead character, who is self-loathing but still struggles to come to terms with his abilities and how to use them. With a wizard who has a hockey stick for a staff and a drumstick for a wand, how can you go wrong? Thanks for your hard work. While I may not always agree with you, I do always read and appreciate your views.— Ron R.

Matt Roush: I've caught it once or twice since writing the review (for which I had two or three episodes to screen in advance), and I still regard it as solid escapism. Not a must, not a bust. It's one of those shows I think of as "stackables," as in: They stack up on my DVR, and when the time comes to choose what to play back, it's rarely my first option. Which isn't to say the show isn't engaging, it just doesn't merit or reward my urgent attention. It's one of the "goods," if not exactly one of the greats. That honor would go to Battlestar Galactica.

Question: I take offense to your rating of 0 for October Road in your recent Roush Review. Personally, I think it's a little harsh of you to rate the show a "0" because it's replacing Men in Trees for a short period of time. I know you gave other reasons, but I'm not buying what you're selling, since you show blatant favoritism toward Men in Trees. I watched the premiere of October Road, and I thought it was a refreshing change of pace for a Thursday-night drama. I'm sure you would say (and probably have said) the same of Men in Trees, but I tried watching that show and I couldn't make it to Episode 3. It was just too ridiculous for me. And before you go judging me for my choices in TV viewing, I do watch shows that you rave about like Friday Night Lights, The Wire and Grey's Anatomy (all on your top-10 list). Are you going to give October Road another chance?— Reida

Matt Roush: First off, I should probably take offense at the accusation that I gave October Road a 0 rating merely because it was bumping Men in Trees for a couple of weeks. I've lived through many mid-seasons with many mid-season shows getting tryouts in other shows' time slots, and even though I do prefer Trees (an imperfect but very charming show, which did get better after the first month — and you slam me for not giving a show "another chance"?), I don't know how that makes it "blatant favoritism." I know Men in Trees will eventually return, and now that it has been picked up for next season (yay!), I see no special reason to fret. The only reason I gave Road a 0 is because my editors wouldn't let me give it a -10. I have rarely seen a phonier show with a more clichéd setup and less appealing characters (poor Laura Prepon aside) than this piece of self-satisfied, overwritten corn. The dialogue is like overboiled, overarticulate leftovers from bad Dawson's Creek episodes. I am not lying when I say that I was in actual migraine pain midway through the pilot, shouting and groaning at the screen after most of these lines of self-consciously precious dialogue. Several days passed before I could force myself to watch the second episode. Not as flagrantly awful as the pilot, but close. One of the few characters I like, the female bartender, tells a character, "The past is like a pimple on prom night," at which point I started hating her, too. October Road is toxic, and I won't apologize for saying so. But I also won't judge anyone who chooses to kick back with it as their new romantic pastime. To each his/her own. Although I can't help resenting the fact that it's getting a free ride for its first two weeks on the back of original Grey's Anatomy episodes and isn't being forced to go up against CBS' top-rated lineup the way Men in Trees has had to do. (But there I go again with my blatant favoritism.) If the numbers hold up, I may grit my teeth and look at the third and fourth episodes ABC sent, just so I'm covered. But there is a limit to how much misery I'm willing to endure for this job.

Here's another observation on October Road from Nikki: "I realize that October Road has a lot of issues, but I have to say the music totally drove me crazy. Maybe I'm out of my mind, but if the central decade of the characters' lives was the '90s, why was so much of the music from the '70s and '80s? I mean, he leaves town, the big pivotal moment, to a Boston song (I can't remember which one exactly). The big air-band scene is to "The Boys Are Back in Town." The main character had a picture of Kurt Cobain, so why weren't they singing Nirvana? I'm a child of the '80s myself, so I actually liked the music, but I felt it really threw off the tone of the show. It's not a huge thing, but it really bothered me for some strange reason! Did you notice it at all?"

My only problem with the music is that it didn't entirely drown out the dialogue. From where I sit, October Road is a soundtrack (perhaps a poorly chosen one at that) in search of a show.

And this, finally, from MSS: "Isn't the 'new show' October Road disturbingly similar to the one that Eddie Cahill was in several years ago? It was called 'Glory Something-or-other.' Maybe that one had a somewhat mysterious twist, but basically the same driving plot: An author had written a book that described many of his friends, and they were offended. He comes back and tries to fit in, but he's rebuffed by many of the people who felt that he betrayed them. Am I wrong? Because if I'm right, then it's not exactly like October Road is the fresh new show that they're making it out to be. And it's supposed to be based on the creator's real life. So was he behind the Eddie Cahill show also, or is all this just a 'coincidence'?"

Coincidence, I imagine. Because who would purposely choose to revisit a dud like Glory Days, which lasted all of two months on the WB in 2002 and is best remembered as the show that gave us a first look at Emily VanCamp? I would appreciate it if October Road took even more pointers from Glory Days, like maybe turning into a mystery series and killing off as many characters as possible.

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

fredfa

03-23-07, 07:53 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Second chances?
Turning the spotlight on "Friday Night Lights”
By Melanie McFarland Seattle Post-Intelligencer TV Critic

Let's not read too much in the symbolism of ABC and Fox announcing additional seasons of struggling series on the first day of spring.

It's a nice coincidence. But it's hard to get too comfortable at hearing those announcements when "Friday Night Lights" still hasn't gotten a pick-up.

People like me are part of the problem. After singing its praises back in the fall, calling it and "The Nine" the best new dramas of the season, I failed to go back to it. Allowed episodes to stack up on the old DVR, promising to get to a marathon at some point.

I'm confessing this to let you know that I understand why viewers have been so reluctant to give it a chance. Because as much as I loved this series when it came on --and still stand by that assertion that it is 2006-2007's best and most underrated new show - the truth is that when "Friday Night Lights" came on each week, I would hesitate. I'd say to myself, "Do I really want to see anything about football right now?" And the answer was invariably. "Mmmm....no."

A lot of us share that attitude, which is why this show is struggling. Ratings are oxygen to TV shows, and "Friday Night Lights" is suffocating.

Here we are in the dregs of March, just three episodes away from its early season finale, April 11. It's late in the game, but not too late.

You can see what you've been missing on Wednesdays at P PM ET/PT on NBC, or you can catch weekend reruns on Bravo. This week's episode repeats at 9 PM ET Friday, followed by back-to-back reruns of the most recent three between 11 AM ET and 2 PM ET on Saturday. This continues through April 13.

Of course, you may still be wondering why you should watch "Friday Night Lights," and if it's possible to understand what's going on four episodes to the end of its first (and hopefully not only) season.

To answer the second question first, the only prerequisite to knowing what's going on in "FNL" is one of these factors.

--You are, or at some point have been, a teenager.

--You are an adult, married or single.

--You have a heart that's been shattered a few times.

--You value the finest content television has to offer.

Notice that loving football is not on that list. I won't mislead you -- the game is a key part of "Friday Night Lights" because Panther football is the lifeblood of Dillon, Texas. But the series doesn't overload the story with the sport. Besides, even if you can't stand football, the actors and writers (primarily head writer and executive producer Jason Katims) earn those games down the last play. You'll be cheering.

I'll also grant you that almost every actor on "Friday Night Lights" is unrealistically gorgeous. No getting past that. Looks don't hinder their ability to expose the flaws and humanity in their characters. The young men and women in this series live in the center of adolescent difficulties instead of playing them for melodrama.

But if you scoff at their appearance, that's understandable. Jaded viewers can easily run down the list of every cliche: Impossibly beautiful cheerleader with quarterback fiance and his running back pals, one a star, another a loser. There's the bad girl, best friend to the coach's daughter and the second string QB with a nerdy best friend.

Except the Panthers' star quarterback, Jason Street (Scott Porter) took a hit in an early game that left him paralyzed from the waist down. The cheerleader Lyla Garrity (Minka Kelly) cheated on him with his best friend Tim Riggins (Taylor Kitsch) --not to serve the plot, but to feel something, anything. Perhaps to repeat parental history. Lyla's dad, the town's most prominent businessman, is a cheater too. Her parents are breaking up.

Smash, the star running back (Gaius Charles), spouts an arrogance that shields him against acts of racism he faces, and helps him deal with his mentally ill girlfriend. Riggins has nobody to believe in him, except the single mother next door. And that relationship is fraught with trust issues and anger, not to mention the impropriety of a mid-30s woman obviously drawn to a high school-aged boy.

Matt Saracen (Zach Gilford), the inexperienced back-up QB, is off the bench and learning to trust himself. So is his best friend Landry (Jesse Plemons), and so is Tyra the teen vixen (Adrianne Palicki), all written off as nobodies in this dusty town but slowly, surely, finding their place in the world.

As "Friday Night Lights" draws to its conclusion, that idea of settling into a new phase of life takes center field. Wednesday's episode, titled "Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes," marked the beginning of a new direction for a number of characters, especially Jason Street. For most of the season he has lurked at the homefield's borders in his wheelchair, constantly reminding his team of the cost of putting so much faith and importance in one game. But ever so gingerly, Jason is coming to terms with his disability and starting to move on. This new path doesn't result in a happy ending for everyone.

For Tyra, the girl used getting by on her looks, reforming her image by developing her intellect is tougher than she could possibly imagine. And that's before an unexpected shock to the system threatens to her derail her progress.

Leading "FNL's" ensemble, as always, are stupendous performances by Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton as Coach Eric Taylor and his wife Tami.

Theirs is the most realistic, honest marriage on television. Tami and Eric are deeply loving, but they fight and fuss, giving as good as each one gets. At the end of the day, they're a stronger team than the Panthers. And while there is no truer or more moving a portrayal of motherhood than Britton's, Chandler's coach is a terrific father figure to the team and his daughter, as we see in tonight's episode.

There's so much chatter about how trashy TV is these days, along with the tendency to reward the usual suspects like David E. Kelley and Aaron Sorkin with unyielding faith. Meanwhile, here is an series that trumps both shows these auteur producers coughed up this year in terms of content and consistency.

Not a single element in "Friday Night Lights" is anything less than a hard-won effort, from the scratchy, documentary realism of the cinematography to honest dialogue delivered in stumbles and spurts, the way conversations happen in real life. And it could be that most people will discover this masterpiece in its afterlife on DVD, where the show could join the ranks of other superior series that ended too soon such as "Freaks and Geeks" and "My So-Called Life" (which, like this series, was written in part by Katims).

But let's reward great television while it's on for a change. Start watching and catching up with the story on Bravo. And let's all hope these "Lights" come back on in the fall.

--By the way, great pal and critic extraordinaire Maureen Ryan told me the directors encourage the players to go off scripts sometimes, changing scenes to make the dialogue seem more real. Her exhaustive report from a recent set visit in Austin, a must-read for all "FNL" fans, is available by clicking here:

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/entertainment_tv/friday_night_lights/index.html

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/print.asp?entryID=113011

dad1153

03-23-07, 09:17 PM

rebkell

03-23-07, 09:48 PM

The more I read the universal praise of Friday Night Lights the least appealing it sounds and less inclined to watch it I am. Call me an elitist snob but I just have zero interest in this show after watching it twice. Studio 60 on the other hand... :(

No no dad, you've got it all wrong(I couldn't get into FNL either and I gave it 8 or 9 episodes before giving it up). We're just not sophisticated enough to appreciate the show. :D

fredfa

03-23-07, 10:04 PM

No offense, dad, but given your own oft-repeated favorite shows on GSN, and despite your apparent adoration of Mr. Sorkin's turkey, it is hard to imagine you as an elitist snob.

Just as anyone who takes a look at my favorite shows would find it hard to describe me as elitist.

Your failing to enjoy "FNL" is truly your loss. But at least you gave it a shot. Those who haven't even given it a chance are the real losers.

HDTVFanAtic

03-23-07, 11:55 PM

fredfa

03-24-07, 12:08 AM

Obviously, as you noted, we are seeing this from different angles, HDTVF.

We'll see how it all shakes out.

fredfa

03-24-07, 12:12 AM

Sunday's NCAA Basketball Tournament schedule has been added at the top of the second post of this thread.

fredfa

03-24-07, 01:53 AM

TV Notebook
Discovery's New View of Nature”
By Glen Dickson Broadcasting & Cable,

One of the most ambitious—and expensive—high-definition series on TV will make its debut on the Discovery Channel this weekend.

The 11-episode series, Planet Earth, which offers a new, detailed look at the natural world, airs Sunday at 8 p.m. ET (and then repeated at 8 p.m PT) on both Discovery HD Theater in 1080-line-interlace (1080i) HD and the standard-definition Discovery Channel flagship network. After the initial episode, “Pole to Pole,” the series will run on both networks on consecutive Sundays through April 22.

Planet Earth, which was produced for Discovery by the BBC and features Sigourney Weaver as a narrator (David Attenborough narrates the British version), took more than five years to create. The cost: $1 million-$2 million per episode to shoot. Producers made lengthy, grueling journeys to remote corners of the world and employed the latest HD camera technology to capture animals and landscapes from unique viewpoints.

“There have been very few series that have the ambition and scale of Planet Earth,” says BBC producer Huw Cordey. “The whole plan at the start was to make sure we filmed in unfamiliar places and presented behavior that few people have seen, or presented behavior that was familiar but in different ways.”

Most of the footage for Planet Earth was shot with Panasonic VariCams recording on DVCPRO HD tapes or Sony HDC-750 cameras recording to HDCAM. The BBC converted variable-frame-rate material to its HD standard of 1080i at 50 frames per second (fps) for post-production. For the American audience, that material has been transcoded to 1080i/60 fps.

Cordey, who has been making nature documentaries for 15 years, says one major technical development for Planet Earth was the use of ultra-high-frame-rate cameras, which capture thousands of frames per second (a practice known as “overcranking”). Such cameras, which have also come into vogue for major sports broadcasts, allow for slow-motion replays of natural events with unprecedented detail.

In “Pole to Pole,” a Photron camera shooting at 1,000 fps (some 40 times the BBC's normal frame rate of 25 fps) snagged a dramatic shot of a great white shark leaping out of the water with a fur seal in its mouth. In other episodes, such cameras were used to capture shots of crocodiles hunting wildebeests and flying frogs gliding through the air.

Other new production techniques for Planet Earth included creating “pole-cams” with waterproof housings for unique underwater shots. And the ample use of new gyro-stabilized aerial camera systems from Cineflex, provided by Helinet of Los Angeles, allowed high-quality HD pictures to be captured from the air.

When combined with a Canon HJ40x long lens, the Cineflex camera system let producers get aerial shots from up to a quarter mile away, says Cordey. That made for sweeping views of wildlife on the move—a giant herd of caribou migrating across northern Canada, for example—that simply weren't possible before.

“One of the special things about Planet Earth is the sequences we were able to film from the air,” says Cordey. “Previously, you would never see an aerial sequence of animals behaving. You would have to be too close to do so, because the mounts were not stable enough to use wide lenses, and the sounds of the engine and the helicopter blades would terrorize the animals.

“With the Cineflex camera,” he adds, “we can shoot from a quarter of a mile away, and film the animal's behavior and never get in the way of their activity.”

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6425586

fredfa

03-24-07, 03:07 AM

TV Review
“Planet Earth”
In the Animal Kingdom, the Wild Bunch Rules
By Susan Stewart The New York Times

Nature often looks better at a distance. “Planet Earth,” an 11-part mother of all nature series to be shown on the Discovery Channel for five consecutive Sundays beginning tomorrow night (8 PM ET and PT), understands this truth. The BBC, which produced the series with Discovery, used helicopters, long lenses and all manner of cutting-edge film techniques to bring us the photographic spoils of a five-year global odyssey.

Often the filmmakers show Earth in the most flattering light. In Antarctica “the cliff tops are stained pink,” the narrator Sigourney Weaver says, “with the droppings of tens of thousands of nesting penguins.”

Seen from afar, the droppings look lovely. But “Planet Earth” does not always see waste matter through rose-tinted lenses. Close-ups can be equally dramatic.

In a cave in Borneo the camera ranges across what appears to be a moving mountain. This, Ms. Weaver explains, is a 300-foot-high mound of bat droppings, “its surface carpeted with hundreds of thousands of cockroaches.” One would have been enough.

The cockroaches eat the droppings. Occasionally something bigger drops — a bat, say — and the cockroaches eat that too. This brings us to the last element of the trinity of nature shows: beauty, repulsiveness and bloody slaughter.

“Pole to Pole,” the first of the series’s hourlong episodes, is a scan of the planet, a précis of things to come. It includes serious evidence that the natural world, however wounded by global warming, continues to be red in tooth and claw. A wolf captures a caribou; a snow leopard (the species is rarely seen) eats a deer; and a seal falls prey to a shark.

It’s a jungle out there — except when it’s a desert. Early on, a tired, thirsty elephant calf trudges alone through the Kalahari Desert, following its mother’s tracks — in the wrong direction.

The elephant is going to die, but we don’t see that on “Planet Earth,” just as we don’t see a wounded polar bear expire, although we know it will. This series skillfully takes us to the brink of heartbreak and then pulls way back — letting us relax and revel in long shots of caribou migrating across the Canadian tundra — or hones in on a cute family of kangaroos licking their skinny forearms to cool off in the 120-degree heat.

The severest climates and most monotonous landscapes on Earth seem to produce the cuddliest animals. Polar bears, seals and penguins populate the poles; kangaroos, big-eared foxes and long-lashed dromedaries enliven the desert. It is as if nature evolved to accommodate a nature show.

The planet, of course, is changing faster than its inhabitants’ ability to keep up with it, and that sad fact colors many of the episodes. As the polar ice cap shrinks, polar bears must swim farther than ever for food. This leads to the aforementioned bear’s quixotic 60-mile voyage to find dinner: in this case, an ill-judged attack on a walrus herd.

Among this series’s many rare feats is that it often encourages you to root for the predator rather than the prey: fitting at a time when the planet itself seems as vulnerable as a newly hatched penguin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/24/arts/television/24plane.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=television&pagewanted=print

steverobertson

03-24-07, 08:30 AM

The more I read the universal praise of Friday Night Lights the least appealing it sounds and less inclined to watch it I am. Call me an elitist snob but I just have zero interest in this show after watching it twice. Studio 60 on the other hand... :(

To each his own but I think FNL is the best show on tv and think studio 60 is one of the worst. So I guess it comes down to what you like.

DoubleDAZ

03-24-07, 10:03 AM

To each his own but I think FNL is the best show on tv and think studio 60 is one of the worst. So I guess it comes down to what you like.I think the biggest difference is that FNL is something that almost everyone can relate to, we all went through much the same during out school years whether we were the jocks or not. With Studio 60, there is no commonality with most of our day to day lives and we therefore need to be willing to invest time and thought to get to know the characters and let those characters develop. Also, unlike the comedy Sports Night, Studio 60 is supposed to be a drama which requires a higher degree of investment. Add to that the turmoil right out of the gate and you have a disaster just waiting to happen. Had costs been lower, I suspect they would have given it more time, but this isn't the first time a good show has been hampered in these ways.

DoubleDAZ

03-24-07, 10:07 AM

Obviously, as you noted, we are seeing this from different angles, HDTVF.I think a lot of it has to do with how one feels about cable in general and the lack of effective competition. Reverse roles and substitute satellite (D*) for cable and vice versa in the whole thing and then see what the reactions would be.

rebkell

03-24-07, 10:46 AM

I would assume that is because, as you noted, there is very little interest in the show, ABC appears to be dumping it (it certainly wasn't on yesterday's list of renewals) and the critics have been mostly silent about ABC playing off its remaining episodes.

How many episodes of 'Six Degrees' are they intending to show? I watched it last night(actually this morning). I thought the show was ok, I'm glad to see it may get some closure, and personally I like it that there are some Friday night shows, even though it's considered the graveyard.

fredfa

03-24-07, 10:51 AM

Good, thoughtful points, Dave.

Regarding "Studio 60": had Sorkin not been involved (and reportedly got pretty heavy penalties for pulling the show, I suspect it would have been gone a long time ago. It just hasn't caught on.

Unlike steve, I enjoy it and actually look forward to it. But I don't harbor any delusions it will be back.

Perhaps the major "FNL" problem, aside from the atrocious marketing effort NBC made, is that it is a quintessential small town show. Perhaps many are turned off by that, as well as by the underlying theme of high school football. There have been very few sports-themed shows to survive on TV.

But when you compare the glossy soap opera that is "Grey's Anatomy" to the gritty, real and awesomely written and acted "FNL" it sometimes amazes me that more people haven't found their way to watch the folks surrounding the Dillon Panthers.

I don't criticize people for choices they make about what to watch. But this one just puzzles me no end.

fredfa

03-24-07, 11:22 AM

TV Sports
'Machine,' but not Michael, saying goodbye
By Marc Narducci Philadelphia Inquirer Columnist March 24, 2007

George Michael fondly remembers the days he was making $16,000 a year working in Philadelphia radio, living in Cherry Hill and having the time of his life as a WFIL "Boss Jock."

Times have changed for Michael since he left WFIL in 1974 after an eight-year stint, but he'll never forget his time here before he hit the national stage.

In 1980, Michael was working as a sports anchor in Washington and debuted The George Michael Sports Machine, showing highlights of games around the country plus interviews with athletes and coaches. The show prided itself on telling the story behind the story.

This was a SportsCenter type show before SportsCenter picked up momentum.

Sundasy night, Michael will host the final half-hour show, closing the books after 27 years. The show was launched locally in Washington in 1980 and syndicated nationally in 1984.

At 66, Michael is not ready to retire, but says it's time to move on. He resigned as a sports anchor at Washington's WRC Channel 4; his last day was March 1. WRC is an NBC affiliate and is where he taped his syndicated show.

Michael said there was a difference in philosophy with the parent company of WRC, NBC Universal. He had a staff of 22 and had to lay off 14, and figured it was time for a change. Michael said he would leave with no bitterness.

"It's been a great run," he said in a telephone interview.

Michael also broadcast college and high school games for Channel 6 and WFIL radio during his time in Philadelphia. One of his analysts was former Phillie Bill White, who became the National League president.

"The eight years I spent in Philadelphia were the best ever," Michael said. "We started with nothing, and WFIL truly became one of the country's all-time-great radio stations."

Michael's newsman at WFIL was a young reporter named Larry Kane, who became one of Philadelphia's best-known television anchors.

And one of Michael's engineers at WFIL was a young sports fan named Howard Eskin, who now rules talk radio on WIP-AM (610).

"I used to tell Howard that he had to get the courage to leave his job as an engineer and go on radio," Michael said. "He obviously made the right move."

Michael also takes pride in breaking in many announcers. He gave The Inquirer's David Aldridge his first television job on Sports Machine. Aldridge is now TNT's basketball insider and reporter.

In Washington, Michael also started a program called Full Court Press, with Michael Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser of the Washington Post. It is still on.

From that show, Wilbon and Kornheiser were hired by ESPN, where they host the popular Pardon the Interruption.

"Full Court Press has launched a lot of careers," Michael said.

After leaving Philadelphia and before heading to Washington, Michael worked in radio in New York and was also the play-by-play announcer for the NHL's New York Islanders.

Michael said he would remain the moderator of Full Court Press, which can be seen Saturday evenings from January through Memorial Day. He also will continue to host Redskins Report during the NFL season, and said Fox had asked him to be part of NASCAR broadcasts.

Michael never thought of himself as a pioneer when he began Sports Machine, simply because he didn't envision the show's being around so long.

"I originally signed a three-year contact and hoped I would be able to survive for a while," he said. "It's been great, and even though I'm leaving this job, I'm having too much fun to retire."

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/sports/20070324_On_Sports_Media___Machine__but_not_Michael__saying_ goodbye.html

fredfa

03-24-07, 11:28 AM

How many episodes of 'Six Degrees' are they intending to show? I watched it last night(actually this morning). I thought the show was ok, I'm glad to see it may get some closure, and personally I like it that there are some Friday night shows, even though it's considered the graveyard.

Last night's episode was #7. I know SD is scheduled for the next few weeks on Fridays. But that could change.

Frankly, I don't remember if the show ever finished producing its complement of 13 episodes. If it did, I would assume ABC will either double up on a Friday or two, or run the remaining episodes sometime this summer. I would strongly doubt they would run in the May sweep.

HDTVChallenged

03-24-07, 11:40 AM

Perhaps the "FNL" problems, {snip} , is that it is a quintessential small town show. Perhaps many are turned off by that, as well as by the underlying theme of high school football.

Bingo!!! We have a winner! :D

But when you compare the glossy soap opera that is "Grey's Anatomy" to the gritty, real[istic] {snip} "FNL"

And therein you have your answer. To wit, in a world full of pain, nutcases, strife and war the last thing most people want to watch is "realistic" TV, we want escapism not documentaries (or dramumentaries.) Otherwise, PBS would be consistantly at the top of the ratings instead of the likes of AI. :)

PS: Perhaps I should disclose that I haven't watched a single frame of FNL, and have no intention of doing so. :)

URFloorMatt

03-24-07, 12:27 PM

TV Sports
'Machine,' but not Michael, saying goodbye
By Marc Narducci Philadelphia Inquirer Columnist March 24, 2007

...Michael said he would remain the moderator of Full Court Press, which can be seen Saturday evenings from January through Memorial Day. He also will continue to host Redskins Report during the NFL season...

Whew. PTI is great, but, honestly, those are my two favorite sports talk shows.

fredfa

03-24-07, 12:42 PM

The 2007-2008 Season
Great Expectations
By Jim Benson and Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable 3/26/2007

At the networks' fall development meetings in Los Angeles last week, ABC's sizzle reel promised big success with its slate of shows. Then came the disclaimer, at the close of the reel: “Maybe not. We're just hoping for three or four solid hits.”

It was a welcome bit of comic relief at the pre-upfront, where, as always, networks and advertisers are engaged in the business of great expectations. Advertisers were doing their best to defrost after shuttling among talent-heavy presentations on cold soundstages—including a skit with Howie

Mandel and two scantily clad models on the set of NBC's Deal or No Deal that attendees felt dragged on too long.

In a presentation near the Ugly Betty soundstage, ABC Entertainment President Steve McPherson moderated a panel with the cast of a new as-yet-untitled Grey's Anatomy spinoff and answered questions. For their parts, Fox chose a theater, and CBS and its co-owned CW opted for a number of smaller one-on-one sessions allowing for an exchange of dialogue.

As is always the case with very little material in the can, networks rely instead on bringing out talent and, often, showing clips of their pervious work.

At the presentations, buyers came away impressed by the networks' willingness to spend more and take greater risks this year. They cite fewer police shows and soapier ensemble dramas, especially at ABC with pilots like Cashmere Mafia.

They were also struck by how the networks are running away from last year's big rage, the failed serialized-drama format, as well as how big-name directors like Spike Lee and Guy Richie are attached to TV pilots.

Revived comedy development

Advertisers also zeroed in on the networks' renewed interest in comedy development. “There seems to be a resurging commitment to try and make comedies work this year, more so than in years past,” says John Rash, senior VP/director of broadcast negotiations for Campbell Mithun.

Comedies were noticeably absent from the list released at ABC's pre-upfront presentation of 14 series receiving early pickups—the most ever—including Men in Trees, which had been on the bubble. The network's decision to bring back Boston Legal was never in doubt since it attracts higher-income viewers, a spokeswoman says.

ABC also attracted attention for introducing a seamless commercial scheme leading into and out of breaks. For instance, a show's characters would watch a spot on their TV that then naturally leads into viewers' seeing the same one on their screens.

“It is nice to see them thinking about it,” says Larry Blasius, executive VP/director of negotiations for Magna Global. “It's not for everybody, but the industry has been after something like this. It's long overdue.”

New commercial tactics

Networks have been experimenting with new tactics to attract advertisers, such as The CW's popular, branded program-like short commercials known as “content wraps.”

Sales executives sought to reassure buyers that they are working hard to find metrics and selling tools that will help the agencies keep their clients in TV and not defecting solely to, say, the Web.

NBC got praise for unveiling research tools to track viewers between TV and ancillary platforms. After the network emphasized the online success of Heroes, Rash said, “It continues to happen that shows that seem to get more traction online tend to have a male slant.”

Buyers were also buzzing about CW's Gossip Girl, a female-skewing show that has Web potential. It focuses on the lives of rich kids and their parents in New York as revealed by a secret tell-all blogger.

And Fox Sales President John Nesvig scored points when he called on the TV industry and buyers to “come together” to settle their differences over the setting of ad rates. Advertisers won round one last summer by nixing networks' attempt to have seven-day DVR usage included in Nielsen ratings.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6427581

fredfa

03-24-07, 12:51 PM

HDTV Notebook
In Los Angeles: KCBS, KCAL Join HD-News Club
All CBS O&Os to have HD News In Next Year
By Michael Malone Broadcasting & Cable 3/26/2007

Two CBS-owned stations in Los Angeles are in the final stages of a move to a new state-of-the-art digital broadcast center, joining the growing legion of broadcasters doing high-definition news. KCBS executives have relocated their offices to the CBS Studio Center lot in Studio City, around eight miles to the northwest of the current site on Sunset Boulevard. The news anchors and teams have already begun rehearsals, and everyone's shooting for an April 21 start date for high-definition news at KCBS and sister station KCAL.

The new site is a massive 140,000- square-foot structure, featuring the Jerry Dunphy Newsroom (named for the legendary Los Angeles anchor), and a pair of 5,000-square-foot sound stages for KCBS and KCAL, a CBS-owned independent station. The lot is rich in television history; KCBS executives say vintage programs Gunsmoke and Leave It to Beaver—and, more recently, CSI: New York and Big Brother—were shot there.

Planning for the move has been in the works since the KCBS/KCAL duopoly was formed almost five years ago. The hardest part, say its chief planners, is maintaining the stations' combined 11½- hour daily news output while worrying about getting phones hooked up and finding those missing files.

“It's a new environment, new systems, new technology, but there's no time to regroup,” says Patrick McClenahan, KCBS/KCAL's senior VP/station manager. “You get everyone trained, and you hit the ground running.”

Fortunately for CBS, McClenahan and KCBS/KCAL President/General Manager Don Corsini are old hands at moving station operations. McClenahan helped build the Prime Ticket (now Fox Sports Net West) facility years ago in Century City, Calif., and Corsini oversaw KCAL's move into the current KCBS headquarters four years ago.

But neither compares in scope and scale with the present undertaking. “[The new site's] size will blow you away,” says CBS Television Stations President/CEO Tom Kane. (CBS executives won't reveal what the facility cost.)

KCBS will become the third station in the Los Angeles market to offer hi-def news; KABC launched it in conjunction with the Super Bowl in 2006, and KTLA recently added some HD newscasts. More than three dozen stations offer HD news nationwide, including Fox O&Os in Cleveland and Philadelphia; ABC-owned stations in New York, San Francisco and Chicago; and NBC flagship WNBC New York. Among the national news programs, ABC's Good Morning America and NBC's Today air in hi-def, and NBC Nightly News With Brian Williams went HD this week (B&C, 3/19, p. 18).

While high-definition television is a logical enhancer to primetime programs and sports (KCAL introduced hi-def Lakers basketball last month), CBS executives say the audience is coming around to watching the local news in HD, too. “The demand is what I call eventual,” says Kane. “It's utility viewing, as opposed to event viewing. But if you watch a newscast in HD, you say, 'This is a better viewing experience.'”

CBS considers hi-def news a good fit for Los Angeles, with the market's high penetration of HD televisions. And offering the whole newscast in HD, including field reports and graphics, is a way to keep pace with KABC, which has been winning the Los Angeles news wars. “Eyewitness News [KABC] did it first,” Corsini says, “so from a competitive standpoint, moving to the hi-def world is the natural thing to do.”

All of CBS' 17 stations are at some stage of shifting to hi-def news. KYW Philadelphia is also moving into a new facility—a 120,000-square-foot, fully HD building in the heart of the city—and will kick off hi-def news to coincide with the Phillies' home opener April 2. “It's been an awful lot of long days and nights, but we're ready,” says President/General Manager Michael Colleran.

WCBS New York rolls out HD news next month, and stations in San Francisco and Miami, among others, are also slated to make the leap in the near future. Says Kane, “Over the next year or so, all of CBS' [O&Os] will do HD news.”

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6427588

fredfa

03-24-07, 01:35 PM

Washington Notebook
Baseball, In Demand Heading to the Hill Transition
By R. Thomas Umstead MultiChannel News 3/26/2007

In Demand and Major League Baseball will take their battle over carriage of the “MLB Extra Innings” out-of-market package to the nation's capital this week, as executives from both sides pitch Congress on what to do about baseball's controversial $700 million exclusive deal with satellite service DirecTV.

Meanwhile, the clock ticks down toward baseball's March 31 deadline for cable to secure rights to the Extra Innings subscription package. If In Demand doesn't reach a deal with baseball by the deadline, DirecTV will gain exclusive rights to Extra Innings for seven years.

Representatives from baseball and In Demand will take questions from the Senate Commerce Committee during a March 27 hearing to examine the viewer implications of the MLB/DirecTV Extra Innings deal, which would exclude cable operators from offering the $179 out-of-market game package to its subscribers.

The hearing was called after several lawmakers — including Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) — questioned whether baseball's exclusive deal with DirecTV was anti-consumer, particularly since cable has offered the package since 2001. The industry generated around 200,000 buys from the package last year.

The hearing comes as baseball last week rejected cable's latest offer to secure rights to the Extra Innings and the baseball channel, which is expected to launch in 2009. Along with matching DirecTV's reported $700 million price tag for the package, baseball is asking cable to match the satellite distributor's guarantee of basic tier distribution for the league's 24/7 channel.

In Demand said its pitch last Wednesday to baseball for the package satisfied the league's demands. The offer matched DirecTV's price for the package and guaranteed distribution through In Demand's three owners — Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications — of the league's upstart Baseball Channel to as many subscribers as DirecTV provides the channel at launch, according to In Demand president Rob Jacobson.

“I think I did them even one better by offering them at least the same amount of carriage as DirecTV just from [In Demand's owners],” Jacobson told Multichannel News. “Nothing in any way would prohibit them from calling up Cablevision [Systems], Charter [Communications], Mediacom [Communications], EchoStar [Communications], Verizon [Communications], AT&T, and securing even better distribution for the channel.”

But baseball immediately rejected the offer, saying in a statement that the offer “falls short of nearly all of the material conditions.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6427572.html?display=Top+Stories

mbarloewen

03-24-07, 03:05 PM

Fred,

Any word on ratings for Showtime's This American Life that debuted on Thursday night?

As a big fan of the radio show for all these years I was pleasently surprised to find that I liked the tv adaptation. I'm just curious if anyone else watched it and whether or not there is any hope for Showtime to bring it back for another season beyond it's 6 episode season.

Thanks,

Mike

dline

03-24-07, 04:04 PM

The FCC certainly has a full plate these days.It certainly is a pivotal time for them -- just look at the headlines on their homepage this week.

It appears they even adopted new rules for allowing more AM and FM radio stations to add digital broadcasts using part of their existing channel, though they didn't adopt a mandatory date for stations to begin the broadcasts. (At least two Cedar Rapids radio stations have been simulcasting in so-called "HD Radio" for several years.)

I won't go too much into it here since we're mosty dealing with TV, but here is a link to the .pdf (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271699A1.pdf) of the press release in case you're interested.

fredfa

03-24-07, 04:46 PM

Sorry for the delay, but Friday’s fast national over night prime-time ratings – and Media Week Analyst Marc Berman’s view of what they mean -- have now been posted near the top of Ratings News the second post in this thread.

fredfa

03-24-07, 04:47 PM

Mike, premium channel ratings take longer to get processed. Perhaps they will be available next week.

I'll try to remember to keep checking for them for you.

Fred,

Any word on ratings for Showtime's This American Life that debuted on Thursday night?

As a big fan of the radio show for all these years I was pleasently surprised to find that I liked the tv adaptation. I'm just curious if anyone else watched it and whether or not there is any hope for Showtime to bring it back for another season beyond it's 6 episode season.

Thanks,

Mike

dad1153

03-24-07, 05:21 PM

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

From Berman's column:

"The return of ABC drama Six Degrees was barely on the map, meanwhile, with a last-place 4.59 million viewers and a 1.6/ 5 among adults 18-49 at 9 p.m. Comparably, that trailed a repeat of lead-in Grey’s Anatomy (Viewers: #4, 5.25 million; A18-49: #4, 1.8/ 6 at 8 p.m.) by 660,000 viewers and 11 percent in the demo. Take a look at its results opposite Fox’s The Wedding Bells.

Friday 9 p.m.
The Wedding Bells (Fox)
Viewers: 5.32 million (#3)
A18-49: 1.8/ 5 (#3t)

Six Degrees (ABC)
Viewers: 4.59 million (#5)
A18-49: 1.6/ 5 (#5)"

Guess its safe to say "Six Degrees" isn't coming back for May sweeps. Heck, I don't know if it's coming back next week! And what ever happed to David E. Kelley's magic touch? Is it his fault "Wedding Bells" isn't clicking or is the night/network too giant a hurdle for this show to overcome?

fredfa

03-24-07, 06:06 PM

At first ABC said "Six Degress" was going to return in January.

Frankly I am surprised they brought it back at all.

steverobertson

03-24-07, 06:28 PM

Fred,

I know I saw it somewhere the schedul for FNL on Bravo I have recruited 2 new people to watch. Is there a set scedule so they can set up the DVR? I forget which thread it was in.

mbarloewen

03-24-07, 06:31 PM

Mike, premium channel ratings take longer to get processed. Perhaps they will be available next week.

I'll try to remember to keep checking for them for you.

Thanks Fred!

fredfa

03-24-07, 07:13 PM

Steve: On saturday's it is 2-5P ET, Fridays 9 PM ET.

steverobertson

03-24-07, 07:24 PM

Steve: On saturday's it is 2-5P ET, Fridays 9 PM ET.

Fred thanks,

I noticed they have a 6pm showing here in the east on friday night I will check my guide and see if they show the latter Friday and Saturday showings.

fredfa

03-24-07, 07:35 PM

Yes please check, I gave you those times from memory...which isn't all that good.

steverobertson

03-24-07, 07:38 PM

Yes please check, I gave you those times from memory...which isn't all that good.

The Friday night showing at 9 is not showing up but Saturday is. I know what you mean about the memory thing I am with you on that . It sucks to get old LOL

URFloorMatt

03-24-07, 07:41 PM

Is it his fault "Wedding Bells" isn't clicking or is the night/network too giant a hurdle for this show to overcome?

It seems like the worst night, the least compatible channel, and no chance for a decent lead-in from any member of the Fox lineup.

Frankly, I think it's pulling in great numbers all things considered. I watched the first episode after Idol. It seems like a fairly good show, but I don't know how it'll survive all by itself on Fox. It feels like an ABC show (ABC is, after all, Network Television for Women) and could easily find a compatible lead-in there.

Unfortunately, Fox doesn't air 10:00 programming, so it can't find an off-network lead-in like ER apparently did with GA.

DoubleDAZ

03-24-07, 08:18 PM

Fred,

I think marketing and timeslot are the key to why FNL is in the shape it's in. I started recording it, but gave up when they moved it against 2 other favorites (or when those premiered, I don't remember which). I'd still be watrching it if that had not happened, but once I get invested in a program, I generally stick with it until the end and FNL just lost out to my older favs.

fredfa

03-24-07, 10:29 PM

TV Review
“Planet Earth”
By Brian Lowry Variety

From the breathtaking cinematography to Sigourney Weaver's crisp narration, everything about "Planet Earth" screams class -- an 11-part series, spread over five successive Sundays, conveying not only the wonder of nature but the arduous process of catching its machinations on film. Viewers can debate which images are the most jaw-dropping -- call it a toss-up between a polar bear fighting a walrus for survival, and a great white shark leaping completely out of the water to grab a seal -- but as assembled, it's a major achievement, making glorious use of aerial and time-lapse photography to bring epic grandeur to each chapter.

Discovery has ventured into a variety of areas to attract a younger audience -- along with the rest of the TV biz --sometimes stumbling in that chase. Yet in this first-rate production tailored to high-definition viewing, "Discovery Atlas" and its ongoing relationship with Ted Koppel, the cabler has burnished its image with a prestigious spine -- representing genuine standards for nature, travel and current-events fare.

Created by the team responsible for Discovery's "Blue Planet," if there's a quibble here, it's that the themes affixed to the individual hours feel somewhat arbitrary, slicing the globe into topics like "Great Plains," "Jungles" and "Ice Worlds." The overall contents, however, are consistently breathtaking.

Images flash by that aren't easily forgotten, and the narration adds to the sense that we're witnessing something special, frequently referring to "never before seen" footage of, say, a snow leopard hunting or a pride of lions attempting to bring down an elephant in a frenzied nighttime attack, chronicled via infrared imagery.

Years in the making, the production deftly employs overhead views to present the vastness of a sprawling caribou herd, hyenas chasing down an impala or a locust swarm, before zooming in to show baboons gingerly walking upright through a stream or bizarre troglodytes residing in the lightless abyss of caves. The same approach applies to Earth itself, from the majestic sweep of the Himalayas to the Gobi Desert blanketed in snow.

In keeping with the whole "circle of life" motif, the life-and-death struggles here are depicted with Darwinian bluntness, as the weak or young fall victim to predators that occasionally fail in their pursuit and thus face extermination themselves.

At the same time, "Planet Earth" heightens our appreciation not just for the natural world but also the patience, perseverance and sheer luck required to document these events. Toward that end, each episode closes with a few minutes, dubbed "capturing the moment," illustrating the lengths to which the production crews went to bring home their precious reels.

"Nobody should have to live one month in poo," mutters one crew member in a later installment, having camped out in a cave occupied by thousands of bats, whose thick layer of guano provides the food for a delicate (if mildly nauseating) ecosystem.

If it's any consolation, from the comfort of the couch, the sacrifice was totally worth it. Besides, he's hardly the first person to endure a little poo in order to make it in showbiz.

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_review&reviewid=VE1117933165&categoryid=32

kizzo

03-24-07, 10:54 PM

It seems like the worst night, the least compatible channel, and no chance for a decent lead-in from any member of the Fox lineup.

Frankly, I think it's pulling in great numbers all things considered. I watched the first episode after Idol. It seems like a fairly good show, but I don't know how it'll survive all by itself on Fox. It feels like an ABC show (ABC is, after all, Network Television for Women) and could easily find a compatible lead-in there.

I never understood why this show was on FOX in the first place. The show is so out of place on this network.. its unbelievable. ABC would have been a perfect fit for this show. In fact it has ABC written all over it.

fredfa

03-25-07, 03:25 AM

TV Notebook
“Planet Earth”: The Whole World in Their Lens
In 11-Part Series, High-Definition Cameras Capture Planet's Wildest Wonders
By Kathy Blumenstock Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, March 25, 2007

Snow blankets the Gobi Desert, where camels must quench their thirst by swallowing frosty mounds. In a tropical rain forest, a blue bird of paradise pirouettes in a mating ballet, while in a nearby tree, howler monkeys and tamarins fight over figs. And in shallow sea water, dolphins gather momentum to hydroplane in their hunt for a seafood dinner.

"It's like your own personal rocket ship into the most microscopic, and largest, wonders of the world," said actor Sigourney Weaver, who narrates "Planet Earth," an 11-part overview of wildlife behavior and wilderness locations (Sunday 8 PM ET/PT Discovery and Discovery HD).

"You get to explore and understand the layers and seasons, the search for food and water, and the courtship," Weaver said. "It allows you to celebrate the world with all of its creatures and to want to be part of it without wrecking it."

The series, which was produced by the BBC and has aired in Britain, took nearly five years to complete, spanning 200 locations where 70 photographers spent 2,000 days recording in the field. (The five-disc DVD set will be released April 24.) While each episode is presented as a one-hour documentary, the entire series fits together as a portrait of the globe's geography and species.

"It also has an emotional feel," said executive producer Alastair Fothergill. "I wanted the audience to know what it feels like to be in any of these places, and that's about the way you photograph the habitat, the way you edit, the music and the chemistry," Fothergill -- whose previous project, "The Blue Planet," focused on Earth's oceans -- said audience response to the epic scale and cinematic style of that series prompted him to try for similar results with "Planet Earth."

"The real challenge is to show new places and new animals, to film extraordinary things," he said. "The promise is, maybe you've been to the Sahara, but have you seen the Gobi Desert in the winter covered in snow?"

Among the unusual segments are an inside view of Mexico's 1,400-foot-deep Cave of Swallows; close-ups of a snow leopard and her cub; and footage of lions bringing down elephants at night -- all sequences that required exceptional amounts of time and patience to film.

"Natural history is always a bit unpredictable, but the great thing about it is, you can spend a month [trying to get the shot] and then get it all in one day, " said Huw Cordey, a cameraman and a producer on the project. "One sequence that stands out as unbelievably lengthy was the birds of paradise. We spent two months shooting 200 hours and we got about 15 to 20 minutes of actual footage."

The episodes benefit from sophisticated production technology, such as a stabilization system that allows a camera lens attached to a helicopter to capture close-ups of distant animals without interfering in their routines. The use of time-lapse and ultra-high-speed cameras gives the material a rich, detailed look.

"When you watch these, you feel you've been there," said Weaver, whose spare narration coupled with natural sound enhances the series' visual impact.

"What I found is that I would be with the birds, protecting their eggs, and then when that arctic fox took an egg, I would become an arctic fox who needed to eat," she said. "Each [episode] was so surprising. We can't even imagine how elaborate nature is and how well it works."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/20/AR2007032001386_pf.html

fredfa

03-25-07, 11:52 AM

Critic’s Notebook
Peyton Manning on 'SNL'
By Roger Catlin Hartford Courant TV Critic in his “TV Eye” blog

He’s been seen in a lot of commercials, they say, but Peyton Manning has never been able to host the big one.

That changed this weekend when he hosted “Saturday Night Live”

He began Saturday with a short monologue in which he introduced his famous dad and brother in the audience and chided his mother for never having her own football career. It was better when he played himself in a commercial about playing football with kids, but knocking them down with bullet passes, cussing them out, and breaking into cars. Its tagline: “Spend time with our kids, so Peyton Maning Doesn’t.”

He was one of those hosts that was used a lot – from the monologue and fake commercial to a guest on the recurring talk show skit, "Bronx Beat with Betty and Jodi" in which the gum-chewing harpies interview Manning, moatly about being such a good looking employee at the Bronx Zoo. Three bits before the first commercial.

He was in the next one too --as a fan with winning brackets on an ESPN March Madness show who was chided for making some key misses and hence "pulling a Peyton Manning."

He wasn’t the kind of guest that the show sometimes like to humiliate by making him wear dress or otherwise making him play way against character (cussing to kids was about as bad as it got). Although there was a lot of bathroom humor.

Not everything he was in exactly killed -- a half-written sketch about a failed battle scene (in which his character won’t throw a rock) was about the only dud.

It was a big show too for Will Forte who got to do his dazed politician character Tim Calhoun during “Weekend Update,” as well as doing an insane dance to the full-length recording of “Casino Royale” by Herb Alpert and Tijuana Brass – the kind of nuttiness not much seen since the days of Andy Kaufman (by the end, Manning had joined in).

There was another flash of "SNL" of yore during a bit about Sanjaya on "American Idol" -- Andy Samberg played the kid, interrupting the end of "Weekend Update" by singing his bad version of "You Really Got Me." In the audience, Kristin Wiig played the crying girl (who now has a name -- Ashley Ferl -- and probably an agent) and the camera panned to Fred Armisen also crying and then next to him, Dan Ackroyd, big as Al Gore, also weeping.

Manning wasn't in the bit -- nor was he in the animated "Dora the Explorer" takeoff, nor did he sing backup for the two Carrie Underwood songs. But he was in practically everything else.

So he didn't "pull a Peyton Manning" -- he succeeded in comedy just as he does on the playing field -- bearing down and being a pretty good straightman, so likable they gave him a birthday cake at the end. Saturday was his 31st birthday, but it was an hour into Sunday by the time they sang to him at show's end.

http://blogs.courant.com/roger_catlin_tv_eye/

fredfa

03-25-07, 01:08 PM

TV Notebook
Reality May Be The CW's New Reality
By Jim Benson Broadcasting & Cable 3/26/2007

By the time The WB and UPN gave way to The CW last September, Time Warner's The WB had been labeled an outright failure.

The operation racked up a staggering deficit north of $800 million, with only a handful of profitable quarters, throughout its rocky 11-year history. Even so, it was the more successful of the two networks launched around the same time: CBS Corp.'s perennially unprofitable UPN approached what industry executives suggest was an eye-popping $1.4 billion in losses during the period.

By merging the assets and sharing costs equally in a 50-50 venture, including joint ownership of expensive programming from their studios, the two media giants promised to create a smarter business model that would make the new CW network instantly profitable.

But after six months, both profitability and strong ratings have been elusive for the fledgling broadcast network, which—unlike ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC—owns no stations in the nation's largest markets. As a startup, it has received a lower cost per point from advertisers in many instances, despite its lucrative adults 18-34 core audience. And it shelled out more than $40 million for a massive “Free To Be” CW branding campaign at launch last September. Some insiders say the marketing dollars could have been better-targeted at a time when younger viewers are more dedicated to individual shows than to entire networks.

While CW executives express optimism about the network's long-term prospects, an opinion shared by key affiliates, their attention is focused on containing programming costs like never before. The most obvious solution: Stick with what's working and add more low-cost reality shows to the mix. “Our No. 1 goal,” says CW Entertainment President Dawn Ostroff, “is to have shows that are hits, and any branding we do is a bonus.”

The CW has devoted about a third of its 17 fall pilots to reality. Exploiting the trend further, it plans a scripted comedy set behind the scenes of a reality series. Titled Dash 4 Cash, it comes from producers Kelsey Grammer and Steve Stark, with Betty Thomas directing.

Reality has been the network's biggest bright spot so far: UPN import America's Next Top Model and WB legacy Beauty and the Geek are the only programs to crack a 3 rating this season among adults 18-34. Midseason addition Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll has also been hot, and wrestling fans are returning to a resurgent Friday Night Smackdown.

But the tactic of having more reality shows would be a departure from The WB's strategy, which relied mostly on scripted programming to bring about long-term profits for its sibling TV studio through DVD and domestic and international syndication sales. The WB had kept reality shows like Geek to a minimum, since their rerun value on cable is not as great as dramas and comedies.

WB had allowed its sibling Warner Bros. TV studio to amass enough episodes of Gilmore Girls and Smallville to collect $80 million in annual sales during the network's final few years—more than enough to offset $30 million-$35 million in yearly losses.

CBS and Warner Bros. are still planning to make a hefty investment in scripted programming this year, splitting the expense for eight of The CW's 11 drama and sitcom pilots.

It costs nearly the same to produce shows for The CW as for bigger networks, despite its narrower demo and lower ratings. Conventional sitcom pilots can approach $2 million, single-camera comedies run higher, and dramas average upwards of $3 million. First-year reality shows come much cheaper, often in the low six figures.

CBS, which runs the creative side of the network and owns 11 CW affiliates, stands to benefit more financially from an infusion of reality than Time Warner, which oversees network business affairs and distribution. Its stations will be able to collect higher ad revenues if the reality format remains as popular next season.

Without any TV stations, Warner Bros. is more dependent than CBS on its ability to extend as many scripted series as possible to four years, allowing it to reach the 100-episode mark that maximizes potential for off-network sales. But the studio could potentially wind up with fewer scripted series on CW's six-night, 13-hour lineup if reality gains a bigger foothold on the fall schedule.

“We're looking for an appropriate balance,” says Nancy Tellem, president of the CBS Paramount Network Television Entertainment Group. “We're not forsaking scripted.”

The move toward reality, with a CW programming executive now devoted to scouring the Web and film schools for new ideas, comes as ratings are lagging for its inherited scripted shows, particularly The WB's Smallville and 7th Heaven and UPN's Everybody Hates Chris and Veronica Mars. Its best performer among women, seven-season-old former WB drama Gilmore Girls, could fold this spring.

With the best-performing remnants of its two predecessors combined in the new network, advertisers had expected The CW to do better than a 1.4 overall ratings average among young adults during the February sweeps. It finished on par with the defunct WB's levels a year earlier but ahead of UPN's 1.1. While top CBS and Warner Bros. executives consider The CW a long-term investment, advertisers don't appear to be so patient.

“I view this as a transition year and [the 2007-08 season] as a make-or-break year for them,” says Shari Anne Brill, VP/director of programming for media buyer Carat USA. “A lot of people felt they have not been doing as well as they had initially hoped, but I did not expect much more, because many of their best assets are aging programming.”

Other media buyers say the network failed to launch enough strong new shows. Ostroff counters the criticism, saying that it would have been too difficult to start a network with unfamiliar programming.

“When you look at what we had to accomplish in eight months [from the time the network was announced], it's incredible,” she says. “No one realized we had to build a company, a distribution system and create everything new, from benefits packages to programming.”

CW ratings have gotten a boost from Nielsen's new “extended home viewing” system, which measures the college audience. Since Jan. 29, when Nielsen started keeping track, the network is up 23% in adults 18-24 and 36% among the younger women who flock to reality shows like Model and Pussycat Dolls. Double-digit increases over WB and UPN's year-ago performances have helped the fortunes of scripted drama One Tree Hill, which was on the bubble at The WB and now has a strong chance of returning next fall.

The CW set the mood for advertisers last week. At small development meetings with ad buyers at its Burbank, Calif., offices, it featured artwork produced by its core demo, an elaborate Gummi Bear exhibition and a hallway filled with plasma TV screens.

Ostroff talked up the network's six drama and five comedy pilots. Eight will be co-owned by CBS and Warner Bros., with NBC Universal Television Studio producing Aliens in America. She thinks that comedy, chronicling the relationship between an unpopular teen and a Pakistani Muslim exchange student, may have the best chance to become The CW's “generation-defining” comedy, the way Friends was for the MTV generation— something neither The WB nor UPN could achieve in their day.

ABC Television Studio, meanwhile, has two dramas in consideration at The CW: Paige Armstrong, a Rod Lurie saga about a twentysomething congressional aide who decides to run against her boss, and The Reaper, which takes a lighthearted approach to a devil's bounty hunter reclaiming souls that have escaped from hell.

But Ostroff was less talkative about The CW's slate of reality pilots after waging an aggressive effort to land their sought-after producers, whose work is in big demand by all of the broadcast networks.

Beyond watching programming costs more closely, the joint-venture partners expect big savings from lower overhead and various forms of reverse compensation that The CW has obtained from most affiliates.

CBS' Tellem and Warner Bros. Television Group President Bruce Rosenblum insist they are meeting the companies' first-year expectations and will see the network become profitable, particularly with new techniques like advertiser-sponsored serialized “content wraps” that resemble actual programming.

“The CW is the last free over-the-air broadcast network that will ever be created,” Rosenblum says. “We have built a distribution system that is even stronger than The WB ever had, with station groups like Belo, Clear Channel, Pappas and CBS.”

The CW signed every significant affiliate group it wanted except Sinclair, which secured some Fox affiliation renewals shortly after signing up for News Corp.'s UPN replacement, MyNetworkTV.

“Strategically, Tribune and the affiliate group as a whole are much stronger,” says affiliate board Chairman John Reardon, who as Tribune Broadcasting president/CEO leads 14 CW affiliates in markets including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.

Reardon credits The CW with balancing WB's heavy female skew, adding African-American viewers, and lessening the average age of its audience by offering UPN's wrestling and the Monday-night sitcoms, as well as the cross-over demo appeal of Top Model.

Tribune has seen the most growth in the top markets. According to John Hendricks, the station group's ad-sales chief, Pussycat Dolls has improved its 18-49 average and late-news ratings. “Fox has American Idol,” he says, “but, in our world, we have Top Model, and we can use it as leverage to package all of our points.”

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6427480

keenan

03-25-07, 01:27 PM

Jacklin

03-25-07, 01:30 PM

Is there any new news on NBC's Law and Order Criminal Intent? Anyone know the chances of it being renewed or canceled?

fredfa

03-25-07, 02:24 PM

First, Jacklin, welcome to the thread. :)

As to L&O: CI, it seems to be on the fence. A lot probably depneds on the shows NBC has in the pipeline for possible use next season, as well as the ratings for the remainder of the year.

The ratings for all three L&Os have been down this year and so far L&O:SVU has been the only L&O franchise to be officially renewed. There seems to be a feeling that either Law & Order or L&O:CI two might be jettisoned by NBC, but not both.

By the way, all renewed shows are listed in the third post of the thread. You can find the list here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=4267598&&#post4267598

The list is continually updated, so literally the moment trhe fate of L&O:CI is announced, you'll find it there.

rebkell

03-25-07, 02:32 PM

How about NCIS, I've recently got into that show, I like it. Don't see it listed on the front page. Have you heard anything about it's future?

fredfa

03-25-07, 02:33 PM

I forgot to include it in the series finale list, but tonight "Grease: You're The One That I Want" ends its run on NBC.

steverobertson

03-25-07, 02:58 PM

How about NCIS, I've recently got into that show, I like it. Don't see it listed on the front page. Have you heard anything about it's future?

I like this show alot as well and from what I have read in the past the ratings are very good for this show so I would think it would be back, but I will let the master of this thread confirm.

fredfa

03-25-07, 03:32 PM

fredfa

03-25-07, 03:33 PM

How about NCIS, I've recently got into that show, I like it. Don't see it listed on the front page. Have you heard anything about it's future?

CBS hasn't announced it officially yet, but NCIS is a sure thing to return.

Iteki

03-25-07, 03:41 PM

I like this show alot as well and from what I have read in the past the ratings are very good for this show so I would think it would be back, but I will let the master of this thread confirm.

I'm positive it will be renewed. It's one of the very few shows that is American Idol proof.

fredfa

03-25-07, 04:13 PM

Agreed.

Jacklin

03-25-07, 05:00 PM

Thank you for keeping me updated :)

I hope it gets renewed! Thanks a bunch for the link.

fredfa

03-25-07, 05:45 PM

I wouldn't worry at all about NCIS, Jacklin. It will be back.

steverobertson

03-25-07, 05:47 PM

I wouldn't worry at all about NCIS, Jacklin. It will be back.

I like this show alot but there was a time the Tony thing almost made me stop watching I am glad they have toned him down some.

fredfa

03-25-07, 06:01 PM

I think you are right -- his character has become a lot more interesting now that he isn't so one-dimensional.

steverobertson

03-25-07, 06:07 PM

I think you are right -- his character has become a lot more interesting now that he isn't so one-dimensional.

I think it was to the point of ridiculous as far as his sexual comments and they have really toned it down to the point I actually like his charchter now.

There is nothing like Abby either she is the best

Jacklin

03-25-07, 06:29 PM

I wouldn't worry at all about NCIS, Jacklin. It will be back.

No, I'm not worried about that show. I'm sure it'll be fine :)

I'm just worried about Law and Order Criminal Intent, but NBC seems to be on better grounds so maybe they'll stick it out another year.

dad1153

03-25-07, 07:05 PM

I forgot to include it in the series finale list, but tonight "Grease: You're The One That I Want" ends its run on NBC.

Promise? :D

dad1153

03-25-07, 07:07 PM

TV Notebook
Reality May Be The CW's New Reality
By Jim Benson Broadcasting & Cable 3/26/2007

Reality has been the network's biggest bright spot so far: UPN import America's Next Top Model and WB legacy Beauty and the Geek are the only programs to crack a 3 rating this season among adults 18-34. Midseason addition Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll has also been hot, and wrestling fans are returning to a resurgent Friday Night Smackdown.

That's fracking pitiful and not worth crowing about in the least. :confused:

fredfa

03-25-07, 07:33 PM

Next Saturday's NCAA Semi Final Basketball Tournament schedule has been added at the top of the second post in the thread.

grittree

03-25-07, 07:35 PM

What time Monday is the Florida vs Ohio State game?

fredfa

03-25-07, 07:42 PM

The UCLA-Ohio State game will begin at 9:07 PM ET.

fredfa

03-25-07, 07:48 PM

TV Sports
Outdated 'Sports Machine' was once state of the art
By Neil Best Newsday March 25, 2007

Once upon a time, in a land mostly without cable TV where people relied on local broadcast stations for their highlights, George Michael was the closest thing to a national sports news emcee.

Those days are long past. But his "Sports Machine" somehow motored on, doing its best to adapt to an ESPN (and later Internet) world to include more off-beat features and such.

Along the way, Michael also ditched his trademark tape machine for a contraption slightly less archaic that looks like a funky, clunky jukebox.

Michael will push its button for the last time Sunday night, ending a 27-year run with a retrospective on the groundbreaking series.

(It is seen at 11:35 p.m. in most places but 12:05 a.m. on Ch. 4 in New York. Mike Francesa's "Mike'd Up" took over its time slot and much of its ratings four years ago.)

Michael, who turned 67 Saturday, was a New York music radio and sports TV personality from 1974-80, even calling Islanders games. Since '80, he has been at Washington's WRC, where Sports Machine is produced and began as a local show before reaching national syndication in 1984.

ESPN started in 1979, but it would be many years before "SportsCenter" became the powerhouse it is now. Meanwhile, others were pioneering the use of sports video highlights. Michael worked at Ch. 7 in New York with two of them: Warner Wolf and producer Carmine Cincotta.

After building a Washington sports news powerhouse during the ensuing quarter-century, when station officials sought huge budget and staff cuts, Michael said last fall that he would leave the nightly news and "Sports Machine."

"They wanted me to continue to do everything but cut costs dramatically," he said. "It was my position, with no bitterness, that if I have to lay off people, I have to be the first to go."

Some highlights Sunday night illustrate the influence of Michael's show for much of the 1980s and '90s. He attracted A-list guests such as Michael Jordan, Walter Payton and Dale Earnhardt.

"Our reputation has taken such good care of us," he said. "Michael Jordan is part of the ESPN era, but he always said, 'I have to take care of you, man."'

The affection for Michael from stars such as Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripken Jr. was evident in interviews during the past two shows. But alas, they were stars of another era, and the show itself had the undeniable whiff of a bygone, simpler, less edgy time in sports TV.

About 83 percent of U.S. households have cable, satellite or fiber optic TV, not to mention Internet access. Will there ever be something like Sports Machine again on national broadcast TV?

"No," Michael said. "No one wants to go through what it takes to get it done. It's all-consuming. You don't just suddenly get it done overnight."

Michael still will do two local shows, one on the Redskins and a panel discussion that has featured Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon and was the precursor to ESPN's "Pardon the Interruption."

He said his only regret about ending "Sports Machine" now is the staff members who had to go with it. Other than that, he called it "a hell of a run."

Said Michael: "I was scared to death it would be canceled after one week. We've had a great time with it."

http://www.newsday.com/sports/columnists/ny-spbest255144908mar25,0,7108014,print.column?coll=ny-sports-columnists

rebkell

03-25-07, 07:52 PM

The UCLA-Ohio State game will begin at 9:07 PM ET.

I'm assuming you guys are talking about the Florida-Georgetown game :D

DevOne

03-25-07, 09:53 PM

I will miss "The George Michael Sports Machine". It covered a lot of obscure sporting events not seen elsewhere in its heyday. Sadly, it had to become more "mainstream" to keep being picked-up. Every now and then, you could still find a decent documentary piece.

DoubleDAZ

03-25-07, 09:58 PM

I can't think of anything else to say, Planet Earth is simply awesome!

DevOne

03-25-07, 10:20 PM

Sportscaster George Michael Ends His Long Run
By John Maynard
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 1, 2007;

Channel 4's George Michael, Washington's best-known sportscaster and a pioneer of the modern sports highlights show, signs off from the station's 11 p.m. newscast tonight for the final time.

Michael rejected a new contract in November after learning more than half of his 20-member staff would be laid off in cost-cutting ordered by parent company NBC Universal. Among the casualties: Michael's wife, Pat Lackman, a writer.

"I came here 27 years ago -- and the ratings were awful," Michael said. "And [then-general manager] John Rohrbeck said, 'Trust me, we're going to make this exciting, and we're going to win with sports.'

"And, 27 years later, we got the ratings, we're making the profit -- and it's over."

The station has been the ratings leader in Washington since the early '90s. Michael's departure breaks up the city's longest-serving news team: anchors Jim Vance ("my soul mate," Michael says), Doreen Gentzler and weatherman Bob Ryan.

He really made his name with his nationally syndicated "Sports Machine" show on Sunday nights, which combined scores with a mixture of news, interviews and a fast-paced highlight reel. While the show's national popularity has waned in recent years, it was ahead of its time when it debuted. Its style influenced other sports shows, including ESPN's "SportsCenter," which is today seen by more than 20 million people a week.

"For me, 'The Sports Machine' really was 'SportsCenter' before 'SportsCenter,' " said Steve Levy, an anchor for the daily ESPN news show.

Levy confesses that when he was sports director for the TV station at the State University of New York at Oswego in the '80s, he not only copied Michael's techniques, he actually stole his footage.

"We didn't have editing techniques or machines or the time or any way to get feeds. So we would take his highlights as is, every single highlight, and I would just revoice them."

Washington Wizards President Susan O'Malley says: "He figured out how to use the bloopers and the Tuesday replays and everything 'SportsCenter' does. Maybe he was even the first MTV because he put stuff to music before anyone else did."

The Wizards paid tribute to Michael during halftime of last night's game with video clips on the scoreboard of his career, including an appearance on "The Tonight Show." He was seen in the Wizards owner's box displaying a team jersey with his name and surrounded by owner Abe Pollin, Redskins Coach Joe Gibbs, former Oriole Cal Ripken and former Washington Bullet Wes Unseld.

Bob Peterson, creative director for CBS News, worked with Michael in 1984 when "Sports Machine" launched nationally (it started off as a local show in 1980).

"George's philosophy was always get the best equipment and the best people," Peterson said. "He didn't care about the money and, ironically, that's how it ended."

Channel 4 reporter Tom Sherwood, who has worked with Michael for 18 years, said things will be a lot quieter at the station's Nebraska Avenue offices without Michael.

"He behaves in the newsroom just like he behaves on TV -- boisterous and brassy," Sherwood said. "He's a well-liked but volatile guy, and that can aggravate some people and put them on edge. But if you haven't been yelled at by George then you're really out of the loop."

Joe Schreiber, a producer for Michael for the past 23 years who is being let go, was blunt. "He kicked my [rear]," he said. "Sometimes it wasn't pretty."

Comcast SportsNet anchor Jill Sorenson, who worked for Michael from 2000 to 2004, remembered her first interview with Michael when she was a 23-year-old sports reporter from Duluth, Minn. "Everything about him was larger than life. He was loud and enthusiastic," Sorenson recalled.

Sorenson left the station because she no longer wanted the pace that Michael required.

"I reached a position in my life where I was married and wanted to have a family, and I didn't have two days off in a row," Sorenson said. "I loved it, but I needed to have a balance in my life."

"Working for me was not a job, it was a lifestyle," Michael said. "You either commit to it or don't take the job."

Recent Channel 4 hires Lindsay Czarniak and Dan Hellie will split the sports anchoring duties for Channel 4. The last "Sports Machine" is March 25. Michael will continue moderating the weekend sports panel shows "Redskins Reports" and "Full Court Press" and will continue his Monday afternoon chats with Redskins coach Gibbs next season.

Michael, who gives his age as 65, said he has been approached by the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network, the regional cable operation jointly owned by the Baltimore Orioles and Washington Nationals. "I don't know what I'm going to do. I just know I want to do something.

"Do I want it to end? Hell, no."