Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Slippery slide for NBC's 'Grease' finale
Once promising reality show ends with 1.9 in 18-49s
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 26, 2007

“Grease: You’re the One That I Want” had a promising debut in January, thanks to its unique concept. It invited viewers to vote on who would win the starring role on the Broadway revival of “Grease.”

But in the weeks since, the show took a major tumble. Last night at 8 p.m. the season finale averaged a 1.9 adults 18-49 rating, according to Nielsen overnights, even to the previous week and down 58 percent from a 4.3 for its premiere.

“Grease” actually looked like a solid show in the early going, but increased broadcast competition and a surprisingly dull group of contestants likely did it in.

“Grease” was flattened by football in late January and early February, as the buildup to the National Football League’s Super Bowl sapped any momentum for the show. ABC’s hit Sunday lineup and Fox’s solid comedies also likely hurt the show, as did CBS’s NCAA basketball the past two weeks, which kept viewers watching the network after the games ended.

The show did actually see a big boost in its second half hour, going from a 1.6 to a 2.3, but that only brought it even to last week’s rating.

CBS finished first among 18-49s on a slow Sunday night, averaging a 3.6 rating and a 10 share. Fox was second at 2.8/8, ABC third at 2.6/7, NBC fourth at 2.1/6, Univision fifth at 1.3/4 and CW sixth at 0.7/2.

Ratings for CBS are approximate as overnights measure timeslot data and not actual program data, and basketball bled over two timeslots.

At 7 p.m. CBS began the night in the lead with a 4.0 average for NCAA basketball runover and the start of “60Minutes.” ABC was second with a 2.3 for “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” Fox third with a 1.4 for an hour of “The War at Home” and NBC fourth with a 1.2 for “Dateline.” Univision was fifth that hour with a 0.9 for “Hora Pico” and CW sixth with a 0.7 for a repeat of “Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll.”

ABC took the lead at 8 p.m. with a 4.2 for “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” followed by CBS with a 3.2 for “60 Minutes” and the beginning of “The Amazing Race.” Fox was third with a 3.1 average for ‘The Simpsons” (3.3) and “King of the Hill” (2.8), NBC fourth with a 1.9 for “Grease,” Univision fifth with the first of three hours of “Bailando por la Boda de Mis Suenos” and CW sixth with a 0.5 for a repeat of “7th Heaven.”

Fox took over at 9 p.m., leading with a 3.8 average for “Family Guy” (4.2) and “American Dad” (3.3). CBS was second with a 3.4 for the end of “Race” and the start of “Cold Case,” with NBC third with a 2.7 for a “Deal or No Deal” rerun, ABC fourth with a 2.2 for a repeat of “Desperate Housewives,” Univision fifth with a 1.5 for its second hour of “Bailando” and CW sixth with a 0.8 for a repeat of “America’s Next Top Model.”

At 10 p.m. CBS regained the lead with a 3.7 for the end of “Cold Case” and the beginning of “Without a Trace,” with NBC second with a 2.7 for “The Apprentice,” ABC third with a 1.7 for a repeat of “Brothers & Sisters” and Univision fourth with a 1.6 for the last hour of “Bailando.”

Among households, CBS led the night with an 8.2 average rating and a 14 share. ABC was second at 4.9/8, NBC third at 4.7/8, Fox fourth at 3.5/6, Univision fifth at 1.6/3 and CW sixth at 1.1/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11036.asp

I guess tonight I'm going to have to make time to watch the last three "Battlestar Galactica" episodes (including last night's season finale) from the DVR. It's no fun coming to this thread with your hands covering your eyes to try to avoid any spoiler headlines/replies. Feels weird! :rolleyes:

TV Notebook
TV Guide Exclusive: Grey's Welcomes Back Denny... Again!
By Michael Ausiello TV Guide

”Grey's Anatomy” is keeping Jeffrey Dean Morgan almost as busy in death as it did in life. The actor — who braved shark-infested waters in February when he gave Meredith a purgatorial pep talk — is returning on April 12 to headline the show's latest recap special. During a telephone chat last week, Morgan explained how this won't be your standard clip show, disagreed that Grey's jumped the shark when Meredith went to heaven, set the record straight about the status of his rumored-to-be-dead war-correspondents drama with Shonda Rhimes, and offered a few choice words about his big Supernatural comeback (the operative word being "few").

Michael Ausiello: How will this clip show be different?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: They're going to use me as an on-camera host. They've never done anything like that before. Usually it's all voice-over. That'll be interesting. I haven't seen a script yet, so I'm kind of on pins and needles myself.

Michael Ausiello: Rumor has it the Grey's spin-off killed your war-correspondents drama. True?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: I got a phone call from Shonda the day before the Grey's spin-off was announced telling me that it does not affect my show whatsoever. As far as I know, we're going into production this summer for a mid-season replacement next year. The idea would be to do six or 13 episodes. I know everybody's saying it's on the back burner or dying a slow, painful death, but I don't think that's the case. Until I hear differently, we're moving forward with it. I haven't heard differently, and believe me, I've checked. I make sure that no one's forgetting about me over here.

Michael Ausiello: Looking back, how do you think Denny's February-sweeps return turned out?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: Shonda called me and said, "Would you be willing to come back?" And I, of course, said, "Yeah," hung up the phone and "How?" became an immediate question. And I don't think even she knew exactly how that was going to play itself out. I got the script about a week before I went out there to shoot it, and even then I was like, "Is this going to work?" It's kind of a big jump from what they normally do, but I thought it was pulled off beautifully. I was really excited to do Denny again. I thought we put him to bed last year, so any chance I get to play him I'm a happy guy.

Michael Ausiello: What do you say to fans who think the show jumped the shark?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: I don't know if the show's jumpin' the shark if 30 million people are still tuning in to watch it. You're going to always have your detractors, but the point is, it's the No. 1 show on TV. I laugh off those comments. It's a good show, the writing is spectacular, and it's so well acted. I don't think it's jumping the shark. Fonzie is not putting on the shorts and waterskiing at this point. [Laughs]

Michael Ausiello: I loved the final scene with Denny and Izzie brushing past each other. What was it like shooting it?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: It was very bittersweet. When I originally was told I was coming back, I assumed I'd be with Katherine. I didn't see the Meredith thing coming at all. So when I finally saw Katie that day and we did that scene, it was very bittersweet, because we spent so much time together. It was sad. That scene was such a cool scene to do, and the way [the director] shot it, it turned out beautifully. It was great. I wished Denny and Izzie could have reconnected more than that, but I thought that was so powerful and such a good way to end that story line. It was well worth it.

Michael Ausiello: So the story is over?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: I can only assume. I can't see Denny coming back again. He walked into the white light, for god's sake. I hope he's not in purgatory in that hospital forever. I can't imagine. But you never know. Sweeps week, something could change. [Laughs]

Michael Ausiello: A lot has transpired behind the scenes since the last time you were on the set. Was the mood more tense?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: The week I was there, we had a great time. It was a lot of fun seeing everybody again. There was a lot of excitement happening at that time. Patrick was just about to have his kids; the show just won the SAG award and the Golden Globe. It was pretty upbeat when I was around. I didn't see any goofiness happening.

Michael Ausiello: What can you tell me about your return to Supernatural?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: I can't confirm nor deny.

Michael Ausiello: C'mon, we know you're coming back.

Jeffrey Dean Morgan: I've been instructed to dummy up on Supernatural. I can't say anything about that. Warner Bros. gave me specific directions: "Don't say squat!" They know you, I guess, Mike.

http://community.tvguide.com/thread.jspa?threadID=800011479

The Business of Television
NCTC Weighs In on Liberty-DirecTV
By Linda Moss MultiChannel News 3/26/2007

News Corp. shouldn’t be allowed to “escape” its obligation to abide by binding arbitration for its regional sports networks after it divests its ownership in DirecTV, the National Cable Television Cooperative told federal regulators.

The NCTC told the Federal Communications Commission it should continue to enforce certain restraints -- including submitting to arbitration for some programming disputes -- it imposed on News Corp. back in 2003 in approving its acquisition of a major stake in DirecTV.

The NCTC made its remarks in a nine-page filing Friday on Liberty Media’s proposed $11 billion purchase of News Corp’s 39% stake in DirecTV. Comments to the FCC on the pending acquisition were due by Friday.

The NCTC -- a buying co-op for small and midsized cable companies -- is in the midst of an arbitration proceeding with News Corp.’s Fox Cable Networks over how much its members will have to pay to carry seven FSN services.

The NCTC said in its FCC filing, “It would be patently unfair and contrary to the public interest for the commission’s approval of the News Corp./Liberty transactions to have the effect of terminating or otherwise interrupting any arbitration proceeding commenced under the News Corp./DirecTV order.”

As one of the conditions of News Corp. buying its stake in DirecTV, distributors can submit carriage disputes regarding News Corp.-affiliated sports networks and its TV stations to arbitration. Those conditions also said small cable companies can designate a bargaining agent to negotiate with News Corp. on their behalf.

According to the NCTC, those conditions should “continue to apply for their entire scheduled term, at minimum, to those networks or stations that are the subject of an arbitration proceeding at the time the News Corp./Liberty transactions close.”

Under the conditions set in 2003 by the FCC on News Corp., the company can’t withhold its cable networks from distributors at least until October 2007, and arbitration can be used to settle carriage disputes regarding regional sports channels and TV stations until January 2010.

Fox Cable couldn’t be reached for comment Monday.

The NCTC is in arbitration on behalf of 30 of its members regarding carriage deals for FSN Florida, FSN North, FSN Northwest, FSN Ohio, SportsSouth, FSN South and FSN Southwest.

The co-op filed for arbitration in January after nearly two years of trying to negotiate a master carriage deal with Fox for its regional sports channels.

As part of the Liberty-DirecTV deal, Liberty will also get News Corp.’s interests in three regional sports channels: FSN Rocky Mountain, FSN Pittsburgh and FSN Northwest.

In their application for ownership transfer, News Corp. and Liberty said those three sports networks will continue to be bound by the conditions set when News Corp. acquired its DirecTV stake.

But that acknowledgement “begs the question of whether the commission’s approval of the News Corp./Liberty transaction will permit News Corp. to escape the application of the News Corp./DirecTV order conditions to its other affiliated programming services,” the NCTC said in its filing Friday.

The pending arbitration proceeding only involves one of the regional sports channels, FSN Northwest, “that News Corp. and Liberty have conceded will remain subject to the News Corp./DirecTV order conditions,” the NCTC pointed out.

The NCTC also expressed concern that News Corp. will use its DirecTV divestiture “as the basis of evading the application of the other programming-related conditions imposed” by the FCC regarding nonsports News Corp.-affiliated cable networks, such as FX and National Geographic Channel.

The NCTC in its filing said that “there is the potential risk that DirecTV and News Corp.-owned programming services entered into, or will enter into, ‘sweetheart’ deals that serve as part of the actual consideration for the transactions between News Corp. and Liberty.”

To guard against that, the NCTC asked that the FCC “rule that the News Corp./DirecTV order conditions will apply to News Corp.-affiliated programming that entered into or modified its affiliation agreement with DirecTV during the period beginning four months prior to the announcement of News Corp.’s acquisition of DirecTV and ending four months after the closing” of the transaction.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6427693.html?display=Breaking+News

TV Notebook
“SNL” Scores Ratings Touchdown With Manning
By John Consoli MediaWeek March 26, 2007

The Peyton Manning-hosted Saturday Night Live on March 24 earned the show’s highest household rating in more than 10 months in the metered markets, averaging a 5.9 rating and 15 share.

In the Indianapolis market, where Manning plays for the NFL Colts, the show averaged a 23.0 rating and 49 share, four times SNL’s average in the market during the recent February sweeps.

Manning also drew heavy ratings in Knoxville, Tennessee, where he played his college ball. In that market, the show averaged a 10.4 rating, 23 share.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/networktv/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003562761

TV Notebook
“SNL” Scores Ratings Touchdown With Manning
By John Consoli MediaWeek March 26, 2007

The Peyton Manning-hosted Saturday Night Live on March 24 earned the show’s highest household rating in more than 10 months in the metered markets, averaging a 5.9 rating and 15 share.


I have to say I was impressed with him. He obviously made an effort to learn the material and he didn't have any trouble making a fool of himself. I thought he was funnier than some of the showbiz guests they've had on.

I have to say I was impressed with him. He obviously made an effort to learn the material and he didn't have any trouble making a fool of himself. I thought he was funnier than some of the showbiz guests they've had on.

The bit with him 'mentoring' the kids was pretty hilarious.

My favorite "SNL" bits with Manning were the locker room pep-talk/dance skit and the "Maraka" TV Funhouse cartoon. The sheer idiocy of the dance combined with the old "Casino Royale" music (which made a few of the other cast members visibly crack-up on camera) and the sight of Peyton getting jiggy with it was classic "SNL" of old. The parody of "Dora the Explorer" was hilarious because the writers/animators refused to take the easy road of having a gross or bloody cartoon (which everybody expected) and insteaed kept hammering the idiocy of the show's signature "talking to the kids like idiots" hook. My favorite question 'Maraka' asked the kids: "do you know why my father left me?" LOL! :D

TV Q&A
Ask Matt (from the Ask Matt column at TVGuide.com)
Matt answers your questions about “Friday Night Lights”, “Lost”, “Veronica Mars” ,and “Studio 60”
By Matt Roush: TVGuide.com TV Critic Monday, March 26, 2007

Question: Do you know if anyone has thought of putting Friday Night Lights in the Monday 10 pm/ET slot on a permanent basis? If you look at the ratings, the idea seems pretty sound. On the one night that Friday Night Lights took over the slot, it improved on the audience that Studio 60 had the week before (getting 520,000 more viewers) and had 330,000 more viewers (on the average) than The Black Donnellys' premiere just a few weeks ago. More to the point, the show seems to be demographically compatible with Heroes. Plus, it would allow NBC to make an attempt at roping in Sunday Night Football viewers from the night before. I mean, I'm certainly not an expert, but giving Friday Night Lights a shot at the time slot next year (if it comes back) seems like a no-brainer to me.— Tom C.

Matt Roush: Clearly, NBC thought about it (ergo the one-time tryout), then rethought it. I'm betting NBC still wants to position Friday Night Lights as more of a family drama and would air it earlier than 10 pm in Year 2 (and I'm becoming more and more confident there will be a Year 2). I also have to think that NBC must be trying to develop something for the fall that will take even more advantage of the powerful Heroes lead-in. Much as I love Friday Night Lights, I can't see NBC squandering the Heroes momentum on it, though I agree it is more compatible than what has aired there this season. The next question presents another hurdle for your football argument.

Question: Regarding Studio 60: While I thank NBC for giving it such promotion before and during the early season, they basically screwed the show by running it on Mondays at 10. They had to know that many in the initial audience would be coming from The West Wing and that it would be competing directly with Monday Night Football in half of the country. I think that if it had another day/time, the ratings would have been 70-100 percent higher. I recall the sharp drop in The West Wing's ratings during the final season when it was moved to Sunday at 8 pm/ET, in competition with ESPN's Sunday Night Football. What are the chances that NBC would effectively apologize for that time slot by renewing Studio 60?— Ian

Matt Roush: The Monday time slot may not have been ideal — if you recall, NBC's initial plan was to air Studio 60 on Thursdays as the lead-in to ER, until ABC surprised everyone with the Grey's Anatomy move. But NBC did the show a favor by not jerking it around (until the recent hiatus, of course), letting it stay where people knew to find it. There are precious few nights when it wouldn't run into CSI competition, even on Wednesdays, where maybe the show could have tapped into a residual Aaron Sorkin vibe from the glory days when The West Wing commanded a large audience on that night. I never really considered football to be the problem here. Studio 60 had enough crossover appeal with women that it shouldn't have been a problem. (CBS does pretty well on the night, and did even when ABC had the football franchise on Mondays.) Referring back to the top question, Friday Night Lights seems unlikely to move to Mondays because of the head-to-head with football. But not as unlikely as NBC giving Studio 60 a second season. With this show, it's not just a ratings problem. It's pretty widely perceived (although not by its fans) that the show has some insurmountable creative problems, which a new time period isn't likely to help.

Question: Does ABC plan on ever finishing the run of a new sitcom? Last year, they gave Emily's Reasons Why Not a one-night trial, along with the returning Jake in Progress. They also pulled Crumbs after five episodes, after it averaged 7.5 million viewers on Tuesdays. That's much better than any of ABC's comedies have averaged this season, besides Dancing with the Stars-fueled Help Me Help You, which was pulled with four episodes left to air. Then, the network pulled Big Day with only one episode left to air, The Knights of Prosperity with four episodes left, In Case of Emergency with two episodes left and Notes from the Underbelly, which will only air seven of its 13 episodes. Do you think this shows an overall lack of confidence in new sitcoms?— Ann H.

Matt Roush: Whew. You're certainly paying a lot more attention to that wasteland than I am. In most cases (though not for Knights of Prosperity, which deserved better), for ABC to take these shows off the air early is kind of like a mercy killing. The fact that few of these shows make it all the way to the end of their designed run is insulting for fans, I'm sure, but it's a clear sign that the network is experiencing a serious comedy drought. Look at ABC's announcement last week of its early pickups. Of 14 series that are definite to return next season, none are half-hour comedies. Not even stalwarts like According to Jim and George Lopez are safe at this point.

Question: When news of Lost's falling ratings first began, I simply ignored it. But now that the show seems to be hitting series-low numbers every week, I'm starting to get worried. Any theories as to why this is happening? I think the show has been fantastic since returning from break, with episodes that have ramped up the action on the island while also providing a few of those answers the fans crave. Is it possible that the success of Heroes, which obviously moves at a much faster pace and prides itself on answering questions, has skewed how fans look at Lost? Also, I see this dip in Lost's ratings as a double-edged sword. On the positive side, slipping ratings may mean that ABC will allow the creators to end the show when they please and not drag it out past its natural lifespan. On the negative side, I'm afraid ABC may start to meddle with the show's creative direction in order to woo back fans, which almost never bodes well. How worried should I be?— Donnie W.

Matt Roush: I wouldn't lose sleep over it. I've addressed the slipping ratings a lot lately, and still contend that the show is settling into a ratings groove much more in line with what expectations should be for something this bizarre. It's still popular enough, and still gets plenty of media buzz. The show's just not the megahit it was when people were first blown away by it (before many started getting frustrated, which is only natural). I'm with you that if Lost's decline allows the creators to end it on their own terms, that will be a positive. With this particular show, I don't see ABC meddling and dictating the direction of story lines. Where would they start? I have to think ABC realizes many former Lost fans have ditched for good, and what's left is still a choice audience. Getting in the way on a production like this is an invitation for much worse disaster.

Question: Why do you keep picking on all-star seasons of reality shows? Yes, Survivor wasn't great, but Big Brother was a different story. I thought it offered a lot of great comedy with a semi-terrific ending. However, I think Amazing Race is different, because it's a race, and not a claustrophobic living space or a secluded island. Amazing Race All-Stars is delivering the kind of great stories that previous Races have had in the past. I love the fact that Charla and Mirna are proving to be great bumbling villains, that Dustin and Kandice are allowed to get along with the other teams and that Romber got their asses kicked. The Amazing Race is not like other reality shows where scheming and plotting get you far. It's all about travel, adventure and determination. So don't go harping on this season just because it's all-stars. Take the time to revel and enjoy the scenery, the competition and the great personal stories of the contestants, because that's what makes this show great.— James

Matt Roush: You're using the same arguments I've made over the years to explain why The Amazing Race has always been and will probably always be my favorite reality show. But I'm going to reprint what I wrote in a recent Dispatch on the show, celebrating the ouster of Rob and Amber: "Much of the pleasure of The Amazing Race any season is in making new acquaintances along the way while experiencing astonishing new locations. When the traveling companions are this familiar, it takes some of the joy out of the ride." That said, I have enjoyed the last few episodes, with the wild reversals of Rob and Amber going from first to worst and Charla and Mirna doing exactly the opposite. Even in an all-stars edition, the race is unpredictable, and as always (except in the all-U.S. family edition, which was truly boring), the visuals are spectacular. I just don't think that this particular show needs to stoop to recycling past stars as a gimmick. And really, putting Big Brother in this category? You must be joking.

Question: The recent discussion about a potential fast-forward for Veronica Mars got me thinking about how shows have a hard time making the leap from a high-school setting to a college setting. Beverly Hills, 90210 and Dawson's Creek took creative nosedives once the gangs left high school. Buffy's college years were such a struggle that she had to die before the show got interesting again. Saved by the Bell: The College Years? Well, who cares, really. But, in fact, we rarely see any shows set in higher education at all. I can only think of two recent examples: Undeclared and Felicity. Undeclared was just OK but lacked the heart of Judd Apatow's true gem, Freaks and Geeks. Felicity is the one example of a show that made the genre work. Why do you think this is?— Kelly C.

Matt Roush: I can't believe you left out The Bedford Diaries, one of the last (and worst) duds in the WB's short history. Shows fail for all kinds of reasons, but generally, when a show moves its characters to college after we've come to know them in high school, there may already be a burnout factor in play, a sense that the best years already are past. (In real life, at least mine, it's the opposite: Life began at college.) The reason Felicity worked was that, besides the wonderful writing and brilliant casting, college was the starting point, not the midpoint, in our relationship with these characters. And besides, the show was more of a romance about college than a serious or even a comic look at college life.

Question: It seems almost certain that Veronica Mars will meet its end this season, and probably not with a nice ending like Everwood had. I was wondering, even though it's not at the magic 100 episodes yet, could Veronica Mars possibly find success in syndication? That's a tough thing to do with a show that began on UPN and was up against House, Lost and American Idol most of its life. Syndication, I think, is the best way to see any good show — I did it for Seinfeld, Friends, Will & Grace, Buffy, Angel and The X-Files. It allowed me to be hooked for months at a time, with a new episode every day saved nicely on my TiVo to watch whenever I wanted. At 7 pm/ET as a lead-in to prime time, Veronica Mars could find itself a much larger audience. I also wanted to know what you thought about a CBS pilot I read about a month ago that made everyone I know who saw Angel laugh. It's supposed to be about a vampire who runs a private investigation firm. However, it's being developed by one of the people behind Veronica Mars and could probably work.— Kate K.

Matt Roush: I won't comment on pilots I haven't seen, except to say vampires and characters brought back from the dead appear to be quite the thing this development season. Let's wait to see if they actually get on the air first. As for Veronica Mars' afterlife, I think it's most likely to live on in some cable network's lineup (Lifetime, WE, Oxygen, something geared toward young women). That may be what you mean by syndication, which when I paid more attention to that marketplace used to be more about selling to independent stations than to cable. Dramas are much less popular in that arena these days, so no matter how long Veronica Mars runs, I don't see much potential for it there. But where the show will really thrive is on DVD.

Question: As a person who has been in and around the TV industry as long as you have, I am hoping that you might be able to shed some light on the issue of what drives a network to renew shows that aren't huge hits but smaller cult and/or critical favorites, such as Friday Night Lights, Supernatural, Veronica Mars and The Class. Is it really just ratings and demographics, or do other factors such as merchandise and future marketability go into the thought process as well? Also, do you foresee a change in the current (and in my opinion, antiquated) ratings system in light of the onslaught of TiVos and other DVR systems?— Chris

Matt Roush: Wow, you make me sound like a graybeard. (Maybe if I grow one, I'll be one.) I'll duck the larger ratings question. I really can't say where audience measurement is heading, but for now, we seem stuck with this system. On the renewal issue, when a network takes a chance on a marginal performer, it often says more about the network than it does the show. For the CW, shows like Supernatural and Veronica are very targeted for special audiences on specific nights, and their overall numbers can be misleading. (The fact that Supernatural goes up against two of the biggest hits of recent years cannot be lost on CW executives.) For NBC to take a risk with Friday Night Lights is in keeping with the rebuilding of a network that wants to be able to use quality as one of its yardsticks. It worked with The Office and might yet with 30 Rock as well. Without the acclaim, these shows would already be dead. The Class is in a much more tenuous situation. It got decent reviews but little real buzz. Its numbers were neither great nor terrible. Its fate really depends on what else CBS has on its comedy bench for next season, and whether the network sees more upside in it than in The New Adventures of Old Christine, which is also struggling in its earlier time slot (no thanks to landing there just as Daylight Savings began its early onset). The fact that The Class is much less likely to be a contender at the Emmys (where Julia Louis-Dreyfus has already won) probably won't help. Neither will the success of Rules of Engagement, which is a slam-dunk for renewal at this point.

Question: I know it's a little early for Emmy talk, but I was so horrified by Lost's snub last year that I can't stop thinking about it. What do you think Lost's chances are at this year's Emmys? I think Elizabeth Mitchell, Henry Ian Cusick and Michael Emerson all have a good chance, as well as the show in the drama category. Also, I heard last year's snub was due to the producers' submitting episodes poorer in quality, such as "Man of Science, Man of Faith," to the nomination panel. I hope the Emmy voters correct last year's grievous wrongdoing and nominate Lost this year. What do you think?— John

Matt Roush: I think I admire your faith in the show and in Emmy voters. Frankly, I'd be shocked if the Emmys reverse course to show much if any love toward a show whose reputation took several hits this year: in the ratings and in media coverage over that ill-conceived opening "pod" of episodes. I agree that Elizabeth Mitchell in particular has shone this season, but given the richness and variety of TV drama these days, I can't help but think Lost's breakthrough freshman season (when it won best drama) is going to be its sole trip to the big party. I'd love to be wrong, but I think (speaking in island terms) that ship may have sailed for good.

Question: Last week's Lost delivered what I thought was the best episode of the season. I literally screamed at that pivotal scene with Locke and his dad — well, actually at the last two scenes between them. Also, wasn't it a master class of acting between Michael Emerson and Terry O'Quinn? The scenes with Matthew Fox and Evangeline Lilly were quite impressive as well. Whenever people gripe about Lost, I always point out the writing, acting and production values. They are a notch above most of the TV shows out there. Plus, predictability is never a claim you can throw at Lost. Who knows where it's going? I am sure Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse do, and I will happily go along for the ride.— Marc

Matt Roush: Or, as Dennis B. wrote in to gush, "After the last couple of episodes of Lost, can we put to rest the reports of its demise?" I'd be happy to. After so much bad-mouthing about the show since the third season began, I'm happy to report that all of the mail I got (at least by week's end) in the wake of last week's sensational Locke-centric episode was positive. The show is back on its game, even if it's a game that many former fans seem less willing to play. For me, Lost has always been more about the characters than about the mysteries. But when an episode combines the two elements as thrillingly as this one, then it really is hard to beat. Or to beat up on, although I'm sure there are some who will try.

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

Washington Notebook
MLB-EI Senate Hearing
Senate Commerce Committee Hearing Set For Tuesday, March 27, 10 AM ET
Exclusive Sports Programming: Examining Competition and Consumer Choice

Witnesses

Opening Remarks

• Rob Jacobson
President and Chief Executive Officer
iN DEMAND Networks

• Stephen F. Ross
Professor of Law
The Dickinson School of Law, The Pennsylvania State University

• Robert DuPuy
President and Chief Operating Officer
Major League Baseball

• Chase Carey
Chief Executive Officer
DIRECTV Group, Inc.

• Carl Vogel
President & Vice Chairman
EchoStar Satellite L.L.C.

http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&Hearing_ID=1838

Critic’s Notebook
I watched so you don't have to:
A kiss-and-tell report on the 'Dirt' finale with Jen and Courteney
From Maureen Ryan’s Chicago Tribune blog “The Watcher” March 26, 2007

This is one of those days that I take a bullet for the team: I’ve watched the “Dirt” finale.

It’s more accurate to say I forced myself to watch the finale of the dreadful FX drama starring Courteney Cox as a tabloid editor, which airs 9 p.m. Tuesday. (Spoilers ahead. If you care.)

I sort of had to screen the finale, because people (OK, maybe just a few people) will be wondering about the much-advertised kiss between Cox’s character, Lucy Spiller, and a rival magazine editor played by Cox’s old “Friends” castmate, Jennifer Aniston.

So, here’s the full report on the kiss: In the scene that precedes it, Spiller and Tina Harrod (Aniston) have lunch in Spiller’s office. Spiller’s job as editor of the celebrity rag DirtNow is in jeopardy and she thinks Harrod is angling for it. A lesbian encounter in their past is mentioned – it emerged earlier in this painfully drawn-out episode that they worked together long ago – but Spiller brushes off Harrod’s string of flirtatious remarks.

As they walk out of Spiller’s office, Harrod kisses Spiller goodbye. On the lips, for a few seconds. No tongue. And since the kiss is in full view of the DirtNow staff, there’s really no passion to it.

That would pretty much describe the show itself, which makes viewers wait until more than 30 minutes have passed to show this not-hot kiss.

Did I mention that this episode features not one but two ghostly visions speaking portentious Latin in the opening minutes? See, whatever happens between Aniston and Cox, you won’t really be too sorry if you miss this finale, will you?

I’ve actually forced myself to watch “Dirt” a few times in the last few weeks. I wrote a negative review of the show after viewing the first three episodes – I found the show made the juicy world of tabloids into a dreadfully pretentious, mind-numbing bore – but I kept giving it a chance.

Why? What was I thinking? If anything, “Dirt” got more painful over time. Each episode was grindingly interminable, and featured ridiculous dream sequences, courtesy of Spiller’s photographer pal, Don Konkey, who’s schizophrenic, and far too many scenes of Courteney Cox’s character having sex with her dolt of a movie-star boyfriend, Holt. Er, no thanks.

The “stars” of Spiller’s version of Hollywood were whiny, pathetic messes, and Spiller herself was cold, ruthless and boring – but not in an interesting way. And the attempts to warm up Spiller by having her demonstrate her love for Konkey were inadequate, at best. “Dirt” not only failed to have some fun with the world of celebrity gossip, but the show was also a frustrating waste of an opportunity to create a compelling female anti-hero. One day, someone will do that, I hope. “Dirt” sure didn’t.

But it wasn’t just the terrifyingly cold Spiller that was the problem. There was not a single reason to invest in any of these characters. It takes sensational storytelling to make you care about people with the morals of pond scum. This was not that show.

I’m racking my brain to think of something nice to say about this show: Oh, I found two nice things! I hated it marginally less than I hated “October Road.” And Spiller’s wardrobe was fierce.

But seriously, if anything can be salvaged from this mess, I hope that Ian Hart, who played Konkey, will get better gigs despite this debacle. He truly did yeoman’s work in his role as the anguished shutterbug, and was really the only marginally tolerable thing about “Dirt.”

Sadly, Aniston’s guest appearance didn’t jazz things up much. If anything, the “Dirt” finale came off as an extended ego-festival, with Jen’s character constantly commenting on how great Courteney's character was, how “gorgeous” Spiller was, what a great mom Spiller would make (what?!). Every other word out of Harrod’s mouth was “sweetie” and “honey.”

“You’ve got a really big heart and I wish you’d let it show a little more,” Harrod told Spiller over lunch.

Harrod must have spotted something I missed.

Oh, by the way, the finale ends on a cliffhanger, of course. If I cared, I’d spoil it for you and tell you what happened. But sorry, like this series, I’ve run out of gas.

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

Washington Notebook
MLB-EI Senate Hearing
Senate Commerce Committee Hearing Set For Tuesday, March 27, 10 AM ET

A spokesperson for the Senate Commerce Committee says she expects that the hearing will be streamed live on the Committee's website but "lately some of our hearings have been getting bumped."

A C-SPAN spokesperson says Tuesday's schedule has not yet been finalized, but will be by early evening ET.

The Business of Television
EchoStar: Beware Liberty-DirecTV
By Linda Moss MultiChannel News 3/262007

EchoStar Communications warned federal regulators to be wary about John Malone’s plan to re-establish Liberty Media’s “market power,” in terms of programming clout, by purchasing News Corp.’s stake in DirecTV, the nation’s largest direct-broadcast satellite provider.

EchoStar, the No. 2 DBS company, filed a petition last Friday asking the Federal Communications Commission to deny approval of Liberty’s $11 billion purchase of News Corp.’s 39% ownership of DirecTV unless there are commitments “to ensure that consumers and the programming market are not adversely affected.”

In its 34-page FCC filing, EchoStar cited the kind of tactics it alleged Liberty was able to engage in the past in when it benefited from an association with another distribution outlet -- namely Malone’s then-cable company, Tele-Communications Inc.

EchoStar claimed that “it is well-established that TCI and Liberty operated ruthlessly in acquiring and creating programming and in its treatment of unaffiliated MVPDs [multichannel-video-programming distributors] and programmers.”

In its filing, EchoStar charged that programmer Liberty and its sister companies have “determined that [the] additional ‘distribution muscle’ of DirecTV’s national platform is critical to its efforts to expand and enhance its programming assets.”

The net result of the Liberty-DirecTV transaction “is that Liberty will rejoin the ranks of vertically integrated major media conglomerates [including News Corp.] that can dictate the terms and conditions of programming -- e.g. higher price and less choice -- to MVPDs and consumers.”

Liberty, which couldn’t be reached for comment Monday, has ownership in programming services such as Discovery Networks, Starz Entertainment, QVC, GSN and Hallmark Channel. It will also get News Corp.’s stakes in three regional sports channels as a result of its acquisition of Rupert Murdoch’s piece of DirecTV, a powerful platform with 16 million subscribers.

At one point, when Malone still owned TCI, Liberty had stakes in a far broader range of networks, such as Court TV and E! Entertainment Television.

In its filing, EchoStar said, “A comprehensive list of TCI/Liberty’s excesses and abuses with respect to programming would be extensive,” including their attempt “to force increased programming costs on MVPDs by agreeing to ‘egregiously generous’ carriage terms for affiliated programmers.”

EchoStar also alleged that TCI/Liberty forced “prospective networks to alter their formats to avoid conflicting with TCI/Liberty-affiliated programming.”

The FCC imposed various conditions on News Corp. in 2003 in exchange for approving the media giant’s purchase of a stake in DirecTV. EchoStar asked that the FCC tweak those strictures so that they would be specifically tailored to Liberty taking News Corp.’s DirecTV stake.

For example, one of the 2003 conditions was that a distributor could take a dispute with a News Corp. regional sports network to arbitration. EchoStar argued that this arbitration right “should apply to any Liberty-affiliated RSN, including after-acquired or new RSNs.” Liberty’s attempt to “limit the condition to the three RSNs included in this transaction should be rejected,” EchoStar said in its filing.

EchoStar also maintained that program-access protections should apply to DirecTV-affiliated programming. “Efforts to limit the reach of those protections to a subset of Liberty’s holdings [Liberty Media] should be denied,” EchoStar said in its filing, adding that program-access protections should provide for third-party arbitration for all Liberty programming.

DirecTV should also be prevented from acquiring any additional exclusive programming rights.

“It is apparent that Liberty will capitalize on its reintegration with a MVPD and either acquire or create new programming, hence creating more vertical integration,” EchoStar said in its papers.

The American Cable Association also filed comments Friday with the FCC on the proposed Liberty-DirecTV deal. The ACA asked that the FCC impose several conditions on the deal, including ensuring that program access and nondiscrimination conditions cover Discovery’s networks.

And the National Cable Television Cooperative said News Corp. shouldn’t be allowed to “escape” its obligation to abide by binding arbitration for its regional sports networks after it divests its ownership in DirecTV.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6427946.html?display=Breaking+News

Critic’s Notebook
The Mr. Television Column:
Show Tuneups
By Marc Berman MediaWeek March 26, 2007

With about eight weeks left before we end the traditional TV season, I have some suggestions on how some of my favorite—and not so favorite—shows should wrap up. While some of this advice comes at the risk of repeating myself (that's what Virgos do, we obsess about every-

thing and repeat ourselves constantly), I feel it is worth saying again.

First, let's acknowledge that ABC's Lost is, well, lost. So here's what it needs to do: Give viewers some definitive answers. Tell us who "the Others" are, where the Dharma Initiative originated and, once and for all, explain to us why the lives of these survivors intertwined before the crash. While I am not asking for all the mysteries to be solved, if I don't get some sense of resolution this season, I won't be back.

Let me issue another stern warning to ABC: Do not break up the Lost season again. If you can't have enough episodes ready by the fall, then do what Fox does with American Idol and 24 and hold off until midseason. I would rather wait than have the rug pulled out from under me again.

Speaking of American Idol, which could use a few good male singers this season, it's time for the silly insults between Simon Cowell and Ryan Seacrest to stop. It's not funny, it's insulting to the gay community and it detracts from the show. As for Paula talking back to bad-boy Simon: You go, girl! It's time that nasty Brit was put in his place. In fact, I have a word of advice to any potential contestants next season: You have a mouth; use it if Simon critiques how you look. Simon is a judge of a music competition, not Mr. Blackwell.

Another show that remains in the top 10 (despite losing steam) is ABC's Desperate Housewives, which I am happy to report has found its way again creatively this season. To keep the show on track, end the monotonous flirtation between Susan (the overrated Teri Hatcher) and Mike (James Denton), who have absolutely no chemistry together; keep spicy Edie (Nicollette Sheridan) in the center of the story lines; and send Lynette (Felicity Huffman) back into the real working world. What the heck is she doing working at a pizza place?

While you certainly cannot deny the successful relocation of former Desperate Housewives lead-out Grey's Anatomy to Thursday, the still apparently must-see medical drama (the appeal of which I admit I don't understand) is treading in dangerous waters. That's because it is overexposed. The minute this show loses its grip creatively—and, trust me, it will—the press will pounce on it. My advice is for these stars to learn how to get along. Isaiah-gate is old news, and Katherine Heigl (Izzie) in the middle of a contract dispute reminds me of the whole Suzanne Somers fracas on Three's Company. Unlike Somers, though, she's not as important to this show and would not be missed.

As long as we're talking about Grey's Anatomy, note to Ellen Pompeo (Meredith): Get some acting lessons! Her sickening sweetness is enough to make a diabetic go into a coma.

No show right now is hotter than surprise Fox sensation Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader, which I am still not sure is the real deal long-term. So, to keep the interest intact, take a break this summer, make sure the show only airs one time per week when it returns next season and increase the pace between questions. Like Deal or No Deal, the constant explaining of the rules is grating.

Also annoying these days is a show I used to never miss, The CW's 7th Heaven. With the introduction of the lisping orphan T-Bone, who came to live with the Camdens, the whole season seems like a bad rash. So, how about taking a page from Dallas and have the Reverend wake up and explain he had a really bad dream? Go back to the original series-ender last May when Mary, Lucy and Matt's wife were all pregnant with twins, and leave it at that.

As for the sorry state of the sitcom, it won't get any better until the networks—ABC, in particular—stop putting on inane nonsense like Big Day, Help Me Help You and In Case of Emergency. These shows did not connect with the TV audience because the humor often went over the heads of the typical TV viewer. Zany characters and zany situations can be fun, but creativity for creativity's sake never works.

As I have said for years, I don't care if the premise is generic. If it's funny, I'll watch. And so will other viewers, I bet.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/departments/columns/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003562500

Critic’s Notebook
We wait, whine as the wizards of TV wonder what to keep
By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle Television Critic Monday, March 26, 2007

Whatever March Madness we had in TV Land is over. After a rush of shows that included two duds ("The Wedding Bells," "October Road"), one mediocre offering ("Raines"), two very promising entries ("Andy Barker, P.I." and "This American Life") and one truly great newcomer ("The Riches"), we are now closing out the month with March Doldrums.

Or maybe just a breather before April brings us "The Tudors" on Showtime, "The Shield" on FX and "The Sopranos" and "Entourage" on HBO. Call it what you want, but suddenly we're bored. Yes, one dull week and already we're whining. But with some serious machinations ahead -- in April, the networks are finalizing what they'll keep, kill and order for next year at the "upfronts" a month later -- this seems like the perfect lull in the storm to contemplate "What We've Learned So Far."

So, in no particular order, here's a list:

• The best pilots turned out to be mediocre -- or worse -- shows. Remember getting excited for "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" and "The Nine"? Seems kind of silly now.

• Serial drama glut -- bad for TV.

• Always put a bet on the dark horse: "Heroes."

• People opted for light ("Ugly Betty," "Men in Trees") over dark ("Vanished," "Smith," "Kidnapped," etc.).

• Some shows that start with promise can easily go sideways: "Jericho."

• There actually was a market for an adult drama that likes big emotions without getting too soapy: "Brothers & Sisters."

• You can have a hit but not find any of your friends who are watching it: "Brothers & Sisters."

• The best intentions can go bad in a real hurry: Trying to limit the number of reruns on "Lost" by pulling it off after a handful of episodes. Nothing like a momentum killer.

• Replacing a serialized drama with another serialized drama is annoying: "Day Break." But not as annoying as having no rules about how your show works: "Day Break."

• Winner, Most Annoying Trend After Serialized Drama Glut: Pulling serialized shows before they finished telling a complicated story. As in "Vanished," "Kidnapped," "Day Break," "Smith," "Runaway," "The Nine," "Six Degrees."

• Biggest network lie of the season: "We'll finish telling the story somehow."

• "Hi, I'm sorry, what was your name again?": "3 lbs.," "Big Day," "Help Me Help You," "Twenty Good Years," "The Game."

• Whoops, we were yawning -- whatever happened to: most of Fox's lineup and "Shark" and "Justice" and "Six Degrees."

• What the hell? From decent to brilliant almost overnight: "30 Rock."

• Not funny then, not funny now: "The Class," "Twenty Good Years," " 'Til Death," "Happy Hour," "The Game," "In Case of Emergency," "The Winner."

• Good shows still looking for an audience: "Friday Night Lights," "Veronica Mars," "Knights of Prosperity," "Andy Barker, P.I." "Everybody Hates Chris."

• A good idea on paper. Not so much on TV: "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," "Smith," "The Nine," "Jericho," "3 lbs.," "The Black Donnellys."

• Sadly, gone too early: "Kidnapped," "Knights of Prosperity."

• Sometimes networks are kinder than you think they'll be: "Friday Night Lights."

• When big ratings from a few shows hide the rest of your ineptitude: Fox.

• Thanks, freshmen, for making this job easier: "The Riches," "Dexter," "This American Life," "Andy Barker, P.I.," "The Sarah Silverman Program," "30 Rock," "Knights of Prosperity," "Heroes."

• Here's to a bigger order of episodes next year: "Battlestar Galactica," "Andy Barker, P.I.," "This American Life," "Weeds," "The Sarah Silverman Program."

• Nice late rally: "Lost." Next year, start in January. "Dirt," much better by the fifth episode.

• Going out too soon: "Rome," "Deadwood."

• Other sad endings, but probably the right time: "Prime Suspect."

• A lot more in the tank: "Sopranos," "Extras," "King of the Hill," "Slings & Arrows."

• Always there when we need you: HBO, FX, Showtime, BBC America.

• Mostly there when we need you: ABC, NBC.

• There because you're so steady, but we probably don't respect you as much as we should: CBS.

• Not there: Fox.

• Still the best we've ever seen: "The Wire."

• Another season of still not caring: "American Idol."

• One day we'll wake up and this will all be a dead fad: makeover reality shows.

• One reality show we're going to pay more attention to: "Project Runway."

• One reality show that has lost us for two versions in a row now: "Survivor."

• Still not listening: To whatever Rosie says on "The View."

• Until further notice, another TV truism: Sitcoms are not dead. But they are nowhere near as good as their dramatic counterparts.

Well, that's "What We Know So Far." In a couple of weeks, we'll know if Showtime has yet another hit, whether "The Shield" maintains its greatness and whether one of the landmark series in all of television will go out with a bang.

In the meantime, maybe we could watch "Maisy" until April comes.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/03/26/DDGFHOQO381.DTL&type=printable

TV Sports
Theismann Dropped From Monday Night Crew
New Lineup Announced for ESPNs Monday Night Football: Tirico, Jaworski and Kornheiser

(ESPN News Release)

Sports televisions signature series, ESPNs Monday Night Football, will kick off its 38th season with a new line-up when longtime ESPN NFL analyst Ron Jaworski joins Mike Tirico and Tony Kornheiser in the booth, and sideline reporters Suzy Kolber and Michele Tafoya.

Jaworski will occupy the analyst role previously held by Joe Theismann, who has been offered a prominent football analyst role with ESPN.

This new lineup will enhance our presentation of Monday Night Football, our most important property, said Norby Williamson, executive vice president, studio and remote production, ESPN. Ron has covered the NFL from many different perspectives, and he is totally tied into the issues and trends from around the league.

We appreciate the work Joe has done for 19 years and continue to talk with him about another high-profile football role with ESPN.

Jaworskis passion for football and his knowledge of all things NFL have made him a fan favorite on ESPNs Sunday NFL Countdown and other studio shows. Following a 17-year NFL career (1973-89), most notably as quarterback of the Philadelphia Eagles, Jaworski joined ESPN in 1990. He has worked in various capacities sideline reporter, game-site reporter, host and as both a studio and game analyst. He was a fixture on ESPNs NFL studio programs last season, including Sunday NFL Countdown, NFL PrimeTime and NFL Match-Up, a show he will continue to do. Jaworski has also appeared as a weekly Five Good Minutes guest on Monday editions of Pardon the Interruption with Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon and worked as an analyst during the San Diego Chargers-Oakland Raiders game as part of ESPNs 2006 season-opening NFL doubleheader. He continues to be a major contributor to ESPNs annual NFL Draft coverage.

Jaworskis studio responsibilities will now be spread amongst ESPNs deep lineup of NFL analysts, including Emmitt Smith, who will join both Sunday NFL Countdown and Monday Night Countdown, and Bill Parcells, who will appear on ESPNs Monday studio shows.

Critic’s Notebook
We wait, whine as the wizards of TV wonder what to keep
By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle Television Critic Monday, March 26, 2007

• Always there when we need you: HBO, FX, Showtime, BBC America.

Why do the critics keep applauding Sho when they introduced one of the most abhorrent practices on network TV to premium channels. That of running ads over the actual programming. Not to mention that when they aren't showing one of the few worthy series they have, their programming lineup is a barren wasteland.

Do critics sit down and watch channels, or are they all reliant on screener DVDs for episodes these days?

Apart from that, a good read. :D

In the vast majority of cases, critics see their shows on screener DVDs, so complaints about how channels intrude upon the programming -- or how commercial breaks are so upsetting -- are pretty much foreign to them.

In addition, the critics usually get to see several episodes at once, which again -- at least in my opinion -- can change their perception of how a show may be viewed by the audience.

TV Sports
Theismann Dropped From Monday Night Crew
New Lineup Announced for ESPNs Monday Night Football: Tirico, Jaworski and Kornheiser

(ESPN News Release)

Sports televisions signature series, ESPNs Monday Night Football, will kick off its 38th season with a new line-up when longtime ESPN NFL analyst Ron Jaworski joins Mike Tirico and Tony Kornheiser in the booth, and sideline reporters Suzy Kolber and Michele Tafoya.

Jaworski will occupy the analyst role previously held by Joe Theismann, who has been offered a prominent football analyst role with ESPN.




Good upgrade....Theismann needed to go.

Critic’s Notebook
`King's' demise reflects state of TV comedy
By Phil Rosenthal Chicago Tribune Media Columnist

On a Culver City, Calif., soundstage this month, Kevin James and the rest of "The King of Queens" crew taped the final episode of their nearly nine-year CBS run.

The episode is set to air this spring and, like the finales in recent years of "Friends," "Frasier" and "Everybody Loves Raymond," it will cause some to reflect on the health of the half-hour sitcom.

They will talk about how the networks increasingly have had trouble developing comedies with mass appeal for the last decade or so. They might point out that, as funny as newcomers "The Office," "30 Rock" and "How I Met Your Mother" are, the only sitcom in Nielsen Media Research's prime-time top 20 in overall viewership for this season is CBS' "Two and a Half Men." And, while averaging around 15 million viewers at No. 16, "Men" is already slipping with Monday's return of ABC's hit "Dancing with the Stars."When "Everybody Loves Raymond" was ending its CBS run in 2005 as TV's top-rated comedy, series creator Phil Rosenthal--known in this columnist's home as The Other Phil Rosenthal--was asked so often about whether his show's exit from prime time spelled the end of sitcoms, he developed a stock response: "I say yes. In fact, I think it's going to be the end of laughing anywhere. And after that, smiling will soon go, too."

The Other Phil Rosenthal then would give his serious answer, that television is cyclical and once another hit comedy comes along, everyone will say, "Oh, look, comedy is back."

He wasn't worried.

But then why should he? According to a study released last week by media buyer Magna Global, "Everybody Loves Raymond" remains television's No. 1 comedy, even almost two years removed from its network run, by virtue of being tops in both syndication and on cable, to say nothing of DVD sales and rentals.

In fact, only one of the study's 10 most popular shows on TV was still airing on a network: "King of Queens."

It seems we're watching more comedy even as we're watching less on the networks, partly because there's so much more comedy available to us. Fourteen years ago, when the Nielsen prime-time top 10 included six sitcoms--"Roseanne," "Home Improvement," "Murphy Brown," "Coach," "Cheers" and "Full House"--there were less than one-third the number of comedy hours available to TV viewers than there are today, between the broadcast networks, syndication and ad-supported cable.

Never mind that the number of sitcoms on network TV, which peaked with 50 at the start of the 2003-04 season, was only 24 at the start of this season last fall.

Part of the problem is obvious to any veteran viewer: Most of the new shows don't compare well to the old favorites.

Julia Louis-Dreyfus' Emmy-winning work in CBS' "The New Adventures of Old Christine" is OK, but it pales in comparison to her Emmy-winning work in "Seinfeld," which still runs several times daily on cable and over the air.

Sarah Chalke is a lot more noticeable on NBC's "Scrubs" than she was during her four seasons as Becky Conner on "Roseanne," but a lot fewer people are seeing her on "Scrubs."

Brad Garrett's new Fox sitcom "'Til Death" has gotten a huge boost of late, thanks to its "American Idol" lead-in. But even then, it's not doing as well as the far funnier "Raymond."

Just last week, the networks showed advertisers their development slates, the herd from which they'll cull the new shows for next fall's schedules, set to be unveiled in May.

Who knows? Maybe we'll find something among the newbies we like even better than Chuckles the Clown's accidental death on "The Mary Tyler Moore Show," or the Thanksgiving turkey drop on "WKRP in Cincinnati" or that episode of "Gilligan's Island" where they almost get off the island.

As for "King of Queens," even as it leaves CBS, its reruns air twice each weekday on TBS cable and a dozen times a week on Chicago's WCIU-Ch. 26. It's tough to miss something that really isn't going away.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/chi-0703250061mar25,0,3238870.column

Critic’s Notebook
We wait, whine as the wizards of TV wonder what to keep
By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle Television Critic Monday, March 26, 2007



• Biggest network lie of the season: "We'll finish telling the story somehow."


Ain't that the truth, bet we never heard that statement from a network exec ever again.

Why do the critics keep applauding Sho when they introduced one of the most abhorrent practices on network TV to premium channels. That of running ads over the actual programming. Not to mention that when they aren't showing one of the few worthy series they have, their programming lineup is a barren wasteland.

Do critics sit down and watch channels, or are they all reliant on screener DVDs for episodes these days?

Apart from that, a good read. :D
I can't help but think this disgusting practice of Showtime's is somehow related to Les Moonves' overseer position of Showtime now.

TV Notebook
Fave shows just a click away
Don't bother picking up your remote control. Your favorite shows are online, convenient, free
By Doug Elfman Chicago Sun-Times Television Critic

It's becoming easier and easier to watch TV without a TV. If you miss an episode of "Lost," you can go to ABC.com to watch not only the most recent episode, but also six others posted there. They're free to watch, unlike shows on $2-an-episode iTunes.

You can't download every TV series online. Fox doesn't post "American Idol," "The Simpsons" or "Family Guy" on MySpace.com/Fox. But you can see 13 other shows there, from "24" to "Bones" and "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?"

NBC.com serves up 13 series, including every episode of "Heroes." At ABC.com, you can prowl 12 series. CBS.com streams 19.

Certain series aren't online because the studios that film them have yet to sign a contract with TV networks. ("Criminal Minds" would be on CBS.com if CBS owned the show, or if CBS could reach an agreement with owner Paramount.)

An upside to surfing shows: Online, they aren't bundled with as many commercials as on TV. And you can pause, rewind and fast-forward with ease.

A downside: The CW posts most of its series, but CWTV.com's online video player pauses roughly for my Mac and ruins the experience. Same deal with ComedyCentral.com.

There's another catch. To handle the size of videos, you need a good and fairly new PC or Mac. My year-old laptop at home streams fine; my decade-old Mac at the office won't even think about running this stuff. Your computer also needs to be equipped with viewing software, which can be downloaded free through the network sites.

Here's what was online as of last week:

ABC.COM

• "According to Jim": Four episodes
• "Brothers & Sisters": 16 episodes
• "Dancing With the Stars": One episode
• "Desperate Housewives": Four episodes
• "Day Break": 12 episodes including the season finale
• "Grey's Anatomy": Four episodes
• "Knights of Prosperity": Nine episodes
• "Lost": Seven episodes
• "Men in Trees": Two episodes
• "Six Degrees": Four episodes
• "Ugly Betty": Six episodes
• "What About Brian?": 17 episodes

BONUS VIDEO ONLINE
• Behind the scenes at "General Hospital" and other soaps.
• Brief clips of "The View," "Good Morning America," "World News," "Primetime," "Nightline," "This Week" and "20/20."
• Snippets of late-night and primetime series.

NBC.COM

• "30 Rock": Five episodes
• "Andy Barker, P.I.": Six episodes, and most haven't aired on TV yet
• "The Apprentice": Eight episodes
• "The Black Donnellys": Four episodes, plus a fifth with cast and crew commentary, DVD-style
• "Friday Night Lights": 18 episodes
• "Heroes": 18 episodes
• "Las Vegas": 17 episodes from this season, plus all of last season
• "Medium": Two episodes
• "My Name is Earl": One episode
• "Passions": Five episodes
• "Raines": One episode
• "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip": Four episodes

BONUS VIDEO ONLINE
• Tina Fey answers viewers' questions on video.
• Jay Leno shows off his bike.
• Jim Gaffigan does the animated "Pale Force" with Conan O'Brien.

CBS.COM

• "48 Hours Mystery": Three episodes
• "Armed & Famous": Four episodes
• "As the World Turns": One episode
• "CBS Evening News": Five episodes
• "The Class": One episode
• "CSI": Four episodes
• "CSI: Miami": Three episodes
• "CSI: New York": Four episodes.
• "Face the Nation": One episode
• "How I Met Your Mother": Four episodes
• "Jericho": 16 episodes
• "NCIS": Four episodes
• "The New Adventures of Old Christine": Six episodes
• "Numb3rs": Four episodes
• "Rules of Engagement": Six episodes
• "Shark": One episode
• "Survivor: Fiji": Five episodes
• "The Unit": One episode

BONUS VIDEO ONLINE
• Exclusives like "Animate This!"
• Super Bowl commercials.
• Loads of fan-friendly clips, interviews and recaps of "various daytime, prime-time and late night shows, plus behind-the-scenes looks at "The Price Is Right," "Survivor" and other series.
• Extras focusing on the Grammys and a Victoria's Secret event.
• Recaps of Letterman's top 10 lists, monologues and other highlights.

MYSPACE.COM/FOX
(only the most recent of each)
• "24"
• "American Dad"
• "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?"
• "Bones"
• "The Loop"
• "The O.C."
• "Prison Break"
• "Standoff"
• "Talkshow with Spike Feresten"
• "'Til Death"
• "Vanished"
• "The War at Home"
• "The Winner"

BONUS VIDEO ONLINE
Not much, unless you go to AmericanIdol.com to watch selected recaps.

CWTV.COM
• "All of Us": Four episodes
• "America's Next Top Model": Two episodes
• "Everybody Hates Chris": Four episodes
• "The Game": Five episodes
• "Girlfriends": Four episodes
• "One Tree Hill": Two episodes
• "Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for a New Doll": One episode
• "Supernatural": Four episodes
• "Veronica Mars": Two episodes

BONUS VIDEO ONLINE
• "Top Model" outtakes
• Outtakes from director and creator commentaries for "Everybody Hates Chris" and other shows.

COMEDYCENTRAL.COM Plenty of episodes online, but (at least on my Mac) the media player jumps and pauses too much to enjoy them.

ESPN.COM: Extensive video clips of interviews, commentaries and game recaps. But it can be choppy video.

FXNETWORKS.COM: No FX episodes online.

HBO.COM: No episodes online, although, Bill Maher's "Overtime" episodes keep his "Real Time" guests on the set to chat and answer viewers' real-time questions at length.

MTV.COM: Full episodes of most original shows are not online but are available through iTunes. "The Andy Milonakis Show" begins its third season on MTV2 April 27, yet the entire new season is already buyable at iTunes ($10 for the season; $2 per episode; first episode free).

PBS.ORG: No episodes online.

SHO.COM: No episodes online.

TBS.COM: Has the full seasons of "My Boys" and "10 Items or Less," but only for Windows-equipped PC users.

TNT.TV: Nothing online -- not even "The Closer."

(http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/elfman/311763,SHO-Sunday-elf25.article)

Technology Notebook
Shapiro Cites DTV "Fear-mongering"
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 3/26/2007

Suggesting there was some"fear-mongering" about the transition to digital, Consumer Electronics Association President Gary Shapiro said on Monday that "consumers do not demand these [digital-to-analog converter] boxes as much as some people think they will."

Speaking after a CEA forum in Washington on the DTV transition, Shapiro said the transition "will be uncomfortable and different, but that if we do our jobs right most consumers will know what their options are."

During a forum panel on the transition, Shapiro said there was more alarmist talk than was justified given that there had been transitions before. However, he likened this one more to that between the horse and buggy and the car--more complicated than the transition from black and white television to color.

"Less than 15% of homes will really be shut out totally," by the February 2009 transition to digital, he said, "and of those, some of them want to be shut out," he said. "There is fear-mongering going on, and frankly, it has become a poltiical issue. Democrats are saying the Republicans didn't give enough money and the Democrats now are saying 'oh, we need more money.' "
National Cable & Telecommunications Association President Kyle McSlarrow said he thought the difference between this and other transitions was that it was a government-mandated flash-cut to the new technology, which could require a pretty large education campaign to get right.

Unlike others who have complained about the lack of funding for a DTV education campaign--Congress set aside $5 million--Shapiro says CEA won't take hat in hand and hit up Congress for more. "We don't have a position whether there is enough money," Shapiro said. "We will not ask for additional money. Now, some of our companies may have positions individually. We aren't going to oppose others asking, but we are not going to take a position, though my members could overrule me."

John Lawson, president of the Association of Public Television Stations who was on the DTV panel with Shapiro, had no trouble asking for more money. He called the $5 million grossly inadequate. PBS had asked for $86 million. He said he didn't think he had been fear-mongering. "We've been consistent from day one. We think the government needs to do its part as a major stakeholder in the success of the transition and invest a little bit more in outreach."

"We are exploring some options with the Hill," said Lawson. "But it would be something less than $86 million." A Republican-controlled Congress set aside the $5 million. Democrats now controlling the Commerce committees in both Houses have been talking about getting more money for the campaign.

Marcellus Alexander, executive VP for the National Association of Broadcasters, said consumers could start looking for the joint-industry DTV education PSA's to begin around Jan. 1, 2008. That is when the government is required to start taking applications for up to two, $40 coupons per TV household, each of which can be used toward the purchase of a $60 analog-to-DTV converter box.

Echoing a suggestion made to an NAB conference by FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell, Alexander said it might be too early to start the PSA campaign now. "We believe that if we started today with the public service announcements, people have a lot of other things on their minds now, the war in Iraq, gas prices."

Starting in January has its challenges as well given the presidential campaigns. "There is an election that will take up a lot of inventory, and we're looking at different ways to reach that audience despite that demand."

Alexander said he had to respectfully disagree with Shapiro by saying he "didn't see fear-mongering going on" in terms of how many sets are analog-only. Shapiro said the number is not large and getting smaller all the time. "The numbers [of sets that could be disenfranchises] are a little bit different from Gary. We don't want as an industry to lose any viewers," Shapiro said.

Both Alexander and Lawson said grassroots campaigns through groups like the NAACP and others most affected by the transition would begin before that.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6427969

Washington Notebook
Extra Innings Beanball War Moves to Capitol Hill
By Mike Reynolds [B]MultiChannel News 3/26/2007

It may not be the 1927 New York Yankees lineup of Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Earle Combs, Tony Lazzeri and Bob Meusel, but there will be another Murderer’s Row of sorts gathering on Capitol Hill Tuesday.

In Demand president Rob Jacobson, DirecTV president Chase Carey, EchoStar Communications chairman Charlie Ergen, Major League Baseball president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy and Penn State Law professor Stephen Ross will appear before a U.S. Senate Commerce Committee hearing to discuss the league’s $700 million, seven-year deal with DirecTV for the out-of-market Extra Innings package and MLB’s linear network, scheduled to launch in 2009.

The hearing comes just four days before the March 31 deadline MLB set for cable and EchoStar’s Dish Network to match DirecTV’s offer.

In Demand said its pitch last Wednesday to baseball for the package satisfied the league's demands, matching 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 would provide the channel at launch.

But MLB immediately rejected the offer, saying in a prepared statement that it “falls short of nearly all of the material conditions.

That sets the showdown for a potential beanball affair at the Senate hearing, which was called after several lawmakers questioned whether baseball's exclusive deal with DirecTV was anti-consumer, particularly since cable has offered the package since 2001. The cable industry generated around 200,000 buys from the package last year.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6427983

Washington Notebook
MLB-EI Hearings: Who’ll be Testifying

Here is some background information on the five men who will be testifying Tuesday before the full Senate Commerce Committee which will be looking into the MLB-Extra Innings contract.

(Information is from company websites, except for Charlie Ergen's bio, which is from Forbes.com.)

Rob Jacobson, President iN Demand

Rob Jacobson is presently President & Chief Executive Officer of iN DEMAND Networks.

Rob joined the company in 1999 as Senior Vice President Programming/Business Development and through a series of successive promotions rose to Executive Vice President, to Chief Operating Officer and in May 2004 to President & CEO.

Throughout his career, Rob has consistently demonstrated innovation in the sports and entertainment business and is widely recognized for the creation and development of sustained product differentiators for both cable and satellite.

While at iN DEMAND, he created the Sports iN DEMAND umbrella and under it launched NBA LEAGUE PASS, NHL CENTER ICE and MLB EXTRA INNINGS. Moreover, Rob gave American television viewers their first taste of interactive television programming with the launch of the Emmy Award-winning NASCAR IN CAR.

His latest innovation is the launch of INHD and INHD2, now cable’s fastest growing all-HD networks, which feature a mix of professional and college sports and general entertainment programming. Over the past few years, Rob also has guided the company’s transition to VOD, which has become one of cable’s most significant product differentiators.

Prior to joining iN DEMAND, Mr. Jacobson was the head of DirecTV’s East Coast programming office and is recognized for the creation and development of Mega March Madness in conjunction with CBS Sports. Jacobson was also responsible for the DirecTV Multi-Cam Racing Series and Ivy League Friday Nights.

Mr. Jacobson joined DirecTV from Fox/Liberty Networks where he was Vice President, Affiliate Sales and Marketing. Prior to that he served as Vice President, Programming and Business Affairs for American Sky Broadcasting, L.L.C. IN DEMAND Networks is owned by Comcast Cable Communications, Cox Communications, Inc. and Time Warner Entertainment – Advance/Newhouse Partnership.

Steve A. Ross Penn State University Professor of Law

Education: J.D., Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California – Berkeley; A.B., University of California – Berkeley

Professor Stephen Ross, one of the nation’s leading sports law and antitrust scholars, joined the Penn State Dickinson faculty from the University of Illinois College of Law.

After graduation from the University of California Boalt Hall School of Law, where he was associate editor of the California Law Review, Professor Ross held a variety of positions leading up to his career in teaching. He spent several years in Washington, D.C., as an attorney for the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, clerked for Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and served as minority counsel for the Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. Senate.

Professor Ross is the author of the casebook Principles of Antitrust Law and has published various pieces involving U.S. and Canadian antitrust and competition policies, domestic and international sports antitrust issues, and statutory interpretation, as well as comparative Canadian law.

His expert testimony and advice on antitrust issues in the sports arena has been sought by various governmental entities in the U.S. and Canada over the years. Additionally, he has served as pro bono counsel to the Consumer Federation of America on sports antitrust litigation.

Professor Ross is a senior fellow of the American Antitrust Institute and an active participant in the America Bar Association’s Section on Antitrust Law.

Robert A. DuPuy MLB President & Chief Operating Officer

Robert A. DuPuy was named the President and Chief Operating Officer of Major League Baseball on March 7, 2002. As President and Chief Operating Officer of Major League Baseball, he is responsible for all phases of baseball's Central Offices, including licensing, sponsorship, international, broadcasting, publishing, marketing, public relations, government relations, baseball operations, legal affairs, finance, baseball's internet operations and the labor relations committee.

DuPuy has been involved in most of Major League Baseball's legal issues since 1989, when he was brought in as outside legal counsel. He negotiated the settlement of the collusion grievance in 1990, and served as the principal outside counsel to the Commissioner and the Executive Council from 1992 until 1998, when Commissioner Allan H. (Bud) Selig hired him as the MLB Executive Vice President of Administration and Chief Legal Officer.

In that capacity, DuPuy oversaw the consolidation of the American and National Leagues into the Central Offices, the consolidation of MLB's office in Washington, D.C., and the formation MLBAM (Major League Baseball Advanced Media) as its initial Chief Executive Officer.

DuPuy, who grew up in Branford, Conn., received an A.B. from Dartmouth College in 1968 and a J.D. from Cornell in 1973. There, he was Editor-in-Chief of the Cornell Law Review. He saw military service with the U.S. Army from 1968 to 1970 and served a year in Vietnam in the 504th Military Police Battalion, where he received the Army Commendation Medal for his service.

After receiving his law degree, DuPuy joined Foley and Lardner, one of the nation's largest law firms, in 1973, becoming a partner in 1980. He has served as a member of that firm's Management Committee, and as Chairman of the firm's Professional Standards Committee. He is a long-time member and Past-Chairman of the State Bar of Wisconsin's Professional Ethics Committee. He has taught legal ethics and professional responsibility at Northwestern Law School, the University of Wisconsin Law School, and Marquette University Law School, and has served as a long-time faculty member of the National Institute of Trial Advocacy.

Charles Ergen, EchoStar CEO

University of Tennessee Knoxville, Bachelor of Arts / Science; Wake Forest University, Master of Business Administration

Founder of satellite-TV service EchoStar picked up a number of satellite channels from Dolan family's moneylosing Voom venture, part of long-term HDTV expansion plans.

Strong growth last year in customers (325,000 new in first quarter), but company still lags behind rival DirecTV (505,000 new users). Former Frito-Lay financial analyst started selling C-band satellite dishes 1980. Today EchoStar broadcasts to more than 15 million subscribers, surpassing Time Warner as third-largest pay-TV distributor.

Chase Carey DirecTV President and Chief Executive Officer

Carey has served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of DirecTVsince December 22, 2003.
He served as Co-Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation from 1996 until 2002 and as a director, President and Chief Executive Officer of Sky Global Networks, Inc. from 2001 until 2002.

Before that, he was a director of Fox Entertainment Group, Inc. ("Fox Entertainment") from 1992 until 2002 and served as Co-Chief Operating Officer from 1998 until 2002.

Carey was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Fox Television from 1994 until 2000. Mr. Carey was a director of News America Incorporated ("News America") from 1998 until 2002, President and Chief Operating Officer from 1998 until 2002 and Executive Vice President from 1996 to 1998.

He also served as a director of NDS Group, Inc. ("NDS") from 1996 until 2002 and a director of Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc. ("Gemstar-TV Guide") from 2000 until 2002.

I can't help but think this disgusting practice of Showtime's is somehow related to Les Moonves' overseer position of Showtime now.

in my mind I have no doubt. Too many things happened to Sho's lineup and attitude since he took over for it not to be his doing.

TV Notebook
Fave shows just a click away
Don't bother picking up your remote control. Your favorite shows are online, convenient, free
By Doug Elfman Chicago Sun-Times Television Critic

There's another catch. To handle the size of videos, you need a good and fairly new PC or Mac. My year-old laptop at home streams fine; my decade-old Mac at the office won't even think about running this stuff.

That's the catch? Can you really expect a 10 year old computer to be running video streams without some upgrades? :rolleyes:

The real catch is that a lot of streamed content on default settings is the size of a postage stamp!

This is the phone number of MLB. Ask for the Commissioners Office. They will listen to your concerns if you are polite and respectful. It may be too late but "Never give up, don't ever give up"

212-931-7800

The internet stuff has been available for little over a year. It has been improving and will get much better very quickly.

That's the catch? Can you really expect a 10 year old computer to be running video streams without some upgrades? :rolleyes:

The real catch is that a lot of streamed content on default settings is the size of a postage stamp!

Agreed. If the official online content was of a decent size and resolution, I would watch it and the attached ads. But due to the subpar quality, I get illegal torrents.

Critic’s Notebook
It's springtime, and the reruns are in bloom
By Charlie McCollum San Jose Mercury News

In the spring, one television writer's thoughts turn to perennial topics:

The Deadly Repeat.

The past couple of weeks, my e-mail box has been filled with complaints from readers about the number of repeats on network TV. No surprise there, since rerun discontent is an annual spring event, like opening day of the baseball season.

Still, here's a quick recap on why March and April are loaded with reruns: Most network dramas produce 22 episodes; most half-hour sitcoms make 24. Those episodes have to be spread out over a season that runs 36 weeks, from mid-September to late May.

That means shows have to go into reruns (or be pre-empted) for 12 to 14 weeks each season. Since the networks want to load up with fresh episodes at certain times of the season - the start, the so-called rating "sweeps" periods and the end - that pushes the bulk of the oldies into the Thanksgiving-Christmas holiday period and the months of March and April.

It's been that way for a long time, and while some shows have bent the original-repeat pattern - Fox's "24," for instance, runs 24 straight episodes starting in January - the networks have yet to find an alternative.

The Dreaded Bubble.

Running a close second to rerun complaints: Is my favorite show (fill in the blank) coming back next season?

For many series, including several that debuted with high hopes in the fall, it's too late: They've already disappeared from the schedule. The absolutely final decisions about shows that are on the so-called "bubble" - they might be back, might not - won't be made until early May, just before the networks announce their fall lineups.

The list of bubble shows was reduced last week when ABC renewed "Boston Legal" and "Men In Trees," and Fox announced it would bring back "Prison Break." But that still leaves a reasonably large number of series in some jeopardy, including "Friday Night Lights" and "30 Rock" on NBC, Fox's "'Til Death," the CW's "Gilmore Girls" and "Veronica Mars," and all of ABC's sitcoms.

This year, though, the network to pay attention to is CBS, which has network TV's most stable and most-watched schedule. It has some obvious bubble series - "Close to Home," "The Class" - but there are rumors that the network may spring some surprises and ax a few shows that are considered moderate hits. The idea is to clear room for new shows that might generate more buzz - something CBS hasn't had, despite its success, in several years.

The Summer Shows.

E-mail topic No. 3: When is my favorite summertime show (fill in the blank) coming back?

I could be flip and say, "In the summertime." That's not very satisfying, but the fact is that return dates for most notable post-Memorial Day series haven't been announced and won't be for a while.

However, rest assured that TNT's "The Closer" and HBO's "Big Love" will be back in mid- to late June with FX's "Rescue Me" and (probably) "Nip/Tuck," USA's "Dead Zone" and "The 4400" and Showtime's "Weeds" - all of which get asked about repeatedly - surfacing in July and August. One fave that won't be around this summer: HBO's "Deadwood" - which may never return. However, "Deadwood" creator David Milch's new "John From Cincinnati" debuts on the premium cable channel on June10.

Remote controls

"House" (9:07 p.m. Tuesday, Fox) finally is back with a new episode, with friends-with-benefits Allison Cameron (Jennifer Morrison) and Robert Chase (Jesse Spencer) finding time to play doctor outside the hospital. But do note the strange start time of 9:07. The good folks at Fox apparently decided it would be a giggle to take a bite out of the audience for "Dancing With the Stars" (which airs at 9 p.m. Tuesday) by running "American Idol" seven minutes long. What a bunch of kidders.

And while we're on "Idol," yes, folks, it's pretty outrageous that Stephanie Edwards has been voted off while Sanjaya Malakar - who sounds like he's being kicked in a sensitive body part every time he sings - is still around. But good singers have gotten the boot on "Idol" while lame ones stayed around before (Remember Jennifer Hudson? Or Tamayra Gray?). It's not unprecedented. Remain calm.

Speaking of "Friends" with benefits: FX's "Dirt" finishes up its first (and possibly only) season Tuesday (starting at 10) with the much-ballyhooed episode guest-starring Jennifer Aniston as a rival to tabloid editor Lucy Spiller (Courteney Cox). The ex-"Friends" stars reportedly do a little lip-lock, which ought to do wonders for the ratings.

http://www.mercurynews.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?articleId=5522527&siteId=568

This is the phone number of MLB. Ask for the Commissioners Office. They will listen to your concerns if you are polite and respectful. It may be too late but "Never give up, don't ever give up"

212-931-7800

Of course, calls to those running In Demand, Dish, Comcast Time Warner and/or Cox might be in order, too.

Echoing a suggestion made to an NAB conference by FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell, Alexander said it might be too early to start the PSA campaign now. "We believe that if we started today with the public service announcements, people have a lot of other things on their minds now, the war in Iraq, gas prices."

That has to be the most idiotic statement of 2007.

I wonder how these guys managed to get to the conference, what with their minds so tied up thinking about the war and gas prices.

TV Notebook
Fave shows just a click away
Don't bother picking up your remote control. Your favorite shows are online, convenient, free
By Doug Elfman Chicago Sun-Times Television Critic


(http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/elfman/311763,SHO-Sunday-elf25.article)

Watched (some) Battlestar on SciFi.

Other options:http://www.findinternettv.com/
http://www.joost.com/

Before I got my HDTV this was as close to watching an animal documentary as I came: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s85uQ45fP0 (pause it and then scroll until it reaches 2:40 min. into the clip... trust me, its worth the hassle). :DI don't know whether to sympathize or empathize. :)

Passings
Michel Grilikhes, 83,
TV executive, Emmy winner
By Variety

TV exec and stage show developer Michel (Mike) Grilikhes died March 9 in Culver City of kidney failure. He was 83.

A native of New York, he attended Yale U. and had a 20 year career in the U.S. Marines. After working in the film unit for the Marines, he started in show business as managing director of Town Hall Theater in Sturbridge, Mass., then joined Universal Pictures in New York and became production manager on "Mr. Universe," starring Jack Carson and Bert Lahr.

Grilikhes joined CBS Television, where he worked as production exec and producer/director on shows such as "Studio One" and "G.E. Theater." He won an Emmy for producing "Playhouse 90" and served as program exec for shows including "Route 66," "Dobie Gillis" and "Dennis the Menace."

His writing credits include the screenplay for United Artists' "Duel at Diablo," a two part episode of "Bonanza" and "The Golden Men" for Qualis Productions.

He produced several live arena shows such as "The Wizard Of Oz," "Disney On Parade" and "Peter Pan," the latter two grossing more than $60 million.

Grilikhes and his wife of 47 years, actress Laraine Day, were active in the development of Oahu's Polynesian Cultural Center. He also produced several touring Polynesian-themed shows.

He was a member of the Writers Guild of America and Academy of Television Arts & Sciences.

Grilikhes is survived by his wife; two daughters; a son; a stepson; a stepdaughter; several grandchildren and two sisters.

Donations may be made to SHARE, Inc. P.O. Box 1342, Beverly Hills, CA 90213.

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117961844&categoryid=14

TV Sports
Is MLB's TV deal about greed or fans?
Senator Kerry Says Deal "doesn't violate any laws"
By Phil Rogers Chicago Tribune March 26, 2007

SURPRISE, Ariz. -- Last weekend, with Major League Baseball's latest summons to Washington fast approaching, Bud Selig wasn't holed up with lawyers preparing for Tuesday's hearing on the Extra Innings cable television controversy.

No, Selig was doing what he loves to do. He was in Arizona, watching Cactus League games and spending some relaxed private time with the owners who have given him an unprecedented level of support.

He swung by press boxes to make himself accessible to reporters, a habit that dates to his years running the Milwaukee Brewers.

Selig talked about labor peace, competitive balance and the growing anticipation of Opening Day. He proclaimed this, for seemingly the thousandth time, "the golden era" of baseball, and he didn't complain once about the contracts given Alfonso Soriano and Gil Meche or the growing salaries in general.

He did allude to revenue.

"I was talking to [Kansas City Royals owner] David Glass earlier, and he was saying that revenues [for MLB] were at $1.2 billion when he bought the team," Selig said. "I remember meetings when we talked about how we could get it to $2 billion. Now we'll be at $5.5 billion and growing. It's unbelievable."

Selig is right. It is unbelievable.

Only a little more than a decade after owners and players wiped out the World Series because they couldn't agree on how to divide the pie, it has grown to a size no one would have predicted.

Ticket prices have soared, the integrity of once-sacred records has been compromised by steroids and human growth hormone, World Series games have routinely ended after school children were in bed, and yet Selig has steered MLB into an era of unprecedented prosperity.

Now we'll see if Selig and whoever replaces him in 2009—Andy MacPhail, Bob DuPuy or someone else—can handle success.

The awarding of MLB's out-of-town television package to satellite TV (DirecTV) after years of making it available as a premium feature on digital cable raises the question of greed.

MLB accepted a seven-year, $700 million deal with DirecTV seemingly without considering that it had in effect taken access to the game away from potentially millions of its most passionate fans—specifically, the transplants who have moved away from their hometowns but still live and die with their teams.

Only after a public outcry did MLB offer the cable companies a chance to continue to carry the Extra Innings package.

The terms it offered were deemed unacceptable by iN Demand and Dish Network. The validity of that counteroffer is at the heart of Tuesday's hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, called by Sens. John Kerry and Arlen Specter.

DuPuy, MLB's chief operating officer, says there's nothing nefarious about the deal.

"Our hope is that iN Demand and Dish opt in and that all fans have an opportunity to receive the Extra Innings package," DuPuy told the Associated Press. "This is not about iN Demand or Dish not being able to match the DirecTV offer; it is about their willingness to do so.

"This was a negotiation at arm's length over several months. DirecTV set the market. It is up to the other bidders to meet it."

DirecTV not only paid to carry the games but also agreed to another key element in the MLB negotiations: a dedicated, 12-months-a-year, 24-hours-a-day channel for MLB, as the NFL has had in place for 31/2 years. In its belated counteroffer to cable companies, MLB stipulated that they would also have to give it an all-baseball channel.

In a conference call Monday, Kerry told reporters that terms of the DirecTV deal do not violate laws but could prompt legislators to review baseball's antitrust exemption. He said he's looking out for Boston Red Sox fans who live across the country and don't have DirecTV.

"The people I represent in Massachusetts, New England, have a passion for the Red Sox," Kerry said. "We've lost jobs in recent years. We've seen a lot of folks go to Arizona, New Mexico, but they still follow the Red Sox. People retire, but they'd like to be able to continue to follow their team."

Kerry said he doesn't believe Congress can or would impose legislation to affect the situation but believes the hearing will force MLB to answer questions that will show whether its offer for the cable companies to match the DirecTV deal was legitimate or made only for appearance' sake.

"That's the purpose of the hearing," Kerry said. "Fans are pretty discerning. I think they'll have a terrific ability to say, 'Well, that's a crock or this isn't,' and kind of get a read on it."

While MLB says most of the people unhappy about the DirecTV deal have the ability to switch to add a satellite dish and switch to that carrier, most would regard it as a major change.

The only other way to view out-of-market games would be on the Internet through a subscription service sold by MLB.com, which is owned by MLB.

The good news for baseball is that so many people still care so much about its product. It's up to Selig to make sure that MLB doesn't alienate its most passionate fans.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-070326rogers,1,5776791,print.column?coll=cs-cubs-headlines

Programming note:

C-SPAN/C-SPAN2 will not be covering the Senate Commerce Committee hearing on the MLB-EI/DirecTV deal because both the House and the Senate will be in session at the same time.

Nonetheless, keep checking in here throughout the morning and I'll keep you updated with what is going on.

TV Sports
Theismann miffed by removal from “'MNF'”
By Larry Stewart Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

Joe Theismann, bumped out of the ESPN "Monday Night Football" booth and replaced by Ron Jaworski, said Monday the move "came out of the blue" and he has "no earthly idea" why it was made.

ESPN executive vice president Norby Williamson, in announcing the change Monday, said Theismann had done nothing wrong, but it was felt that replacing him with Jaworski would enhance the telecasts.

Williamson said ESPN hoped to retain Theismann by offering him another prominent football commentating job. Williamson would not specify what job, but Theismann later said by phone it was the Saturday night college football package with Brent Musburger. Kirk Herbstreit and Bob Davie worked with Musburger last season.

Theismann, who has been a pro football commentator at ESPN since 1988, was informed of the change on Friday. Jaworski was told the day before.

For Theismann last season, one of the biggest changes was working with newcomer Tony Kornheiser, the Washington Post columnist and co-host of ESPN's "Pardon the Interruption."

Almost immediately, media critics pointed to a lack of chemistry between the two men, particularly early in the season, but Williamson on Monday dismissed that complaint.

"I thought Joe and Tony got along very well, and I thought the dialogue was good and conversational," he said. "Now I think we're going to build on last year. We had a fantastic first year. I was happy with the booth and I think we're in a position now of continuing to move it forward and build on it."

Theismann's agent, Sandy Montag, said he was convinced there would be interest in Theismann from other networks. But, Montag said, Theismann is under contract to ESPN and would have to be released from it to go elsewhere.

A spokesman for NFL Network said all the announcers there are locked up, indicating there was no room to add Theismann. That could be a problem at other networks as well.

Theismann conceded the college football offer from ESPN is intriguing.

"I love college football," he said, "but not as much as I love the NFL."

Kornheiser on Monday said he and Theismann "had a nice phone conversation, in which Joe was very gracious." Kornheiser said he suggested to the former Washington Redskins quarterback that he look into doing something with Notre Dame.

Theismann was a standout quarterback at Notre Dame and runner-up to Stanford's Jim Plunkett for the 1970 Heisman Trophy.

Jaworski, a former Los Angeles Rams and Philadelphia Eagles quarterback, has been at the network since 1990 and is not untested. ESPN opened last season with a Monday night doubleheader, and Jaworski teamed with Dick Vermeil and play-by-play announcer Brad Nessler on the secondary game, San Diego at Oakland.

Although Jaworski is probably better known as an ESPN studio analyst, it may be more noteworthy that he has been friends with Kornheiser for a long time and has appeared on "Pardon the Interruption" frequently. The two men clearly get along well.

Jaworski called his new job "the pinnacle of sports broadcasting," and of reaching that pinnacle, he said, "If you keep sawing wood you eventually break through."

He said he had not yet talked with Theismann but that he would. He called Theismann a good friend.

"That's what makes this a little bittersweet," Jaworski said.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-spw-theismann27mar27,1,4853438,print.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

Let Theismann be miffed...

Let's be honest. A lot of people (including many not at ESPN) thought that Theismann was lousy and detracted from the game. Jaworski will be missed on the pre-game shows, but he'll be an attribute in the booth.

TV Sports
Sen. Kerry talks 'Extra Innings'”
By Tim Lemke Washington Times

Members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation tomorrow plan to question officials from Major League Baseball and DirecTV over their potentially exclusive deal involving the league's "Extra Innings" package of out-of-market games.

Senator John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, arranged a quick and noisy conference call Monday with reporters, in which he said that he feared the league was shutting out non-DirecTV subscribers in the name of profit.

"It's an attempt to corner the market and limit fans," he said. "And I'm concerned about that."

MLB and DirecTV announced a deal involving Extra Innings earlier this month, and the league gave until March 31 for other cable and satellite companies to match the terms.

Kerry said he was concerned that Extra Innings would end up exclusively on DirecTV, possibly shutting out millions of people who had previously received the service through their cable company or Dish Network.

Extra Innings allows fans to watch games involving teams located outside their home markets, allowing a Boston native living in Phoenix, for instance, to watch Red Sox games.

"I think people should be able to get [the games] of their team," Kerry said. "Red Sox Nation is affected. I've heard from people who feel the same way about fans of the Cardinals and Cubs. Access to our national pastime and sporting contests is an important part of the fabric of American life."

Kerry acknowledged that an exclusive deal between MLB and DirecTV is "probably legal," but he wanted to ensure that other cable and satellite providers had a reasonable and fair chance to match DirecTV's terms.

Kerry earlier this month asked the Federal Communications Commission to investigate the deal, and the FCC said it would look into the matter. But Kerry said he has not heard from the FCC since that initial correspondence.

MLB President Bob DuPuy is scheduled to testify along with DirecTV CEO Chase Carey, Echostar President Carl Vogel, inDemand President Rob Jacobson and Penn State law professor Stephen Ross.

http://www.washtimes.com/blogs/storyview.php?StoryID=20070326-015315-3373r&TopicsID=sportsbiz

Let Theismann be miffed...

Let's be honest. A lot of people (including many not at ESPN) thought that Theismann was lousy and detracted from the game. Jaworski will be missed on the pre-game shows, but he'll be an attribute in the booth.

I agree with you I was never a Theismann fan he just never shuts up

Have there been any reviews of the new TV show drive? It looks interesting. Would like to read some reviews on it.

The real catch is that a lot of streamed content on default settings is the size of a postage stamp!

All the better to fit on those tiny cell-phone screens. That's the future, you know. They tell us all the time. ;)

TV Notebook
Q&A with "Battlestar" Showrunner Ron Moore
By James Hibberd Television Week March 26, 2007

Last week Sci Fi Channel announced the pickup of nine more episodes of its Peabody Award-winning series "Battlestar Galactica."

The pickup completes a partial fourth-season order that left the show's fans in suspense over the fate of the show. A third-season storyline drawing parallels to the war in Iraq won critical raves, yet ratings have slipped, leaving some comparing the show to another serialized cult program struggling in its third season, ABC's "Lost."

Developer and executive producer Ron Moore spoke to TelevisionWeek about the show's future, its ratings, the long-planned "Caprica" prequel and the return of fan favorite Starbuck.


Fred did a great job of cutting the interview off for the HOTP thread right before they discussed the spoiler-stuff, but the last paragraph will be interesting for us HD people (and contains no spoilers), so I'll paste it in here for those who don't want to be "spoiled" by the complete transcript...

TVWeek: There's a real difference watching "BSG" on Sci Fi and when it airs on UHD months later in HD and 5.1 Surround Sound. Has this lag time been frustrating that viewers aren't watching the original airings the way it was shot?

Mr. Moore: I don't see it that way. We don't cut it in HD. When I sit in the Avid room, it's not in HD. As a practical day-to-day matter, there's no reason for me to be watching it in HD. ... When it comes out on UHD months later, I'm usually sort of surprised. "It's gorgeous! Look at that, you can see the reflection on the glass and everything." My head isn't geared toward HD at all.

FYI for those who want to watch the hearing you can go to http://commerce.senate.gov and there's a webcast on that page for the hearing.

The Senate Commerce Committee hearing on the MLB-EI package has just ended.

Senator Kerry urged the parties to reach some sort of agreement and even extend the deadline. On his prodding, inDemand's Jacobson and MLB CEO Dupuy agreed to set up a face-to-face meeting in the next 24 to 48 hours.

At the hearing, iN Demand offered to continue carrying the MLB-EI package while it attempted to negotiate for MLB's key point: carriage of The Baseball Channel in 2009.

Senator Kerry wondered why that couldn't be done for the next two years -- with MLB being able to pull EI from any carrier which refuse to carry TBC in an acceptable way in 2009.

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
ABC's 'Stars' cha-chas the night away
Network wins second straight Monday with a 4.9
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 27, 2007

Suddenly ABC is the network to beat on Monday night, thanks to “Dancing with the Stars” and a slide into reruns by two of its competitors. That follows a winter in which the network was stuck in fourth place on the usually tight night.

“Stars” averaged a 5.8 rating in adults 18-49 from 8 to 10 p.m. last night, according to Nielsen overnights, pushing ABC to a 4.9 rating and 13 share on the night and securing an easy first-place finish for the second straight week.

Second-place Fox, the only other network to show all originals on the night, averaged a 4.0/10 and CBS and NBC were farther behind.

“Stars” was down 8 percent from last week’s series-best debut of 6.3, but it built every half hour through the night and was particularly dominant among total viewers. It averaged 20.2 million of them, almost 9 million ahead of second-place NBC’s average during the same two-hour span.

“Stars” also gave the season and possibly series finale of “What About Brian” a spark. That show averaged a 3.0 at 10 p.m., 19 percent above its season-to-date average of 2.6, though that did include two minutes of “Stars” runover. Thus its average may dip when final ratings are released later today, as overnights measure timeslot and not actual program data.

Meanwhile, NBC was third for the night at 3.2/8, CBS fourth at 3.0/8, Univision fifth at 1.8/5 and CW sixth at 1.2/3.

ABC led the first two hours of the night, starting with a 5.4 rating at 8 p.m. for the first half of “Stars.” Fox was second that hour with a 3.3 for “Prison Break,” NBC third with a 3.1 for a repeat of “Deal or No Deal” and CBS fourth with a 2.2 for repeats of “How I Met Your Mother” and “The New Adventures of Old Christine.” Univision was fifth with a 2.0 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and CW sixth with a 1.2 average for “Everybody Hates Chris” (1.2) and “All of Us” (1.1).

At 9 p.m. ABC was first as the second half of “Stars” grew to a 6.3 among 18-49s. Fox was second with a 4.7 for “24,” NBC third with a 4.2 for another “Deal” encore and CBS third with a 3.2 for repeats of “Two and a Half Men” and “Rules of Engagement.” Univision finished fifth with a 1.9 for the premiere of “Destilando Amor” and CW sixth with a 1.2 average for “Girlfriends” (1.2) and “The Game” (1.1).

At 10 p.m. CBS took the lead with a 3.7 for a repeat of “CSI: Miami,” with ABC falling to second with a 3.0 for the finale of “What About Brian.” NBC was third with a series low-tying 2.3 for “Black Donnellys” and Univision fourth with a 1.6 for “Cristina.”

Among households, ABC led with a 10.4 average rating and a 17 share, with CBS second at 6.3/10, Fox third at 6.2/9, NBC fourth at 6.1/10, Univision fifth at 2.3/4 and CW sixth at 1.8/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11063.asp

Monday’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.

TV Sports
MLB, Cable to Meet Face-To-Face on “Extra Innings”
(By Fredfa)

In a just-over two-hour hearing Tuesday, the parties in the MLB Extra Innings dispute carefully laid out their positions, and just as carefully seemed to indicate there is little hope to widen distribution beyond DirecTV.

Bu iN Demand president Robert Jacobson said his company, owned by Comcast, Time Warner and Cox, would be willing to provide the Extra Innings package this year and next, with the issue of carriage of a new MLB channel to be decided “in the future”. MLB Chief Bob Dupuy and DirecTV’s Chase Carey seemed less than happy with the proposal

After being pressed vigorously by Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, the iN Demand chief agreed to a face-to-face meeting with MLB officials over the proposal in the next day or two to see if some last-minute agreement could be reached. Both indicated no such personal meetings had been planned.

MLB had extended the deadline to gain agreement from cable and/or Dish to join DirecTV in carrying MLB-EI until April 1st, baseball’s opening day.

All the old cable/satellite arguments came up at the hearing, which Sen. Kerry took pains to point out several times was not being held to force anything on the various parties.

But, he said, a wider carriage of MLB “is in the public interest, and MLB’s interest, too, I believe.”

The parties disagreed on the financial breakdown of MLB’s latest proposal to iNDemand, although Jacobson said at one point he believed that it would force cable to pay about 61 or 62% of the total cost -- and not get the 20% equity in the Baseball Channel DirecTV has acquired..

The hearing heard all the usual cross-platform complaints: Cable and Dish unhappy with DirecTV’s increasing concentration on exclusive sports content like Sunday Ticket and now Extra Innings and the DBS concern about cable's "triple play" bundling options.

Dish President Carl Vogel, MLB CEO Bob Dupuy, Penn State Professor and antitrust expert Steve Ross and DirecTV CEO Chase Carey all pointed to the San Diego (Cox) and Philadelphia (Comcast) regional sports networks which are not available to satellite providers.

Both Dupuy and Carey wondered how that exclusivity was different from the proposed MLB-EI deal. He did say that in those two cities about 500,000 homes are involved, compared with just 230,000 cable subscribers to MLB EI. Jacobson said he was not involved with those channels and could not comment.

In the end, Ross suggested that Senator Kerry lock the panel in a room until they came up with an agreement.

Kerry, in closing the hearing, asked Jacobson and Dupuy if they had any face-to-face meetings planned before the deadline.

Each appeared surprised by the question, and they eventually agreed to meet in person in the next 24-48 hours.

CPanther95 has posted a running and more detailed summary of much of the Senate Commerce Committe MLB-EI hearing starting here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10138525&&#post10138525

While it seemed apparent that cable and Dish won't reach an agreement to carry MLB=EI going forward -- or at least they had no plans before the hearing -- what seemed strange was MLB's position on cable's offer to carry The Baseball Channel.

iNDemand's proposal of last week would have added something like 15 million subscribers to the base, doubling the number guaranteed by DirecTV when the channel starts up in 2009.

MLB's DuPuy said the DirecTV offering made the Baseball Channel's launch already a success.

So why wouldn't doubling that number (at least) make it doubly successful?

No one pressed Dupuy on that question.

It seemed easy to understand the positions of Dish, Cable and DirecTV.

But for MLB, leaving 15,000,000 subscribers on the table at the inception of the channel seemed odd at the most charitable.

TV Sports
MLB: We’ll Meet Face-to-Face with Cable
By Steve Donohue MultiChannel News 3/27/2007

Under pressure from Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Major League Baseball president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy agreed to meet with In Demand Networks to discuss a possible deal that could provide the cable-backed program supplier with the league’s Extra Innings package.

The chances of the league cutting a deal with cable operators before Monday -- opening day of the 2007 season -- are slim. But MLB and DirecTV are facing heat from regulators for their seven-year, $700 million deal that will restrict the league’s Extra Inning’s package to DirecTV customers.

When MLB struck the controversial deal with DirecTV earlier this month, it set a deadline of March 31 for operators to match DirecTV’s offer. But in order for Comcast, Time Warner Cable and other operators to secure Extra Innings for their customers, they’d have to agree to match DirecTV’s terms and distribute MLB’s Baseball Channel, set to debut in 2009, on their most widely distributed tiers.

Customers who previously subscribed to Extra Innings when it was available on cable will not have access to the games unless they switch to DirecTV or order a $100 Internet package that would allow them to watch the games on a PC via a high-speed-Internet connection.

Kerry scolded MLB’s DuPuy and DirecTV CEO Chase Carey Tuesday, arguing that the league and DirecTV are more focused on making money than ensuring that America’s pastime is available widely.

“You’re driving for the best deal that you can get -- that may not be the best deal for baseball, frankly, or the fans,” Kerry told DuPuy.

“This was not about maximizing profits for us,” DuPuy countered, insisting that what drove the league to cut the DirecTV deal was a guarantee that it would launch Baseball Channel to its entire subscriber base of more than 15 million customers.

“What this was about was serving the maximum number of fans with the maximum amount of programming,” DuPuy added.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6428250.html?display=Breaking+News

At the hearing, iN Demand offered to continue carrying the MLB-EI package while it attempted to negotiate for MLB's key point: carriage of The Baseball Channel in 2009.

Senator Kerry wondered why that couldn't be done for the next two years -- with MLB being able to pull EI from any carrier which refuse to carry TBC in an acceptable way in 2009.

Because that's to logical?
Greed doesn't allow people to think clearly, which is what MLB is not doing. The owners are greedy, the players are greedy and the only people that really care about the game, the fans, get screwed.

Clearly iNDemand has been doing better in the PR war, RemyM.

But Jacobson complained that (if Dish weren't involved) iNDemand was being asked to pay 61%-62% of the total package cost.

If DirecTV brings 16,000,000 subs to the table, and iNDemand brings 50,000,000, a 62-38 split seems pretty fair to the iNDemand partners.

As to the Kerry propsal, were I MLB, I would grab it in a hearbeat. (And it would work for DirecTV, too!)

Get two more years of MLB-EI out there, with vastly increased HD this year and especially in 2008, and then, if cable won't carry the Baseball Channel in acceptable numbers, pull the plug for 2009.

It would give MLB two more years of promotion to its biggest fans. And maybe cable could be persuaded to be a bit more aggressive in marketing MLB-EI. Since with its 50 million subs it has far fewer MLB-EI customers than DirecTV with its 16 million, something is not right with cable's marketing effort.

On top of all that, Kerry indicated such an agreement would keep Congress off the backs of DBS, cable and MLB over this deal.

The Business of Television
Fading picture: TV via telephone lines?
A few years back fiber optic was the hot thing
By Kevin Downey MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer Mar 27, 2007

America's cable and satellite operators are feeling challenged wherever they turn from new competitors anxious to offer cheaper ways to deliver media services into the home.

One of the biggest looming threats has been the telephone companies, with their ambitions to deliver competing TV programming over phone lines.

Except it's really not such a big threat after all.

For all the talk of telephone companies like Verizon and AT&T laying fiber optic cable capable of delivering TV, with the aim of stealing away subscribers and advertising, it's not nearly the threat it once seemed.

Indeed, while Verizon began signing up subscribers in 2005, it doesn't have much to show for it, and now most analysts say a projection for 10 million teleco TV subscribers by the end of the decade is looking downright bullish. That would be under 10 percent of the estimated 106 million homes subscribing to all forms of TV service by 2010.

The reason: It appears to be a case of a technology whose time came and went before it got off the ground. Fiber optic is a huge advance in landline connections but it's increasingly obsolete in the face of wireless technologies. It's simply too costly for the return on investment it offers.

“With the video market largely saturated, it is very difficult if not impossible to make money off a video service itself,” says Bruce Leichtman, president and principal analyst of Leichtman Research Group. He estimates more than 80 percent of telecom revenue now comes from wireless services. “They are wrestling with whether they need to do this as a competitive service.”

Of the two players in fiber optic service (FiOS), Verizon and AT&T, Verizon is clearly ahead, with some 200,000 subscribers at the end of 2006 versus a few thousand for AT&T, according to analysts' estimates.

Just last week, Verizon said it would lay its cable past 129,000 more homes in California, and earlier in the month it won approval to offer service statewide, without having to gain local approval from municipalities, as required of cable. California is the 10th state to permit local bypass, and it's a huge advantage.

But in the end regulatory approval is not the issue.

“What is holding them back is the question: Does it make sense to do this?” says Leichtman “The telecom companies have entered the TV business four times. Every one of the companies has dipped their toe in to some extent over the past decade, and pretty much every company has gotten out of it.”

The most upbeat outlook for teleco TV is one of slow growth. PricewaterhouseCoopers is projecting that 3.5 million homes will subscribe to teleco TV by the end of this year and 10 million homes will have it by the end of 2010.

Analysts say it now appears that teleco TV will fall short of this projection. One reason why is that the telecos aren't offering consumers much in the way of incentives.

“It does look like their video pricing is somewhat lower,” says Mariam Rondeli, an analyst with Kagan Research. “But once you bundle in other services, I don’t think they have a price advantage. Teleco TV can also do a lot more with interactive TV, and I think they will do that in years to come, but right now there isn’t much difference.”

Teleco TV will have the most impact on satellite services like DirecTV because telecom companies, like cable operators, can offer triple-play packages of phone, internet and TV. Satellite doesn’t have two-way connections, meaning it has to partner with phone companies to offer these packages.

But how much that cuts into satellite's growth is another matter. PwC estimates that today 28 million households have satellite service and that 33 million will subscribe by the end of the decade.

When it comes to cable, teleco TV’s main threat is its potential to take away a slice of local ad revenue. As with cable, the telephone companies will be able to splice local advertising into the TV programs they deliver. But that represents just another source of drain for cable, and not a particularly big one. Cable's bigger worry is local internet, which is already draining off local ad revenue.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11033.asp

TV Sports
NBC, NHL Extend Contract
By Jon Lafayette Television Week March 27, 2007

NBC Sports extended its contract with the NHL through the 2007-2008 season.

The arrangement continues as a revenue-sharing partnership, rather than a more traditional rights fee deal. NBC also has an option for the 2008-09 season.

Next season NBC will add flexible scheduling, which will allow the network to make last-minute changes in which game is being broadcast on Sunday afternoons. On nine Sundays, NBC will get to select from at least three games to broadcast. The other games will be available to local carriers, but later in the day to avoid a conflict.

"Flexible scheduling will always allow us to have the best possible games," Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Universal Sports and Olympics, said in a statement Tuesday. "Nothing could be better for hockey fans, who now will be able to see the best teams and marquee players on national broadcast television each week."

In addition to regular season games on Sundays, NBC will broadcast some playoff games on Saturdays, and games 3 through 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals in prime time.

All games will be broadcast in high definition next season.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11780

Last week’s complete network average prime-time results (with demographic and season-to-date averages) are now at the bottom of RATINGS NEWS the second post in this thread.

TV Sports
NBC, NHL Extend Contract
By Jon Lafayette Television Week March 27, 2007

"Flexible scheduling will always allow us to have the best possible games," Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Universal Sports and Olympics, said in a statement Tuesday. "Nothing could be better for hockey fans

except those with tickets to games that change times.

Join the brave new world of TV effecting the lives of baseball, NFL, college football and basketball fans, RemyM. :(

Because that's to logical?
Greed doesn't allow people to think clearly, which is what MLB is not doing. The owners are greedy, the players are greedy and the only people that really care about the game, the fans, get screwed.

Nothing new there the fans have ben getting screwed for years. We are all to blame from buying tickets and watching the commericials on TV we are all supporting this type of behavior. I have stopped attending games as my on little protest however I still watch on tv so I am just as guilty I guess

iNDemand's proposal of last week would have added something like 15 million subscribers to the base, doubling the number guaranteed by DirecTV when the channel starts up in 2009.



This is where baseball's position is disingenuous. Cable has said they matched carriage size for DirecTV. All testimony today seems to point that way. I suspect baseball wants the percentage of subs. While they're stating that DirecTv is guaranteeing 15K subs, they are putting it on their least expensive tier. This puts DTV's penetration at close to 100% of subs(I don't know if DTV has a family pack or something like Dish does). It sounds to me like baseball wants that penetration on cable and Dish. Cable's saying that are matching DirecTV which is true. Baseball is just using a smokescreen.

Last week’s updated top 10 prime-time program ratings are now toward the bottom of RATINGS NEWS -- the second post in this thread.

Join the brave new world of TV effecting the lives of baseball, NFL, college football and basketball fans, RemyM. :(
I prefer the way College football handles this by marking all games times as TBD until 7 or 11 days out, whatever the contract calls for. What the NFL did last year with marking all games as 1 or 4 and then move a game a few weeks out I think causes much more confusion for both the viewers and ticket holders.

I am actually stunned.

The CW has done something I thought to be impossible.

One of its shows has finished behind a show on Pax (or Ion as I guess it is now known).

The Ion Sunday movie got 1.43 million viewers 2+ to rank #124 for the week.

The CW's 7th Heaven attracted 1.38 million viewers to finish 125h for the week.

Ouch!

TV Sports
MLB, Cable to Meet Face-To-Face on “Extra Innings”
(By Fredfa)



The parties disagreed on the financial breakdown of MLB’s latest proposal to iNDemand, although Jacobson said at one point he believed that it would force cable to pay about 61 or 62% of the total cost -- and not get the 20% equity in the Baseball Channel DirecTV has acquired..


I don't remember reading that part before, so if cable matches DirecTV's contract with MLB does cable get a 20% equity position as well? The way I'm reading it is that cable is required to match the offer but not get the same "deal" as DirecTV.

A B C
3 GREY'S ANATOMY 22.30
4 DANCING WITH THE STARS 21.80
15 EXTREME MAKEOVER:HOME ED. 12.30
16 LOST 12.22
20 OCTOBER ROAD 11.50

C B S
5 CSI: MIAM 17.66
6 NCIS 15.69
7 CRIMINAL MINDS 15.19
10 COLD CASE 13.91
11 CSI: NY 13.64

Fox
1 AMERICAN IDOL-TUE 29.96
2 AMERICAN IDOL-WED 27.08
8 TIL DEATH 14.88
18 24 11.80
21 SMARTER THAN 5TH GRADER 10.82

N B C
9 DEAL OR NO DEAL-MON 14.19
28 DEAL OR NO DEAL-SUN 9.66
33 RAINES 3/22(S) 8.71
42 LAW & ORDER:CI-SAT 7.51
43 LAW AND ORDER:SVU 7.51

CW
76 AMERICA'S TOP MODEL-2 5.04
83 FRIDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN 4.76
94 SMALLVILLE 4.07
99 SUPERNATURAL 3.38
102 PUSSYCAT DOLLS-WED 3.13

• Source: Nielsen Media Research data

Lowest Rated Shows By Network
Week of March 19-25, 2007

These are the lowest-rated programs, generally excluding repeats, by network for last week.
(Shows are listed by overall rank and viewers in millions.)

A B C
77 PRIMETIME:THE OUTSIDERS 5.01
85 SIX DEGREES 4.45
90 BROTHERS & SISTERS 4.29
92 ABC SAT MOVIE OF THE WEEK 4.14
113 CELEBRITY DEBUT-3/24(S) 2.69

C B S
37 CBS NCAA BSKBL CHMP FR 1(S) 8.13
39 CBS NCAA POST GUN SAT 2(S) 7.96
45 HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER 7.27
50 OLD CHRISTINE 6.74
52 48 HOURS MYSTERY 9PM SP(S) 6.67

Fox
61 KING OF THE HILL 6.08
66 COPS 2 5.76
75 WEDDING BELLS 5.05
81 COPS 4.88
97 WAR AT HOME 3.56

N B C
67 DATELINE NBC-TUE 5.62
68 BLACK DONNELLYS 5.53
70 FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS 5.39
72 ANDY BARKER, P.I. 5.33
79 DATELINE SUN-7PM 4.91

CW
118 GAME, THE 2.14
119 GILMORE GIRLS 2.08
121 AMERICA'S TOP MODEL-2-ENC 1.77
122 PUSSYCAT DOLLS PRESENT-EN 1.59
125 7TH HEAVEN 1.38

• Source: Nielsen Media Research data

All the better to fit on those tiny cell-phone screens. That's the future, you know. They tell us all the time. ;)
My brother works for the Isobar division of Aegis Group which is heavily involved in emerging media and marketing, and the cell-phone thing is just a small part of it. It's an incredibly huge business, I was amazed at some of the stuff he was telling me, TV commercials are practically the middle ages compared to the stuff they're working on, interactivity, brand association, the linkage of seemingly two unrelated fields(tennis shoes to sell soft drinks, cars and/or financial products), interactive TV show internet sites, stuff like that), etc. This stuff is huge outside of the US already.

Highest Rated Prime-time Shows in the 18-49 Demo
Week of March 19-25, 2007
(Listed by viewers in millions)
[code]
1 AMERICAN IDOL-TUE FOX 15.44
2 AMERICAN IDOL-WED FOX 13.62
3 GREY'S ANATOMY ABC 11.70
4 DANCING WITH THE STARS ABC 8.36
5 TIL DEATH FOX 7.92
6 CSI: MIAMI CBS 7.00
7 LOST ABC 6.95
8 24 FOX 6.03
9 OCTOBER ROAD ABC 6.01
10 CRIMINAL MINDS CBS 5.67


• Source: Nielsen Media Research data

Nothing new there the fans have ben getting screwed for years. We are all to blame from buying tickets and watching the commericials on TV we are all supporting this type of behavior. I have stopped attending games as my on little protest however I still watch on tv so I am just as guilty I guess

I used to go to many games in many sports. With the exception of a few NY Giants games a season, I too have stopped going. And when the Giants start charging over $100 a ticket, or sell PSL's, then that will be the end of them too. I've learned to enjoy watching games recorded on my HD-DVR so I can also skip all of those commercials that the companies overpaid for.

I am actually stunned.

The CW has done something I thought to be impossible.

One of its shows has finished behind a show on Pax (or Ion as I guess it is now known).

The Ion Sunday movie got 1.43 million viewers 2+ to rank #124 for the week.

The CW's 7th Heaven attracted 1.38 million viewers to finish 125h for the week.

Ouch!

Wow, Ion doesn't even have affialiates in several fairly large DMAs.

I don't remember reading that part before, so if cable matches DirecTV's contract with MLB does cable get a 20% equity position as well? The way I'm reading it is that cable is required to match the offer but not get the same "deal" as DirecTV.

That is the cable spin.

DirecTVcounters that cable has all kinds of equity positions in all kinds of networks (The Golf Channel, Versus, RSNs and on and on). MLB says DirecTV has had an active role in developing the Baseball Channel and has ponied up and deserves a share.

Comcast has a major stake in the Mountain West network, DirecTV has major stake in the Big Ten network which begins broadcasting this fall. And there scores of other examples.

I think this is the most disingenuous of the cable/Dish arguments.

But I still don't see why MLB wouldn't accept an additional 15 million cable subs at startup of TBC if cable even came close to matching DirecTV's proportional share of the $100 a year cost.

I used to go to many games in many sports. With the exception of a few NY Giants games a season, I too have stopped going. And when the Giants start charging over $100 a ticket, or sell PSL's, then that will be the end of them too. I've learned to enjoy watching games recorded on my HD-DVR so I can also skip all of those commercials that the companies overpaid for.


I share your feelings.

But for me the enjoyment I get from actually sitting in a venue and watching a baseball, college basketball or college football game is far, far superior to sitting at home and even watching the best HD presentation.

There is nothing to compare to a jet flyover (Stealths are even better!) before a bowl game or a MLB opener or WS game.

Comcast has a major stake in the Mountain West network, DirecTV has major stake in the Big Ten network which begins broadcasting this fall. And there scores of other examples.
Does D* have an interest in any networks not through Fox Cable Networks?

Aside from the Big Ten network (and, apparently the Baseball Channel) I don't think so, but I am not totally sure.

When -- and if -- John Malone takes over DirecTV, he has some cable interests, (QVC, Starz!) and three Fox RSNs (Pittsburgh, Denver and Seattle) he will acquire in the deal.

His Liberty Media is also buying the Atlanta Braves.

Aside from the Big Ten network (and, apparently the Baseball Channel) I don't think so, but I am not totally sure.

When -- and if -- John Malone takes over DirecTV, he has some cable interests, including three Fox RSNs (Pittsburgh, Denver and Seattle) he will acquire in the deal.
What deal does D* have with the Big Ten Network, other then being the first to carry them? I thought all the ownership interest (49%) was through FOX Cable Networks.

TV Sports
Extra Innings Bidders Agree to Face-to-Face Negotiations

By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 3/27/2007

The parties to the dispute over carriage of Major League Baseball's out-of-market Extra Innings package have agreed to face-to-face negotiations in the next 48 hours.
The last such meetings were held on March 9, and the topic was how to match DirecTV's deal to carry the package.

The March 9 meeting was only held after the heads of Major League Baseball, DirecTV, In Demand and EchoStar took a trip toWashington for a meeting requested by the Senate Commerce Committee and Red Sox fan John Kerry (D-Mass.).

At a SCC hearing on the deal on Tuesday--a hearing driven by fan complaints that they would lose access to baseball games if if DirecTV gets exclusive rights-- Senator Kerry said he recognized MLB and DirecTV had struck a business deal they thought was in their best interests. Kerry pointed to MLB Commissioner Bud Selig's acknowledgement of baseball's special relationship to the fans--one established in its anti-trust exemption--and Kerry said Congress needed to look at balancing that legitimate business interest with the public's interest in access to that "special" sports programming.

He also said that the FCC had the power to regulate direct-to-home satellite in the public's interest and that the committee was trying to discern what the public interests might be.

Incumbent Extra Innings carriers EchoStar and In Demand-- a consortium owned by Comcast, Cox and Time Warner,--have four more days before the season starts. When it starts, DirecTV becomes the exclusive broadcaster and EchoStar and In Demand have to match DirecTV's terms.

The hearing in the Senate Commerce Committee Tuesday was as much about trying to get a deal that would make the package nonexclusive as it was to collect information from the parties.

Kerry, joined by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), all pressured them to come to the table and avoid a legislative solution.

"Eventually, if it comes across this desk enough," said Lautenberg, "things happen that you don't like."

Kerry pushed for the status quo for at least the next few weeks or until a deal might be reached. MLB President Robert DuPuy said the they were open to talking, but said that negoatiations over the package had been going on for nine months and that DirecTV had to start marketing and pricing the package. That marketing would differ based on whether the package was exclusive or nonexclusive.

The status quo would be all three--DirecTV, EchoStar and In Demand--delivering the games to some 61 million potential digital subscribers, rather than the 16 million DirecTV subscribers that would have access to the games if the pacakge were exclusive.

MLB and DirecTV CEO Chase Carey said that all the games were available over the Internet, but Kerry said that was not a reasonable alternative to the big, plasma-screen, friends-over experience of baseball game watching.

The key sticking point in the negotiations over the Extra Innings package is the guarantee of carriage, on the more broadly viewed basic tier, of baseball's planned MLB cable channel, which launches in 2009. DirecTV committed to delivering the channel to 80% of its subscribers, which MLB says In Demand and EchoStar must do it they want to continue to share the package. In Demand has made a counter offer, but it was rejected .

DuPuy conceded that getting a critical mass of carriage for that channel was driving the negotiations. DirecTV is getting a shot at a 20% stake in the channel not being offered to others, which has become a key bone of contention.

Initially the deal was going to be exclusive to DirecTV, but after Kerry and others in Washington complained, it was modified to give the incumbents a chance to share it if they agreed to the same terms , though they have not even been able even to agree on what constitutes the same terms..

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6428267

TV Sports
Senate Commerce Committee Prepared Statements

Here are links to prepared statements at today’s Senate Commerce Committee hearing on the MLB-Extra Innings contract:

Senator John Kerry (D, MA)
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Statement&Statement_ID=223

Daniel K. Inouye (D, HI)
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Statement&Statement_ID=224

Rob Jacobson, President and Chief Executive Officer , iN DEMAND Networks
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Testimony&Hearing_ID=1838&Witness_ID=6559

Stephen F. Ross, Professor of Law, The Dickinson School of Law, The Pennsylvania State University
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Testimony&Hearing_ID=1838&Witness_ID=6560

Carl Vogel, President & Vice Chairman, EchoStar Satellite L.L.C.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Testimony&Hearing_ID=1838&Witness_ID=6561

Chase Carey, Chief Executive Officer, DIRECTV Group, Inc.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Testimony&Hearing_ID=1838&Witness_ID=6563

Robert DuPuy, President and Chief Operating Officer, Major League Baseball
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Testimony&Hearing_ID=1838&Witness_ID=6562

What deal does D* have with the Big Ten Network, other then being the first to carry them? I thought all the ownership interest (49%) was through FOX Cable Networks.

I was wrong. You are correct, homcom.

FCN will own a 49% share of the Big Ten Network.

Sorry for the error.

TV Sports
Final Negotiations Before MLB-EI Moves to DirecTV
By Ira Teinowitz Television Week March 27, 2007

Accused by several senators of putting baseball’s economics ahead of its fans, Major League Baseball agreed to hold one last negotiating session with cable and satellite providers before moving its Extra Innings out of market games exclusively to DirecTV.

With the baseball season’s start just four days away, the last minute meeting requested by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., was reluctantly OK’d, though there were no promises made about changing the DirecTV deal.

The Extra Innings package of up to 60 out of market games a week has been available to cable subscribers and EchoStar’s DishTV subscribers, who will lose access if the MLB’s deal with DirecTV goes ahead unaltered.

Robert A. DuPuy, president-CEO of MLB, repeatedly told senators that the DirecTV rivals had nine months to make a deal and only DirecTV had stepped forward. Mr. DuPuy said that because of senators earlier concerns, MLB had already offered to extend the deal to rivals under certain conditions.

The meeting agreement capped an unusual Senate Commerce Committee hearing on Tuesday in which intricate details of the carriage negotiations between baseball and satellite and cable system operators -- including dollars to be paid -- were publicly aired.

Mr. DuPuy acknowledged MLB -- having seen the NFL and the NBA’s woes in getting their channels carried -- used the Extra Innings negotiations to try to ensure The Baseball Channel gets airing. DirecTV agreed to pay $100 million a year for 7 years and get a 20% ownership in the new channel, which launches in 2009.

Senators including Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.; Bill Nelson, D-Fla.; Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., for two hours on Tuesday questioned whether baseball was acting in the public or its fans interest, even as they acknowledged its economic reasoning.

They cited the difficulties sports fans in apartment buildings with common cable systems will have switching to DirecTV and the expensive options it could present some sports fans. In the Philadelphia area where Comcast Sports Net Philadelphia isn’t available on satellite TV, Sen. Lautenberg said avid sports fans would have to subscribe to both local cable and DirecTV, essentially paying twice for cable.

Sen. Kerry, a Boston Red Sox fan, pleaded with MLB to take action.

“We are here because this is driven by economics rather than the public interest,” said Sen. Kerry.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Penn., ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also attended the hearing and urged MLB take action. He said the proposed deal further fuels his concerns about sports on TV and MLB’s current anti trust exemption.

“I have great concerns about what is happening in pay TV,” he said.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11786

I share your feelings.

But for me the enjoyment I get from actually sitting in a venue and watching a baseball, college basketball or college football game is far, far superior to sitting at home and even watching the best HD presentation.

There is nothing to compare to a jet flyover (Stealths are even better!) before a bowl game or a MLB opener or WS game.

Fred,

I agree nothing can replace being at an event however some of us have had enough of the cost associated with going to games. Here in Boston it is totally out of control from ticket prices, parking, concessions, and souviniers. Imagine paying anywhere from 30.00-50.00 for parking for just 1 game and there was 1 gas station a couple of years ago aeound Fenway charging 100.00 to park. To me is just totally out of control.

The only event that I attend now is the frozen 4 with 4 buddies every year not taht it is cheap but it is a nice get away each year with friends.

Weekly Cable Nielsen Notebook
Week of March 19-24, 2007:
USA Wins Again, But Discovery Strikes Gold With “Planet Earth”
By Anthony Crupi MediaWeek.com March 27, 2007

Discovery Channel delivered monumental ratings with the first three installments of its Planet Earth documentary series, averaging 5.72 million viewers Sunday night between 8 p.m. and 11 p.m., while drawing the week’s largest single audience with 6.07 million viewers tuning in during the second hour (“Mountains”).

The five-years-in-the-making doc series, which debuted with an overview of the planet’s diverse animal habitats (“Pole to Pole”), generated the largest audience for Discovery since Sept. 11, 2005, when its Flight That Fought Back was seen by just over 7 million viewers.

Planet Earth claimed the top two programming spots for the week ended March 25, according to Nielsen Media Research data. Hour three (“Deep Ocean”) managed to retain 5.38 million viewers in the 10 p.m. slot, finishing just behind USA Network’s WWE Raw, which took third place on the week with 5.45 million viewers in the Monday 10 p.m. hour.

Set to run Sundays through April 22, Planet Earth propelled Discovery into the top five for the first time in recent memory, as the net finished as the week’s second most-watched prime time destination with 1.88 million total viewers. Discovery also finished third among ad-supported cable nets among the adults 18-49 demo, averaging 985,000.

USA once again won the week in prime, finishing with 2.63 million total viewers, while winning A18-49 (1.23 million). TNT took third with 1.78 million viewers, while Turner sibling TBS and FX ended up in a virtual tie for fourth place with 1.65 million viewers each. Fox News Channel brought up the rear of the top five ad-supported cable nets with 1.56 million viewers.

Both TBS and FX enjoyed strong showings among the 18-49 demo, as the Turner net took second with just over 1 million and FX finished fourth with 979,000.

Non-ad-supported Disney Channel was the week’s statistical second-place finisher among the entire basic cable universe, delivering 2.05 million viewers.

Individual programs of note include ABC Family’s movie premiere Bring It On: All or Nothing, which broke all sorts or records for the net Sunday night, serving up the week’s fifth-largest single audience with 4.84 million viewers, while establishing new benchmarks for its delivery of 18-34s (1.1 million) and 12-34s (2.7 million). VH1 also scored ratings gold with I Love New York, which finished in seventh place with 4.2 million viewers.

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

Fred,

I agree nothing can replace being at an event however some of us have had enough of the cost associated with going to games. Here in Boston it is totally out of control from ticket prices, parking, concessions, and souviniers. Imagine paying anywhere from 30.00-50.00 for parking for just 1 game and there was 1 gas station a couple of years ago aeound Fenway charging 100.00 to park. To me is just totally out of control.

The only event that I attend now is the frozen 4 with 4 buddies every year not taht it is cheap but it is a nice get away each year with friends.

I don't disagree at all. I just got an invoice for next season's UCLA football ( 2 seats) and basketball (4 seats) for a total of just under $3,900. (Nice to get billed for next year's basketball tickets when a) the final game this year hasn't yet been played and b) the schedule for 2007-08 hasn't been announced!)

Dodgers season tickets are about $3,564 for two decent (not great) seats and parking this year was raised to $15 a game -- another $1,215.

Fred, any news on how "Battlestar Galactica" did for its season finale? Even though its renewed for a fourth season if ratings don't show promise the next season might be the show's last (whether Ronald Moore wants to end it or not).

The CW has done something I thought to be impossible.

One of its shows has finished behind a show on Pax (or Ion as I guess it is now known).

The Ion Sunday movie got 1.43 million viewers 2+ to rank #124 for the week.

The CW's 7th Heaven attracted 1.38 million viewers to finish 125h for the week.

This better make it into Lisa DeMorea's Washington Post "Winners/Losers" column in a couple of weeks or her credibility is shot. But seriously though, WOW! :eek: You wouldn't happen to know what the name of the Pax movie was by any chance, do you?

The movie (according to Nielsen) was "The Cowboys".

I should note that "7th Heaven" was a repeat.

But then I would venture to guess that "The Cowboys" was not a network TV premiere.

I don't disagree at all. I just got an invoice for next season's UCLA football ( 2 seats) and basketball (4 seats) for a total of just under $3,900. (Nice to get billed for next year's basketball tickets when a) the final game this year hasn't yet been played and b) the schedule for 2007-08 hasn't been announced!)

Dodgers season tickets are about $3,564 for two decent (not great) seats and parking this year was raised to $15 a game -- another $1,215.

I love the 15.00 parking I havent seen taht around here in over 20 years. That is amazing they are already sending you your invoices.

Fred, any news on how "Battlestar Galactica" did for its season finale? Even though its renewed for a fourth season if ratings don't show promise the next season might be the show's last (whether Ronald Moore wants to end it or not).

I don't know.

The weekly Nielsen cable program ratings only go down to the top 40 programs.

BSG wasn't in the top 40 and based on recent ratings, it wouldn't have come close to the top 40, which was a 2.0 US AA% share -- or some 2.7 million 2+ viewers.

Comcast doesn't offer an ownership stake in Versus in exchange for carriage - no reason for ownership of the MLB TV channel to be part of the carriage agreement. Neither did INHD when they required D* and E* to match the cableco's terms for carriage of their channel.

Agreed CP95.

It is just another of the many red herrings these two sides like to throw at each other so everyone's eyes glaze over and they are allowed to keep oparating in the same confusing way.

(By the way, nice job on the Hearing verbatims!)

TV Sports
DirectTV CEO Carey to Sen. Committee: Investigate Cable Deals
By John Consoli MediaWeek march 27, 2007

DirecTV President and CEO Chase Carey went on the offensive at a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, hearing today, saying if the Committee is concerned about sports programming, rather than examining DirecTV’s telecast deal with Major League Baseball, it should begin by “examining the worst instances of sports withholding” in the Philadelphia and San Diego markets involving cable operators Comcast and Cox.

“In Philadelphia and San Diego, half a million satellite subscribers cannot watch their home teams,” Carey said, alluding to cable exclusive deals. In Philadelphia, for example, Comcast owns the Phildelphia Flyers and Philadelphia 76ers, and those games air exclusively on the Comcast cable system there.

He said the DirecTV telecast deal with MLB “will provide more baseball to more fans in a more compelling format than ever before,” and said the agreement “comports with the policies Congress established to create a competitive marketplace.”

DirecTV, he said, “had no advantage in the negotiation; we simply had greater interest than our competitors.”

IN Demand last week submitted an offer to match DirecTV’s $700 million, seven-year carriage rights deal, but MLB rejected it as being “not responsive” to the terms set forth by MLB to allow it to match. But IN Demand president Robert Jacobson disagreed, stating, “Our offer was fully responsive to Major League Baseball’s requirements and public statements.”

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 Senate Committee is chaired by Senator Daniel Inouye, and also includes Senator John Kerry, who has been pushing for an investigation into the DirecTV/MLB deal.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003563405

Chris Mortensen reported earlier on ESPN that the NFL Rules Committee has made instant replay a permanent rule and this will result in all stadiums being wired for HD. Not sure exactly what it means for viewers, but it can't be a bad thing.

Chris Mortensen reported earlier on ESPN that the NFL Rules Committee has made instant replay a permanent rule and this will result in all stadiums being wired for HD. Not sure exactly what it means for viewers, but it can't be a bad thing.

Remember that the NFL has mandated that ALL televised games as of the 2009 (??) season MUST be in HD. Gives CBS a chance to ramp up - they're supposed to be having four games a week in HD starting this coming season, maybe even going up to five games a week.

This means your Oakland Raiders/Detroit Lions stinker (assuming they're still that bad a few years from now) will be in beautiful 1080i/720p (or whatever is in vogue at that time).

Nielsen Notebook
Fox's Standoff Return Postponed to Summer
By Jim Benson Broadcasting & Cable 3/27/2007

The Fox drama Standoff, initially slated to return to the schedule at 8 p.m. Fridays starting April 6, has seen its return delayed to June and will be replaced by House reruns.

Despite the move to summer, a network spokesman insists to B&C that the drama about two romantically involved FBI crisis negotiators has not been cancelled. No decision on its fate will be made until May, after Fox has a chance to look at its pilots, he says.

The move came as a surprise to some, as it had been slated to return to the Fox primetime schedule until Monday. But the Fox spokesman says with the network now assured of winning the season due to American Idol, the decision was made to postpone its return and provide it with original programming for the summer.

Standoff, one of three new dramas introduced by Fox last fall (the other two have been axed), debuted at 9 p.m. Tuesdays last September with House as a lead-in. It shifted to 8 p.m. Tuesdays when the two series flipped time slots at the end of October and went on winter hiatus Dec. 12 with a spate of other Fox shows.

Producer Twentieth Century Fox Television has already wrapped production for the season on 18 episodes, 11 of which have aired.

During its fall run, Standoff averaged a 2.7 rating/7 share in adults 18-49 and 7 million total viewers. In its short frame behind House, the series had retained about 60% of its lead-in.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6428590

Chris Mortensen reported earlier on ESPN that the NFL Rules Committee has made instant replay a permanent rule and this will result in all stadiums being wired for HD. Not sure exactly what it means for viewers, but it can't be a bad thing.

Three stadiums, that house four teams, will not be wired for HD replay because they are being replaced.
Texas Stadium - Cowboys
RCA Dome - Colts
Giants Stadium - Giants & Jets

Interesting in that everyone except the Jets would have probably every home game in HD.

Not to mention that they haven't even started construction on the replacement for Giants Stadium yet. With all the $$$$'s the NFL has they can't wire a stadium that will be used for 2 or 3 more years.

Britt: Cable Needs DTV Flexibility
By Ted Hearn 3/27/2007 8:46:00 PM

Cable operators need the flexibility to convert digital local TV signals to analog to help keep consumer bills in check after analog local TV signals are turned off in early 2009, Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt said in testimony to be delivered Wednesday before a House subcommittee.

If cable operators can’t downconvert digital signals at the headend or central office, they would need to lease set-top boxes to millions consumers. The National Cable & Telecommunications Association estimated that cable homes currently have 134 million TV sets that would need set-tops to receive digital signals from cable operators. Comcast, the largest U.S. cable company, charges $3.50 per month for digital set-tops.

“A cable operator may decide to convert the digital-broadcast signal to analog format at the headend. Under this option, cable customers who receive service on an analog television without the use a set-top box will receive the same high-quality service the day after the transition as they did the day before with no requirement for new equipment and at no additional cost to the consumer,” Britt said, according to copy of his testimony obtained by Multichannel News.

Britt, along with broadcasting and consumer-electronics representatives, is scheduled to appear before the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet regarding the government-mandated analog-TV cutoff Feb. 17, 2009.

In his statement, Britt didn’t address whether cable operators had legal authority to downconvert at the headend after local TV stations go all-digital. Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin has suggested that cable’s legal authority to do so was an open regulatory question.

Nearly 50% of cable homes have only analog-TV equipment, which means they can’t view a digital local TV signal sent by the cable operator without a set-top box.

Britt indicated that cable operators with particularly high digital-set-top penetration -- Cablevision Systems, for example, reported 76% penetration -- might forgo downconversion and rely on a purely set-top solution as the 2009 deadline nears.

“This option, however, would require these customers to change out equipment or add a set-top box where they did not have one before,” he added.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6428579.html?display=Breaking+News

Have there been any reviews of the new TV show drive? It looks interesting. Would like to read some reviews on it.

i don't need reviews..i know the show will be canceled and i know it will be f*#*)*$ brilliant because it has -

a) tim minear
b) nathan fillion

This is an automatic watch for anyone that has seen firefly..

I will be watching all 6 episodes, and hope that they are all shown on tv...i do not want to watch episodes on the web.

i don't need reviews..i know the show will be canceled and i know it will be f*#*)*$ brilliant because it has -

a) tim minear
b) nathan fillion

This is an automatic watch for anyone that has seen firefly..

I will be watching all 6 episodes, and hope that they are all shown on tv...i do not want to watch episodes on the web.

and it's on Fox, so it's pretty much a guarantee that it will be gone in three weeks if it doesn't instantly pop in the ratings.

Chris Mortensen reported earlier on ESPN that the NFL Rules Committee has made instant replay a permanent rule and this will result in all stadiums being wired for HD. Not sure exactly what it means for viewers, but it can't be a bad thing.

Does this impact the in-stadium camera work? The jumbotrons at FedEx Field are ancient for a stadium that's just turning a decade old compared to some of the amazing jumbotrons I see on TV at other stadiums (Miami and Denver come to mind).

Does this impact the in-stadium camera work? The jumbotrons at FedEx Field are ancient for a stadium that's just turning a decade old compared to some of the amazing jumbotrons I see on TV at other stadiums (Miami and Denver come to mind).
It will have no effect on in stadium productions.

NFL Replay uses the cameras provided by the network, which has been a criticism of replay. Since some game like MNF and SNF use more cameras then a C game of CBS or FOX.

Nielsen Notebook
Fox's Standoff Return Postponed to Summer
By Jim Benson Broadcasting & Cable 3/27/2007

The Fox drama Standoff, initially slated to return to the schedule at 8 p.m. Fridays starting April 6, has seen its return delayed to June and will be replaced by House reruns.

Could Studio 60 be next to follow this path? :(

I suspect that is certainly a possibility.

Three stadiums, that house four teams, will not be wired for HD replay because they are being replaced.
Texas Stadium - Cowboys
RCA Dome - Colts
Giants Stadium - Giants & Jets

Interesting in that everyone except the Jets would have probably every home game in HD.

Not to mention that they haven't even started construction on the replacement for Giants Stadium yet. With all the $$$$'s the NFL has they can't wire a stadium that will be used for 2 or 3 more years.

The league may want to rethink wiring up Qualcomm Stadium (nee San Diego Stadium, nee Jack Murphy Stadium) for the Chargers. The team is in research/negotiations to move out of their 40-year old home - to maybe someplace else within San Diego County, or maybe even out of the county.

Weekly Nielsen Notebook
A big move for 'Dancing'
By Gary Levin USA TODAY March 28, 2007

•Hoofers return. The fourth-season premiere of ABC's Dancing With the Stars (21.8 million Monday) paso dobled to the series' biggest opening yet, up from last September's bow of 20.2 million.

•Long Road. ABC's October Road, sitting in the post-Grey's Anatomy slot, averaged 11.5 million viewers in its second week, down 17% from its debut, while a temporary time-slot competitor, NBC's Raines, dipped the same amount to 8.7 million.

•Miss USA misses. NBC's Miss USA Pageant Friday skidded to a record-low 7.4 million viewers, down from last year's 7.7 million.

•Rating separation. The return of ABC's Six Degrees after a long break Friday hit a series-low (and fifth-place) 4.4 million viewers, well below the 7.4 million for its most recent Thursday episode in early November.

•Cable able. Discovery Channel's Planet Earth series kicked off Sunday with chart-topping numbers, as its first three hours averaged 5.7 million viewers. The ABC Family movie Bring It On: All or Nothing, starring Heroes' Hayden Panettierre, drew 4.8 million, a channel movie record.

•Final bows. HBO's Rome ended its two-season run Sunday with 2.4 million viewers, and NBC talent competition Grease: You're the One That I Want crowned winners with a low 6.9 million. Sunday's season enders: Showtime's The L Word (485,000) and Sci Fi Channel's Battlestar Galactica (1.5 million).

•Series lows. Dancing sent CBS' Two and a Half Men (11.7 million) to a record low Monday, while Rules of Engagement ended its midseason run with 9.3 million. Other lows: NBC's The Black Donnellys (5.5 million Monday) and Crossing Jordan (6.1 million Wednesday). Sunday's Simpsons (7 million) marked its worst turnout since May 2004.

•Idol makers. In its second outing without an American Idol lead-in, Fox's Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader? dipped 14% Thursday to a low 10.8 million viewers but edged out Ugly Betty (10.4 million) to win its time slot. 'Til Death (14.9 million), the week's top comedy, edged up 4% in Wednesday's second post-Idol appearance.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2007-03-27-nielsens-analysis_N.htm

Note: For those who asked, the final "Battlestar Galactica" ratings are in the story above ("Final bows").

I wonder who the genius was at NBC who decided to have Lunesta, a sleep-aid drug, as the sponsor who brought us Law and Order: Criminal Intent with minimal commercial interruption, the lowest rated of the L&O franchise. I thought the juxtaposition of a sleep aid with a failing show was pretty funny, albeit unintentional. :D

TV Notebook
Sinking NBC has lots riding on its fall
Ratings are now actually down from a year ago
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 28, 2007

NBC’s triumphant fall, in which it saw big ratings gains thanks to “Sunday Night Football” and No. 1 new show “Heroes,” has given way to a disappointing spring.

All four of its new midseason shows have flopped, and several veteran programs look weak as the May upfront approaches. Two weeks ago the network slipped behind last year’s average for the first time this season, raising a serious question for media buyers: Can NBC recover next year?

Season to date, the network is averaging a 3.3 adults 18-49 rating and a 9 share, down 3 percent from a 3.4/9 at the same point last season. It’s in fourth place, 0.2 rating points behind ABC and down 11 percent from fourth quarter, when it was averaging a solid 3.7/10.

Much of the problem is the poor performance of new shows “Andy Barker, P.I.,” “Raines,” “Grease: You’re the One That I Want” and “The Black Donnellys,” which are all averaging below a 2.8 rating. It’s doubtful any will return, despite mostly favorable critical response to the three scripted programs.

NBC had two years of sinking ratings before last fall’s growth. Next year will be critical for the network to avoid falling way back into the cellar, and much of it will depend on NBC’s new program development.

The network will need to replace a number of sagging older shows, likely including “Crossing Jordan,” “The Apprentice” and “Law & Order” and/or “L&O: Criminal Intent.” That means it will need a crop of not just smart shows but shows that actually interest viewers.

This year many media people felt NBC had the best slate of pilots, but viewers did not agree. Outside of “Heroes,” none of its new shows averaged above a 3.7 rating.

Yet NBC seems likely to renew low-rated “Friday Night Lights” and “30 Rock,” believing they can find an audience, much like “The Office” did after a disappointing first season. That show is now NBC’s top comedy among 18-49s.

The trick is to find some programs that can catch right away. By taking the far-from-sure chance that “Rock” and “Lights” will grow, NBC can’t risk repeating ABC’s mistake from last season. It followed up a strong development year that yielded “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Desperate Housewives” and “Lost” with one in which just one new show was renewed, nearly wiping out the gains from its big successes.

Meanwhile, in broadcast ratings for the week ended March 25:

Among adults 18-49, Fox led with a 4.4 average rating and a 12 share, followed by CBS at 3.5/10, ABC at 3.1/9, NBC at 2.3/6, Univision at 1.5/4, CW at 1.3/4, Telemundo at 0.4/1, Telefutura at 0.2/1 and Azteca at 0.1/0.

Among adults 18-34, Fox led at 3.9/13, followed by CBS at 2.7/9, ABC at 2.6/8, NBC at 1.7/5, Univision at 1.6/5, CW at 1.4/4, Telemundo at 0.4/1, Telefutura at 0.3/1 and Azteca at 0.1/0.

Among adults 25-54, Fox was first at 4.8/12, followed by CBS at 4.3/11, ABC at 3.5/9, NBC at 2.7/7, Univision at 1.5/4, CW at 1.2/3, Telemundo at 0.3/1, Telefutura at 0.2/1 and Azteca at 0.1/0.

Top five (18-49s): 1. Fox’s “American Idol - Tuesday” 11.8; 2. Fox’s “American Idol - Wednesday” 10.4; 3. ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy” 9.0; 4. ABC’s “Dancing with the Stars” 6.4; 5. Fox’s “'Til Death” 6.1.

Top five (total viewers): 1. Fox’s “American Idol - Tuesday” 29.96 million; 2. Fox’s “American Idol - Wednesday” 27.08 million; 3. ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy” 22.30 million; 4. ABC’s “Dancing with the Stars”21.80 million; 5. CBS’s “CSI: Miami” 17.66 million.

Bottom five (18-49s): Tie-93. CW’s “America’s Next Top Model - Encore” and “Gilmore Girls” 0.8; Tie-95. ABC’s “Celebrity Debut” and CW’s “The Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll-Encore” 0.7; 97. CW’s “The 7th Heaven” 0.5.

Bottom five (total viewers): 93. CW’s “The Game” 2.14 million; 94. CW’s “Gilmore Girls” 2.08 million; 95. CW’s “America’s Next Top Model - Encore” 1.77 million; 96. CW’s “The Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll-Encore” 1.59 million; 97. CW’s “7th Heaven” 1.38 million.

Show on the rise: “Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll,” CW, Tuesday 9 p.m. This reality talent show grew 27 percent week-to-week among viewers 18-49, from 1.1 rating to a 1.4, despite leading out of a repeat of “Gilmore Girls” at 0.8.

Show on the decline: “Rules of Engagement” CBS, Monday 9:30 p.m. CBS’s new comedy started hot last month but has since cooled considerably, last week posting a 3.6 rating among 18-49s, off 16 percent from a 4.3 the previous week. Last week’s rating was down 23 percent from the 4.7 the show has averaged so far this season.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11064.asp

TV Notebook
Home Base for Laughs?
Comedy Central Thinks So
By Bill Carter The New York Times March 28, 2007


Nobody in broadcast television has been laughing much lately at the state of comedy. This season exactly one situation comedy, “Two and a Half Men” on CBS, is among the 20 most-watched shows on television.

That does not mean people have stopped looking for laughs, of course. In the midst of mostly grim days for comedy, the cable channel that is self-proclaimedly in the comedy business, Comedy Central, has never been merrier.

Ratings for the channel’s prime-time shows have increased 12 months in a row, and its all-day schedule is on pace to score its best season ever.

Some of that is explainable by the continuing strength of the channel’s signature shows, like “South Park” and “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart.” Both of these shows continue to generate audiences and attention for the network. Today the channel’s parent company, Viacom, is scheduled to announce plans for a cellphone game based on “South Park,” the first time that franchise has jumped into the gaming world.

The move is designed to play to Comedy Central’s core audience of young men and boys. Few channels other than ESPN have such a heavy concentration of male viewers; audiences for some Comedy Central shows are more than 70 percent male.

One reason for some of the increased ratings is an adjustment by Nielsen Media Research, which for the first time is including a calculation that adds some viewing by college students. In that sample Comedy Central is the No. 2 cable network among male viewers, trailing only ESPN.

Beyond “South Park” and “The Daily Show,” new additions have pushed the network’s ratings: “The Colbert Report” has proved to be an ideal late-night match with “The Daily Show,” and a new sitcom, “The Sarah Silverman Program,” has scored some of the best first-season ratings in the channel’s history.

What seems to be happening, at least according to the channel’s chief executive, Doug Herzog, is that Comedy Central is stepping into the void that years of lackluster broadcast comedy have created.

“A decade ago I used to say we really weren’t the comedy network. NBC was,” Mr. Herzog said. “They had all those great must-see comedies. But now I think we have the heavyweight crown in comedy. It’s ours to defend.”

That boast gets some backing from Doug Mitchelson, who analyzes Viacom for Deutsche Bank. “Comedy Central is doing a fantastic job with its programming,” he said, noting that the channel’s audience size has grown for four straight years. He also said the channel is especially well positioned to take advantage of the migration of the audience to the Internet and mobile devices.

What seems to be making it all work is the fit of the channel’s sensibility with what the comedy audience now expects. Mr. Stewart defined it as “shows that reference a point of view.” He jokingly called the channel “the Sam’s Club of comedy — a central warehouse of comedy where our comedy comes in giant boxes.”

The boxes are actually still rather small, at least when they begin. Ms. Silverman’s show was considered a hit out of the gate; after only two episodes had played, the channel ordered a new season of 14 more episodes. The series averaged about 1.7 million viewers, not big by network standards. Still, that represented a 150 percent improvement in the channel’s ratings in the 10:30 p.m. Thursday time period. (The show has since moved to Wednesday.) “The Sarah Silverman Program” was also the most-watched show in all of television at that hour among men ages 18 to 24.

Ms. Silverman, along with many other of the channel’s stars, said that the environment at Comedy Central was most hospitable to her brand of often outrageous humor. “Where else could I do it?” she said.

Not that the channel leaves its stars completely to their own devices. Ms. Silverman said she has had battles over subject matter. “I don’t know anyone who doesn’t get frustrated when someone who isn’t funny for a living tells someone is who is funny for a living what is and isn’t funny,” Ms. Silverman said.

The creators of “South Park,” Matt Stone and Trey Parker, have had occasional conflicts with the channel as well, but Mr. Stone said that a decade ago he and his partner had watched early Comedy Central programming like “Mystery Science Theater 3000” and decided, “This is where we belong.” He added, “You can see a show now and say, ‘That feels like Comedy Central. That smells like Comedy Central.’ ”

The channel now has a distinct whiff of political satire, thanks largely to Mr. Stewart, Mr. Colbert and the “South Park” guys. In tonight’s “South Park” episode, for example, an animated version of Hillary Clinton visits town. Mr. Stone said of the satirical shows, “That stuff gets a lot of press and attention, but I still think our biggest shows are just about the kids being weird.”

The Bill O’Reilly-like character that Mr. Colbert plays is both political and weird, which is exactly his intention. “No one ever calls and says, ‘Don’t do this,’ ” Mr. Colbert said.

Certainly no one at the channel minded when Mr. Colbert stirred a media firestorm with his satirical-guns-blazing performance at last year’s White House Correspondents Association dinner, where he stayed fearlessly in character despite the discomfort his routine was apparently causing in his dais partner, the president of the United States.

“That day I got off the train in character,” Mr. Colbert said. “I don’t want to be in that town and not be in character. The character is my magic carpet.”

So is Comedy Central the only place to be for contemporary television comedy? Not really, according to the people who work there. The premise that the network sitcom might not make a comeback found no takers at the channel.

Mr. Stewart, Mr. Herzog, Ms. Silverman and Mr. Colbert all spontaneously endorsed comedy being made elsewhere, namely at NBC, with its comedies “The Office” and “30 Rock.”

“Are there any better characters on TV than Alec Baldwin in ‘30 Rock’ and Steve Carell in ‘The Office’?” Mr. Stewart said of the actors on two Thursday night NBC comedies. (Mr. Carell was formerly a correspondent on Mr. Stewart’s show.)

Why do those shows work? Mr. Herzog suggested they come from a comic sensibility familiar at his channel. He said that one of NBC’s Thursday night comedies, “Scrubs,” is now playing extremely well in reruns on Comedy Central.

“That show fits because it is true to our core,” Mr. Herzog said. “And that is point-

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/28/arts/television/28come.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

Almost nothing in this story is new. But it does provide a decent summary of where things stand at the moment. And it illustrates how although many of us have been aware of the digital deadline for years, much of the country has little or no idea what lies ahead.
The HD Revolution
Millions may miss digital TV deadline
The shift from analog to the new format in 2009 might leave many viewers in the dark
By Jim Puzzanghera Los Angeles Times Staff Writer March 28, 2007

WASHINGTON — For millions of Americans, the digital revolution might not be televised.

One in 5 U.S. households — more than a million in the Los Angeles area — depends on rabbit ears or a rooftop antenna to watch TV. Without converter boxes, most of their sets will go blank the day in 2009 that federal law requires broadcast stations to turn off analog signals and transmit only in digital.

The shift is being hailed as broadcast television's most dramatic upgrade since it bloomed to color from black and white half a century ago. The technology gives free TV viewers vastly sharper pictures and enables networks such as ABC and PBS to offer a wider range of channels.

The 80% of Americans with cable or satellite service won't be affected by the change. Neither will those who have newer, digital TV sets. If you do have an old analog TV hooked up to an antenna, you need only buy a converter box, which will probably cost about $50. The federal government is going to hand out subsidies to help pay for it, and you have two years to get ready.

Civil rights leaders and lawmakers are uneasy anyway.

A recent poll found that 61% of people who rely on broadcast TV aren't aware of the digital shift. What's more, households without cable or satellite service tend to have lower incomes, and blacks and Latinos are more likely to receive only over-the-air TV than whites.

The worry isn't that people will miss vital episodes of "American Idol." It's all about staying connected. Even today, with news a 24/7 affair on the Internet and pay TV, nearly two-thirds of viewers say broadcast news is the main way they find out what's going on in the world.

"When I walk into people's houses, they're tuned in to the news," said Alex Nogales, president of the Los Angeles-based National Hispanic Media Coalition. He is testifying on the digital-TV transition before a House subcommittee today. "Am I concerned that our community is going to be left out? Of course."

Federal law requires broadcast stations to turn off analog signals and transmit only in digital on Feb. 18, 2009.

TV networks, cable providers and consumer electronics makers have joined to raise public awareness through websites and an estimated tens of millions of dollars worth of televised public service announcements to begin airing next year.

The Commerce Department plans to give most anyone who applies a $40 coupon to buy a no-frills converter box — limited to two per household. The department has budgeted nearly $1.5 billion, enough for about 34 million converters. But an estimated 70 million TVs are hooked up to antennas, including extra sets in homes with cable or satellite.

For broadcasters, who base their advertising rates on the number of viewers watching, the transition looms as the dawn of a new digital era — and a potential financial disaster if viewers aren't informed.

"The last thing we want is a train wreck on Feb. 18 of 2009," said Dennis Wharton, vice president of the National Assn. of Broadcasters, which represents local stations and TV networks.

Broadcasters are eager for the switch. They think viewers will buy digital sets to receive high-definition programming and the additional channels the technology allows. Stations also would significantly cut their energy costs because they won't have to transmit both analog and digital signals.

Once TV has gone digital, a wide swath of the analog airwaves will go for free to public safety organizations, such as police and fire departments, so they can improve their communications systems. The rest will be auctioned off by the government, with major telecommunications firms such as AT&T Inc. and possibly even Web giants such as Google Inc. expected to pay as much as $10 billion to use it for wireless high-speed Internet service.

For some TV viewers, the continuing digital conversion already has launched a new era. They're discovering that those relics of the pre-cable era — antennas — can deliver sharp programs, many in high-definition.

That's because digital broadcasts offer clear, vivid reception over the free airwaves. And broadcasters can transmit several additional channels on the same frequency because the signals take up fewer airwaves than analog. For example, NBC affiliates have started offering a digital 24-hour weather station.

"When people see the picture quality of [digital] over-the-air — and it's free — it's kind of mind-blowing," said Kevin Nakano, a 42-year-old electrical engineer who has already made the switch to digital broadcasts at his south Torrance home.

Digital TV sets are sharp enough to make the new broadcast signals look great, and the Consumer Electronics Assn. said sales of digital TVs outpaced those of analog sets for the first time last year. Plus, prices are dropping — standard digital TVs are projected to average $901 this year and high-definition sets, $1,150.

Broadcasters are hoping that more viewers will hook up antennas to their digital sets and get hooked on free TV.

"Today, over-the-air television is regarded as sort of your grandfather's technology," said John Lawson, president of the Assn. of Public Television Stations. "But digital over-the-air broadcasting really creates a new experience and adds a lot of value that costs the consumer nothing."

Some of the TV watchers who will have to make the transition are known as cable rejecters — people who can afford pay TV but choose not to get it.

Frustrated by the high cost and hassles of cable and satellite, Greg Brouwer, 34, and his wife hooked up their 32-inch analog TV to a rooftop antenna at their Los Feliz home. They catch up on older shows by renting DVDs.

"We call it the rabbit ears-Netflix plan," said Brouwer, an ABC News editor. "We both really like the fact you can get quite a bit of entertainment without having to pay anything."

Brouwer said he had no idea about the digital-TV shift, but he would probably shell out the cash for a converter box.

"That's a bummer," he said.

Mandy Tam of San Gabriel was also in the dark on the change. If her screen went blank in 2009, the 30-year-old USC pharmacy graduate student said, she would have assumed the $400 TV she bought last year had broken.

"Maybe I would bang on the TV a couple of times, and then I'd just skip it," Tam said.

But many people haven't chosen to skip the digital TV revolution — they just haven't been able to afford it.

A 2005 Government Accountability Office survey found that 48% of households receiving only broadcast TV through antennas had incomes of less than $30,000, compared with 29% of households with cable or satellite service.

The federal government's plan to raise public awareness has been criticized as inadequate. The administration is budgeting only $5 million to notify nearly 300 million Americans about the transition. By way of comparison, the German city of Berlin spent $1 million to notify its 3.4 million residents of a similar shift in 2004.

Worried that people would be caught off guard, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, has suggested that Congress could delay the transition date. It has already pushed back the rollout once.

But advocates say another delay is unlikely, so they've got to start spreading the word.

Nancy Zirkin, director of public policy with the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, is worried that people who need the converter-box coupons the most will be the last to learn about them.

"Like some science fiction nightmare, the news they watch, the programs that actually keep them company and let them know what is happening in the world, could — poof — disappear," she said.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-digital28mar28,0,6269815,print.story?coll=la-home-business

I was talking to a guy at work yesterday about it and he had no clue. It should be interesting as we get closer to the date

I wonder who the genius was at NBC who decided to have Lunesta, a sleep-aid drug, as the sponsor who brought us Law and Order: Criminal Intent with minimal commercial interruption, the lowest rated of the L&O franchise. I thought the juxtaposition of a sleep aid with a failing show was pretty funny, albeit unintentional. :D

It'd be interesting to see if audience resonance with the single sponsor worked though. Maybe for Lunesta it was worth it to spend an extra load of cash to get the full attention of a smaller number of dedicated viewers (which "L&O" fans definitely are) than the inatention of millions of viewers of other shows as just another commercial to ignore. If last night's "CI" had regular commercials I wouldn't even have remembered Lunesta advertised on it, but now I remember them as the kind folks that gave my fast-forwarding thumb a break last night. Plus it was a good "CI" episode to boot, giving us a peek into Wheeler's personal life that we were denied with Barek when Annabella Schiorra departed last year.

dad:

Are you as enthusiastic about "To Catch an ID Thief" as you are the "Predator" series? Next week should be interesting, this first week was focused on tracking all the stolen product to US addresses, and despite all their hidden camera work, turns out all of them were just unwitting, clueless lackeys forwarding the product overseas. Next week they should track some of them down. Shame they likely won't result in arrests.

Weekly Cable Nielsen Notebook
For FX Network, a poverty of 'Riches'
Is the cutting-edge network going over the edge?
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 28, 2007

After an impressive line of critical and ratings hits including “The Shield,” “Nip/Tuck” and “Rescue Me,” FX seems to be suffering from HBO syndrome. It just can’t come up with a new hit that holds its audience after a big debut, and the problem may be with the shows’ flawed main characters.

They may simply be too off-putting to be interesting.

“The Riches” became FX’s latest new program to see substantial declines in its second outing, following a big second-week plunge for “Dirt” last winter and the generally disappointing “Thief” last year.

“Riches” averaged 2.82 million total viewers in its second episode last week, the week ended March 27, down 27 percent from the previous week’s 3.84 million.

Among adults 18-49, where “Riches” had FX’s second-best debut ever behind “Shield,” the Monday 10 p.m. program averaged 1.87 million, down 26 percent from 2.52 million for its premiere.

It's by no means a dog. It remains a top 40 show in total viewers and 18-49s, but it clearly won’t be top 10 as those previous FX hits.

“Riches” follows a family of con artists who take over the identities of a rich family killed in a car accident. Like “Thief,” it asks the audience to sympathize with characters who knowingly break the law to benefit themselves.

While “Shield,” “Nip” and “Rescue” continue to draw very strong ratings several years into their runs, FX hasn’t launched a successful drama since president Peter Liguori left the network several years ago to take over at Fox.

Much like HBO, which unsuccessfully followed up offbeat hits like “Sopranos” and “Sex and the City” with over-the-top flops like “Carnivale” and “Rome,” FX may be pushing too hard to program outrageous shows.

The common thread among the three veteran shows is that, while their lead characters may not always do the right thing, they are generally striving to be decent people. Their morally questionable decisions often have somewhat noble motives, such as helping a family member or avenging a previous wrong. In short, the characters are relatable.

The leads on “Thief,” “Dirt” and “Riches” are anything but. It’s very difficult for audiences to connect with outright criminals, as on “Thief” and “Riches,” or someone whose deplorable antics have no explanation, as with the icy tabloid editor on “Dirt.”

“Riches” received generally favorable reviews, especially for lead actor Eddie Izzard’s portrayal of a con man. But as Media Life TV critic Andrew Lyons notes, “The problem is that for all their surface charm, conmen--or in this case a con family--aren't at all likeable. The sleights of hand and camera are seductive enough but they never overcome this one flaw.”

Meanwhile, in other cable ratings for the week ended March 25:

Top five networks in primetime (18-49s): USA, TBS, Discovery, FX, Comedy Central

Top five networks in primetime (total viewers): USA, Discovery, TNT, TBS, FX

Top movie (18-49s): ABC Family’s “Bring it On: All or Nothing” (Sunday, 8 p.m.) 1.89 million

Top sporting event (total viewers): USA’s “WWE” (Monday, 10 p.m.) 5.45 million

Shows making the top 10 among 18-34s, 18-49s and 25-54s: USA’s “WWE Entertainment” (Monday, 9 p.m. and 10 p.m.); Discovery’s “Planet Earth” (Sunday,9 p.m. and 10 p.m.)

Show on the rise: ABC Family’s “Bring it On: All or Nothing,” Sunday, 8 p.m. The movie, starring “Heroes’” Hayden Panetierre, was the network’s top movie premiere ever among total viewers and several major demographics.

Show on the decline: USA’s “WWE,” Monday 10 p.m. After hitting year-to-date highs the past few weeks, the show was down more than 500,000 from last week.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11066.asp

dad:

Are you as enthusiastic about "To Catch an ID Thief" as you are the "Predator" series?

No. Without the sex predators Chris Hanson is an annoying self-aggrandizing a-hole not worth watching (even if the subject matter warrants investigating), sorry. BTW, does 'Dateline' have any other correspondents besides Hanson? What exactly keeps Stone Philips so damn busy he can't do on-the-field pieces or reports? Isn't NBC risking a backlash if Chris Hanson becomes (if he hasn't already) the face most people associate with NBC News besides Brian Williams and the 'Today' anchors? Rotate more correspondents into 'Dateline' for God's sake, and leave Chris Hanson free to roam the countryside catching sex predators for our eternal amusement! :D

You should have seen the proud look on CH's face when one of the lackeys was talking about Dateline and the Predator series. He loved the show and never missed an episode, and despite having this conversation while sitting across a desk from CH (wearing a delivery company ballcap as a "disguise"), he had no clue who he was talking to.

CH may be annoying, but the stings and resources they put behind him, let us take a view behind the scenes. In the case of ID theft, it was interesting to see how efficient the criminals have become - and how simple it really is. I'd expect this series will open up a lot of people's eyes - and probably increase the problem 10 fold in the process when people see how easy it is to profit. ;)

For me at least, "Dateline" is finally living up to at least some of its potential by actually reporting on a problem which could harm millions -- if not most -- of us.

But the ghosts of Brinkley, Huntley and others are not resting easy with the kind of "news" charade NBC has been putting on for years under the "Dateline" banner.

TV Notebook
Fox Returns With More “Hell's Kitchen”
By John Consoli MediaWeek March 28, 2007

Season three of cooking reality show Hell’s Kitchen on Fox will premiere on Monday June 4 at 9 p.m., preceeded by the new movie-making competition reality show On the Lot at 8.

The On the Lot “Box Office Results Show” will air on Tuesday night, June 5 at 8 p.m., and on each Tuesday night after that. It will be followed at 8:30 p.m. By the freshman sitcom ‘Til Death, in its new time period, with Fox drama House following at 9 p.m.

The Fox drama Bones will move to Friday night at 8 p.m. Beginning June 8, followed by the return of freshman drama Standoff at 9 p.m.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/networktv/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003563933

When news today consists of spending 45 seconds before a hard break letting two people debate major issues - I'm appreciative of any program that dedicates a decent amount of time to any issue so we get more info than a couple lines from somebody's talking points.

Can't wait for "To Catch a Lobbyist" where we can see people walking into an office on the Hill to deliver a big fat envelope - with CH posing as a D-List Congressman. ;)

The problem with "To Catch A Lobbyist" is that NBC would have to make sure it dodged the broadcasting, defense department and other GE-related lobbying efforts.

But it would make a great show.

Imagine seeing those Comcast lobbyists napping in Arlen Specter's inner santcum; or the Liberty/DirecTV folks camped out at the FCC or the....the possibilities are endlessly amusing (or depressing, depending on your own sensibilities).

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

Weekly Nielsen Notebook
Analysis: National Ratings in Prime Time:
Week of March 19-25, 2007
By Marc Berman MediaWeek.com March 28, 2007

CBS and Fox shared bragging rights for the week of March 19, with the Eye net first in households and total viewers (with just 220,000 separating the two) and the home of American Idol No. 1 among key adults 18-49, adults 25-54 and adults 18-34. Both networks were down from one year earlier, with Fox’s losses slightly more extensive at margins of 6 to 17 percent. ABC and NBC were also on the year-to-year downside, with ABC third in the five surveyed categories, followed by NBC and, of course, The CW.

As expected, week two of ABC’s October Road and NBC’s Andy Barker, P.I. and Raines all lost steam on Thursday. While the news was still relatively positive for October Road (No. 1 in the Thursday 10 p.m. hour despite double-digit percent losses from Grey’s Anatomy) and Raines (double-digit growth out of Andy Barker P.I.), it looks like series No. 3 is not the charm for the overrated Andy Richter. Take a look at the three shows versus their debuts from one week earlier:

Andy Barker, P.I. (NBC) – Thurs. 9:30 p.m.
3/15/07
Viewers: 5.96 million (#63 overall)
A18-49: 2.4/ 6 (#46t)
3/22/07
Viewers: 5.33 million (#72 overall)
A18-49: 2.1/ 5 (#58t)

October Road (ABC) – Thurs. 10 p.m.
3/15/07
Viewers: 13.93 million (#9)
A18-49: 5.6/15 (#5)
3/22/07
Viewers: 11.50 million (#20)
A18-49: 4.6/13 (#8t)

Raines (NBC) – Thurs. 10 p.m.
3/15/07
Viewers: 10.46 million (#23)
A18-49: 2.9/ 8 (#29t)
3/22/07
Viewers: 8.71 million (#33)
A18-49: 2.5/ 7 (#42t)

On Fox, the second telecast of Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader in its regularly scheduled Thursday 8 p.m. hour kept network on the map, with 10.82 million viewers (#21) and a 3.7/11 among adults 18-49 (#18t). Let’s see what happens this week when 5th Grader faces CBS’ Survivor: Fiji for the first time.

In return series news, NBC game show Identity is not an adequate replacement for former Friday 8 p.m. occupant 1 vs. 100, with just 6.47 million viewers (#54) and a 1.9/ 7 among adults 18-49 (#67). Even worse was ABC’s long lost Six Degrees, which moved into the Friday 9 p.m. time period with 4.45 million viewers (#82) and a 1.5/ 5 among adults 18-49 (#85). Comparably, that trailed week three of Fox’s struggling The Wedding Bells (Viewers: #74, 5.05 million; A18-49: #79t, 1.6/ 5) by 600,000 viewers and six percent in the demo.

Elsewhere, recently introduced Monday 10 p.m. mob drama The Black Donnellys on NBC is waiting for the axe to swing at 5.53 million viewers and a 2.3/ 6 among adults 18-49 (out of 14.19 million viewers and a 4.3/11 in the demo for lead-in Deal or No Deal). Over at The CW, week three of Tuesday 9 p.m. reality/competition Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll scored 3.12 million viewers (#90) and a 1.4/ 3 among adults 18-49 (#88). While that may not sound like much, that built from a repeat of lead-in Gilmore Girls (Viewers: #97, 2.08 million; A18-49: #96t, 0.8/ 2) by 1.04 million viewers and 75 percent in the demo.

Week two of March Madness on CBS, meanwhile, remained at levels close to one year earlier. Take a look:

NCAA Basketball Championship (CBS) :
-Thursday 8-9:50 p.m.
Viewers: 8.98 million (#32)
A18-49: 3.1/11 (#32)
-Thursday 10-11 p.m.
Viewers: 9.93 million (#27)
A18-49: 4.0/13 (#16t)
-Friday 8-9:45 p.m.
Viewers: 8.13 million (#37)
A18-49: 2.6/10 (#41)
-Friday 10-11 p.m.
Viewers: 9.41 million (#29)
A18-49: 3.4/11 (#24t)
-Saturday 8-9:22 p.m.
Viewers: 10.22 million (#25)
A18-49: 3.4/13 (#24t)

Also worth noting for the week was Miss USA 2007 on NBC with 7.39 million viewers (#44) and a 2.2/ 7 among adults 18-49 (#53t), which was comparable to levels from one year earlier.

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:
CBS: 7.4 rating/12 share (- 6)
Fox: 6.8/11 (- 6)
ABC: 5.9/10 (- 6)
NBC: 4.9/ 8 (-22)
CW: 2.0/ 3

Total Viewers:
CBS: 11.44 million (- 5)
Fox: 11.22 (- 6)
ABC: 8.98 (- 8)
NBC: 7.36 (-23)
CW: 3.05

Adults 18-49:
Fox: 4.4 rating/12 share (-14)
CBS: 3.5/10 (-10)
ABC: 3.1/ 9 (-14)
NBC: 2.3/ 6 (-28)
CW: 1.3/ 4

Adults 25-54:
Fox: 4.8/12 (-11)
CBS: 4.3/11 (- 9)
ABC: 3.5/ 9 (-17)
NBC: 2.7/ 7 (-31)
CW: 1.2/ 3

Adults 18-34:
Fox: 3.9/13 (-17)
CBS: 2.7/ 9 (-10)
ABC: 2.6/ 8 (-10)
NBC: 1.7/ 5 (-32)
CW: 1.4/ 4

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

Must 'Dateline' resort to the "To Catch A ____" banner for all of its investigations now though? The one a week ago about the Ethiopian internet scam was pretty good (almost "60 Minutes" worthy... cringe) but again, why Chris Hanson and why "To Catch A..." in the title? Ratings aren't exactly backing the idea that these "Dateline" specials are doing much better than second-rate sitcoms and dramas like "Andy Baker P.I." and "Friday Night Lights" (wink!), only that they cost so little to make NBC is willing to continue doing them to fill empty time slots and remain deadlocked in fourth place on the 18-49 demo. At least they should blow a Ford pick-up truck with sexual predators trapped inside to expose the weak state of both the American steel and automotice industries. That'd be worth checking out just for laughs! :o

It'd be interesting to see if audience resonance with the single sponsor worked though. Maybe for Lunesta it was worth it to spend an extra load of cash to get the full attention of a smaller number of dedicated viewers (which "L&O" fans definitely are) than the inatention of millions of viewers of other shows as just another commercial to ignore. If last night's "CI" had regular commercials I wouldn't even have remembered Lunesta advertised on it, but now I remember them as the kind folks that gave my fast-forwarding thumb a break last night. Plus it was a good "CI" episode to boot, giving us a peek into Wheeler's personal life that we were denied with Barek when Annabella Schiorra departed last year.
To be honest, that was my initial thought as well, it would be nice to see more advertisers sponsor the whole hour with limited interruption(even though it was not an exclusive sponsorship last night). I might even sit through a 3-5 min commercial if it was intelligently done, and provided varied information throughout the broadcast with each break. I think Ford and/or Toyota have done this with "24" on occasion.

I just thought it was funny that a show it seems most people would rather go to bed than to watch would have a sleep-aid for a major sponsor.

I agree also, the episode was actually a pretty good one, I've liked Julianne Nicholson in almost everything she's done so far, I hope she does some more film work.

...I've liked Julianne Nicholson in almost everything she's done so far, I hope she does some more film work.

You sound like she should already start looking for work because the "CI" ship is sunk already. BTW, Julianne Nicholson in HD = cutest freckled girl ever! :)

BTW, Marc Berman's result from last night: "Third behind House and Dancing With the Stars at 9 p.m. was NBC’s Law & Order: Criminal Intent (7.2/11), followed by a repeat of CBS’ The Unit (4.4/ 7,) and The CW’s Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll (2.3/ 4). While the growth of 53 percent for Pussycat Dolls out of the Gilmore Girls encore is admirable, a 2.3/ 4 is still…well…a 2.3/ 4."

While not stellar I'd think NBC and Lunesta are pleased with those numbers considering the show was up against two highly-rated reality shows. Plus how many times have we mentioned Lunesta in this thread already (which we wouldn't be doing if had been a regularly-sponsored show)? Lunesta, Lunesta, Lunesta, L-U-N-E-S-T-A (hooray). Seriously, any sponsor that wants to support my "L&O" babies will have my serious purchase consideration even though I don't need or take sleeping aids... ever! :cool:

TV Notebook
Fox Returns With More “Hell's Kitchen”
By John Consoli MediaWeek March 28, 2007



The Fox drama Bones will move to Friday night at 8 p.m. Beginning June 8, followed by the return of freshman drama Standoff at 9 p.m.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/networktv/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003563933
What is with FOX, why this propensity to move stuff around all the time risking viewer erosion, do these guys suffer from ADD or something?

You sound like she should already start looking for work because the "CI" ship is sunk already. BTW, Julianne Nicholson in HD = cutest freckled girl ever! :)
Definitely, and with that little overbite... :) :)

What is with FOX, why this propensity to move stuff around all the time risking viewer erosion, do these guys suffer from ADD or something?

It's only impacting summer reruns of Bones. If anything it may pick up some straggler viewers who didn't watch it because the in-season timeslot conflicted with one of their favorites.

It's only impacting summer reruns of Bones. If anything it may pick up some straggler viewers who didn't watch it because the in-season timeslot conflicted with one of their favorites.
I didn't see that mentioned in the article, but yeah, I guess June would be the start of the summer TV season. :p

Lunesta was shrewd in advertising on a 10pm show. Keep in mind who their target audience is. The others have gone to bed.

When news today consists of spending 45 seconds before a hard break letting two people debate major issues - I'm appreciative of any program that dedicates a decent amount of time to any issue so we get more info than a couple lines from somebody's talking points.

Can't wait for "To Catch a Lobbyist" where we can see people walking into an office on the Hill to deliver a big fat envelope - with CH posing as a D-List Congressman. ;)

LMAO....if only!!!!!

The tough part would be finding a lawmaker that a lobbyist would believe could be bought. Of course, if NBC offered enough cash, they'd likely get plenty of takers. ;)

Almost nothing in this story is new. But it does provide a decent summary of where things stand at the moment. And it illustrates how although many of us have been aware of the digital deadline for years, much of the country has little or no idea what lies ahead.
The HD Revolution
Millions may miss digital TV deadline
The shift from analog to the new format in 2009 might leave many viewers in the dark

I posted the following two posts back several years ago (sometime in 2004, I think). I STILL see no progress.

I've been puzzled for some time now why we don't see any "mainstream public" info about the digital transition. No PSAs, no print ads--nothing! It should come from the government, broadcasters, the CEA, or any entity who has the power to inform the masses. I talk to people at work sometimes that STILL have no idea about the upcoming change in the way we receive television signals. The only way for the complete transition to take place is to INFORM THE PUBLIC! I tell everyone I know, but I can't tell all 300 million of us. And some blame should also go to manufacturers and retailers who still sell analog sets. There needs to be, at least, a disclaimer to encourage buying a digital set over an analog one.

("but that's just my opinion, I could be wrong")

Public awareness of digital transition

I try to keep somewhat informed (through AVS and a couple of other forums) on the status of digital TV, HDTV, and the eventual cutover to all digital broadcasting. There seems to be a lot of confusion/lack of info on the digital transition, currently scheduled for the end of 2006. [now 2009] Many people I come in contact with are still unaware that there is a move to digital TV. (I tell as many people as I can.)

As an average, everyday consumer, I see very little (if any) public service announcements, commercials, or any other mainstream information about the conversion. Since this transition affects almost everyone in the country, shouldn’t there be some information dispersed on the one medium that the transition affects: TV?

TV Notebook
Home Base for Laughs?
Comedy Central Thinks So
By Bill Carter The New York Times March 28, 2007

That boast gets some backing from Doug Mitchelson, who analyzes Viacom for Deutsche Bank. “Comedy Central is doing a fantastic job with its programming,” he said, noting that the channel’s audience size has grown for four straight years. He also said the channel is especially well positioned to take advantage of the migration of the audience to the Internet and mobile devices.


On Xbox Live Marketplace about half of the top 50 downloads are South Park episodes. A few Stand Up specials and other shows are in the top 50 as well. And that's content people are paying for. As Stephen Colbert said when Google bought Youtube: "I can't wait for my check, I'm all over that thing".

One South Park episode, Good Times With Weapons, was offered for a limited time in HD for free via download on XBLM. It's now being included with all Xbox 360 systems purchased for the next couple weeks on disc. Hard to know what it means going forward but it looks excellent and far exceeded my low expectations (and my wifes). Did you know Cartman has teeth? The point is that not only is Comedy Central leading the way in alternate forms of online distribution but they are now starting to push beyond that to content which is otherwise unavailable.

Lunesta was shrewd in advertising on a 10pm show. Keep in mind who their target audience is. The others have gone to bed.

Right, except "Criminal Intent" airs at 9PM ET and "Special Victims Unit" at 10PM. :p I'm sure Lunesta would love to sponsor "SVU" for the entire hour leading up to the product's peak time of consumption, but that would cost a lot more than what they paid for "CI." Remember that "CI" ranks much lower than "SVU," so advertisers like Lunesta can buy the entire hour for a lot less than what a single sponsor would have to shell for a hit show like "24" or "Desperate Housewives." Maybe the ad agency/Lunesta people figured they could get more bang for their buck by targeting (a) the older crowd that watches all "L&O" shows in droves and more likely to use sleeping pills as well as (b) 18-49 year-olds that don't use the product but will now remember the name Lunesta if they ever need a sleeping aid. I fall on the latter category (34 yrs. old Hispanic male) so this, as far as I'm concerned, was money well spent by Lunesta's ad people.

Some of us are so busy discussing the "menusha" of TV shows, the industry and the major players that we forget what these TV shows actually are: devices through which sponsors paying for the whole thing want to reach us and sell something. When's the last time anybody here discussed what advertisements appeared on "CSI" or "Dancing with the Stars"? The closest is the semi-regular jokes from comedians about how many ads for medicines aimed at older people appear on all thee networks' evening newscasts.

Sorry for the delay, but Tuesday’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.

TV Notebook
'Underbelly' moves over
ABC comedy to follow 'Grey's Anatomy'

By Michael Schneider. Josef Adalian Variety March 28, 2007

New ABC laffer "Notes From the Underbelly" is getting an upgrade: Series will now air in the plum spot behind "Grey's Anatomy."

Alphabet opted to make the change after Fox expanded its "American Idol" results show on Wednesdays to an hour -- smack against "Underbelly's" Wednesday-at-9:30 p.m. slot.

ABC has high hopes for the single-camera "Underbelly," promoting it heavily during the net's hit reality competish "Dancing With the Stars." Rather than watch it suffer opposite "Idol," the network now hopes to attract some of "Grey's" loyal aud.

Now, ABC will air back-to-back episodes of "Underbelly" at 10 p.m. Thursdays starting April 12. "Underbelly" replaces "Men in Trees," which has already been picked up for next season, and now may not return until then.

Current slot occupant "October Road" was skedded to air just four times, and will bow out after its April 5 episode.

As for the Wednesday 9 p.m. slot, ABC will continue with "According to Jim" and "In Case of Emergency" until the end of April, and then fill the slot with repeats of "Lost."

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117961981&categoryid=14

What is with FOX, why this propensity to move stuff around all the time risking viewer erosion, do these guys suffer from ADD or something?

They realize that whatever they do, "American Idol" and "House" will save them.

CBS has gone exactly the opposite route: it puts shows on and leaves them there. Week after week, new episode and repeat. You know CSI is on at 9 PM Thursday and NCIS is 8 PM Tuesday.

All summer fans of other shows who don't want to see repeats can check out the reruns at CBS.

It has worked remarkably well, as CBS has been the leading network in total viewers for a number of years.

On the other hand, this season should be the third straight Fox 18-49 win.

So go figure.

Technology Notebook
Best Buy Won't Commit To Labels or Carriage of Converters
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 3/28/2007

In the House Telecommunications Subcommittee meeting Wednesday, Best Buy admitted that the company does not have any warning labels on it's analog-only sets to inform potential buyers that the sets will not work without a converter box after the DTV transition in 2008, according to Michael Vitelli, senior VP of Best Buy.

This admission did not make House Telecommunications Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey (D-Mass.) very happy.

Former Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.)--who co-sponsored a bill in Congress that would require warning labels and a consumer education campaign--agreed with Markey's disappointment.

Former Commerce Chairman Joe Barton (R-Tex.) asked how many of the witnesses at a Wednesday hearing on the DTV transition would support the label bill proposed by Upton. The bill included a May 1 deadline to launch the education campaign. There were no supporters.

James Yager of Barrington Broadcasting said he would not support the bill because he thought May was too early to launch a campaign since the analog-to-digital converter boxes would not be in stores until early 2008. He suggested November 2007 for beginning to ramp up that education campaign.

Barton said that they were willing to work with that date, but thought it important to pass a bill establishing the outlines of the education campaign. A similar outline was passed as part of the House version of the DTV transition bill in the last Congress, but it was stripped out in the Senate,

Markey seemed even more offput by Vitelli's refusal to promise that all his stores would stock analog-to-digital converter boxes. "The right answer is yes," he advised. But when he asked Vitelli again, he would not commit to carrying them.

Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) asked whether there should be concern that retailers would be discouraging people from getting the converters so that they would, instead, buy more expensive DTV sets.

Vitelli said no. But he did say that applications for government coupons to subsidize the converters would be in every store, a commitment that drew praise from Dingell.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6428721

TV Sports
Is Dish Nearing an MLB-EI Deal?
EchoStar Closer to Deal than iN Demand
(From bizofbnaseball.com)

John Ourand and Eric Fisher of the Sports Business Journal report today on the Sports Business Daily that, "EchoStar's Dish Network appears much closer than cable's InDemand to striking a deal with MLB to carry Extra Innings and the planned MLB Channel, marking a potentially significant breakthrough in the distribution logjam that has lasted for months."

Further reporting by Ourand and Fisher indicate that MLB and DirecTV are considering EchoStar's offer, which most likely would ask for an equity stake in The MLB Channel as is currently the deal with MLB and DirecTV's agreement.

http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
Two left feet for ABC's 'American Vote'
New reality show debuts with dismal 1.9 in 18-49s
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 28, 2007

It was a different show but the same old story for ABC: A new program unable to hold the big lead-in audience from “Dancing with the Stars.” This time the new show was “The Great American Dream Vote,” which lost more than half the first “Stars” results show’s lead-in in last night’s special debut.

“Vote” averaged a dismal 1.9 adults 18-49 rating at 10 p.m., according to Nielsen overnights, retaining just 43 percent of “Stars’” 4.4 rating in the 9 p.m. slot. It slipped by 30 percent, from a 2.3 to a 1.6, in its second half hour.

Among total viewers, where “Stars” is strongest, “Vote” averaged only 6.1 million, or 11.5 million fewer than “Stars.”

That was despite airing against relatively light competition, with CBS showing a “Shark” repeat and NBC’s “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” an original.

ABC has had a tough time finding a compatible new lead-out to “Stars” over the past year. Already two sitcoms, “Help Me Help You” and “Crumbs,” bombed when paired with the competition show.

The network may have more luck trying a veteran show behind “Stars.” Last fall the “Stars” results show led into “Lost,” already an established hit, and the two seemed to mesh well.

“Vote” was actually a special preview and will air regularly on Wednesdays at 8 p.m., but ABC probably could have tinkered with the schedule if “Vote” did well enough behind “Stars.” Luckily for the network, it’s only scheduled to run through April 18.

“Vote” invites contestants to help convince America to let them pursue their wildest dream. Contestants are winnowed down to two by the studio audience, then viewers can vote for their favorite. It’s hosted by Donny Osmond.

The return of “House” after a brief hiatus solidified Fox’s first place for the night with a 10.0 average rating and a 27 share, followed by NBC at 3.0/8, ABC at 2.8/8, CBS at 2.2/6, Univision at 1.7/5 and CW at 1.0/3.

Ratings for Fox are approximate, as “American Idol” aired from 8 p.m. to 9:07 p.m. and “House” was on until 10:07 p.m. Overnights measure timeslot, not actual program, data, and will be adjusted when final ratings come out later today.

At 8 p.m. Fox led with a 10.4 for “American Idol,” followed distantly by CBS with a 2.5 for a repeat of “NCIS.” ABC was third that hour with a 2.1 for a “Dancing with the Stars” recap show, NBC fourth with a 2.0 for “Dateline,” Univision fifth with a 1.9 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and CW sixth with a 0.8 for a repeat of “Gilmore Girls.”

Fox led again at 9 p.m. with a 9.5 for “House,” with ABC moving to second with a 4.4 for its “Stars” results show. Things were closer in total viewers, with “House” at 22.2 million and “Stars” at 17.6 million. NBC jumped to third with a 2.7 for “Law & Order: Criminal Intent,” with CBS fourth with a 2.1 for a repeat of “The Unit,” Univision fifth with a 1.7 for “Destilando Amor” and CW sixth with a 1.2 for “Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll.”

At 10 p.m. NBC took the lead with a 4.3 for “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.” CBS and ABC tied for second at 1.9, CBW for a repeat of “Shark” and ABC for the premiere of “Vote,” with Univision fourth with a 1.4 for “Nuestra Belleza Latina.”

Among households, Fox led the night with a 14.2 average rating and a 22 share. ABC was second at 7.3/12, NBC third at 6.4/10, CBS fourth at 5.7/9, Univision fifth at 2.2/4 and CW sixth at 1.6/2.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11091.asp

TV Sports Commentary
Extra Innings Deal Makes Poor Long-Term Business Sense
By Maury Brown bizofbaseball.com March 28, 2007

Yesterday saw several principle players in the Extra Innings saga testify before the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation at a hearing entitled Exclusive Sports Programming: Examining Competition and Consumer Choice. Rob Jacobson President and Chief Executive Officer for iN DEMAND Networks, Bob DuPuy President and Chief Operating Officer for Major League Baseball, Chase Carey Chief Executive Officer for DIRECTV Group, Inc., and Carl Vogel President & Vice Chairman EchoStar Satellite L.L.C. all had time at the microphone.

As the prepared statements provided here on The Biz of Baseball show, there are some key facets—namely the upcoming The Baseball Channel—that are creating the impasse on getting all the incumbents in a place to carry Extra Innings.

In a nutshell, DirecTV has offered to pay for the rights to show The Baseball Channel up-front, and now. Given the fact that ratings for NFL Network have not exactly been stellar (the heavily hyped debut game on the fledgling network pulled an averaged 4.2 million total viewers and a 2.3 household rating according to Nielsen, nearly one-third what Monday Night Football pulls on ESPN), you might understand why Robert Jacobson of iN Demand offered up a compromise deal in his opening statement. “If The Baseball Channel launches in 2009, we would give MLB the right to cancel the Extra Innings deal if it cannot reach a satisfactory agreement for carriage of the new channel with our owners,” Jacobson said. “This would put off the issue of The Baseball Channel until it actually launches and ensure that for the next two years at least, all baseball fans will have access to the Extra Innings package.”

After the statement was made, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) asked Bob DuPuy, “"What's the matter with that?”

Well, here’s what’s the matter with that: If MLB re-negotiates with iN Demand, MLB has to renegotiate with DirecTV, and possibly EchoStar if they get onboard. The exclusive deal takes the risk off MLB and places it on DirecTV. As mentioned, if ratings for the NFL Network are not high by comparison to games shown on ESPN, how will MLB fair? After all, the NFL enjoys a vastly more popular product. Also, by DirecTV offering an up-front payment as opposed to iN Demand’s offer make The Baseball Channel available on a per subscriber basis, MLB has those funds available for any start-up costs involved in launching The Baseball Channel.

Back to iN Demand, it seemed more than a bit ironic that they played themselves up as the “good guys” in this deal. After all, there are exclusive deals for cable that involve the Mets, White Sox, Padres and Phillies. As reported by Richard Sandomir of the NY Times in late February:

The owners will also have their own interests at heart. The Mets are partners in SNY with two cable operators, Time Warner and Comcast; the White Sox and Cubs are also partners with Comcast in Chicago. The Atlanta Braves are caught between being sold by Time Warner, which owns cable networks like TBS, to Liberty Media, which is taking over DirecTV.

The Padres' cable games are not licensed to satellite, so if their local fans switch to DirecTV to continue to watch Extra Innings, they will not get their own team's games unless they buy both services.

Comcast SportsNet in Philadelphia is not delivered by satellite as most regional sports networks like YES and SNY are, which leaves 300,000 or more DirecTV subscribers (at least 50 percent more than total national cable subscribership to Extra Innings) in that market without access to those cable games. Comcast's refusal to put its sports network on satellite has been challenged by DirecTV and EchoStar but affirmed by the federal government.

So, it’s not as if cable isn’t playing a roll in the exclusivity matter, as well. Should be interesting if you live in San Diego, have to watch the Padres on cable due to an exclusive deal with Cox, and you want to watch Extra Innings. In that instance, it appears you’ll have to have DirecTV, AND cable.

As for DirecTV, Chase Carey provided some analysis by dartboard. “DIRECTV estimates that there are relatively few viewers – no more than three percent of the cable segment (approximately 180,000 Extra Innings subscribers) – who cannot receive DIRECTV service,” Carey said in his opening statement. “This translates to roughly 5,000 subscribers – each of whom can access the games over the Internet.”

This is analogous to saying, “When a breeze blows through pile of leaves, 5,000 of them will be displaced.” It’s wholly arbitrary. How Carey and DirecTV came about this figure had to come with sticking their finger in the wind, but it did, none the less, create a case where the figure will be published and the myth will, in time, become engrained as revisionist history.

The other issue that got a lot of play regarded MLB’s willingness to offer a 20% ownership equity in The MLB Channel to DirecTV, while not giving this same offer to the incumbents. As Carl Vogel of EchoStar said, “However, in its entirety must be apples to apples, which will require EchoStar to acquire a pro-rata ownership of The MLB Channel,” Carey said in his opening statement. “In a letter dated March 22nd, from Major League Baseball, they state they are not in a position to offer any equity in connection with this ‘opt-in’ opportunity without DirecTV’s consent. It will be interesting to see whether that consent is forthcoming, and with what conditions, as DirecTV reconciles whether it wears its ownership hat for the MLB Channel or its hat as a competitive distributor.”

While DISH has seemed almost a secondary player in all of this, word came late yesterday by way of the Sports Business Journal, that EchoStar has offered up, what they feel, matches MLB’s terms as it pertains to financials, and distribution. For the deal to fly, EchoStar is asking for an ownership stake in The Baseball Channel, as well. The sides were reportedly mulling the offer over.

The biggest question is, what is MLB’s endgame in all of this?

As I’ve reported before, the exclusive deal does not make good long-term business sense. Limiting viewers is a poor growth model, beyond the ill-will that has been created in this process. No matter how many times you turn the deal over in your head, one asks if by not making the deal exclusive, if MLB would have come out financially in the long run.

iN Demand offered $70 million per-year in a non-exclusive arrangement. If DirecTV offered half of what they are offering in an exclusive arrangement ($50 million), MLB would come out $20 million a year ahead of where they are now, and that’s without DISH in play. Maybe it’s a matter of driving consumers to MLB.TV. After all Bob DuPuy said yesterday, “If iN Demand and Dish choose not to step up to the plate as DirecTV has done, fans will still have several options. They can switch to DirecTV, they can subscribe to MLB.TV and watch the games on the Internet, and they can watch the roughly 400 games that every fan in every Major League market has available without the out-of-market package.” That’s convenient. MLB will pull in revenues from the displaced through their online offering. Still, is it going to be enough to offset the revenues that could have been pulled in by keeping all the incumbents in the fold?

Added to this, there is more of the “ill-will” factor as it pertains to the relationship that MLB needs to keep with cable. Is it simply not a matter of time before MLB comes to cable looking to get The MLB Channel carried?

So, to repeat, the deal makes poor long-term business sense, outside of fan ill-will.

Lastly, I should note (once again) that I’ve been a DirecTV subscriber for some time and chose to do so for reasons outside of Extra Innings. Still, I’ve subscribed to EI in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. With that, and the season on the cusp, I looked up the schedule. Sunday, there was a limited slate of games on tap. Now, DirecTV is showing a more complete slate of games to choose from. At least that’s one less matter to be critical of in what might be deemed “ExtraInningsGate”.

Note: Maury Brown is the founder and president of The Biz of Baseball and an author for Baseball Prospectus.

http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php

They realize that whatever they do, "American Idol" and "House" will save them.

CBS has gone exactly the opposite route: it puts shows on and leaves them there. Week after week, new episode and repeat. You know CSI is on at 9 PM Thursday and NCIS is 8 PM Tuesday.

All summer fans of other shows who don't want to see repeats can check out the reruns at CBS.

It has worked remarkably well, as CBS has been the leading network in total viewers for a number of years.

On the other hand, this season should be the third straight Fox 18-49 win.

So go figure.
CBS is definitely the "reliable" network. In my mind, FOX is still really only a one-trick-pony with "AI", "House" notwithstanding.

TV Sports Commentary
Extra Innings Deal Makes Poor Long-Term Business Sense
By Maury Brown bizofbaseball.com March 28, 2007



As for DirecTV, Chase Carey provided some analysis by dartboard. “DIRECTV estimates that there are relatively few viewers – no more than three percent of the cable segment (approximately 180,000 Extra Innings subscribers) – who cannot receive DIRECTV service,” Carey said in his opening statement. “This translates to roughly 5,000 subscribers – each of whom can access the games over the Internet.”

This is analogous to saying, “When a breeze blows through pile of leaves, 5,000 of them will be displaced.” It’s wholly arbitrary. How Carey and DirecTV came about this figure had to come with sticking their finger in the wind, but it did, none the less, create a case where the figure will be published and the myth will, in time, become engrained as revisionist history.


:p
I like this part, I guess this is the polite way of saying he pulled the numbers out of his a$$. :D

They realize that whatever they do, "American Idol" and "House" will save them.

.......

On the other hand, this season should be the third straight Fox 18-49 win.

So go figure.


I think people will eventually tire of Idol...the judge based show is still compelling, but when it opens up to voting it becomes a popularity contest pure and simple. It will never go away, but it will drop in ratings similar to Survivor...still formidable, but not invincible.

:p
I like this part, I guess this is the polite way of saying he pulled the numbers out of his a$$. :D

Probably.

But DirecTV has said for some time that only about three per cent of cable customers are unable to get DirecTV if they really want to subscribe. So in that way the numbers seem to add up.

I am not sure how his numbers relate to apartment dwellers, to be honest. I do know that D* has made a major effort in recent years to get apartment dwellers hooked up through an aggressive MDU (Multiple Dwelling Unit) campaign.

But in watching the hearing yesterday, I would say all the participants were equally as guilty of pulling stats and numbers out of the air to bolster their various (and often preposterous) claims.

The HD Revolution
COMMENTARY
Fuzzy Pictures
By John Eggerton in the Broadcasting & Cable “bcbeat” blog March 28, 2007

House Telecommunications & Internet Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey (D-Mass.) says the DTV transition picture is still fuzzy. I agree.

A Hill hearing was held Wednesday with the goal of clearing up that picture. Hmmmm. Not sure it did much to "sharpen it to crystal clarity," to borrow from the Outer Limits intro about control of the TV picture.

I agree with broadcaster/Congressman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) that a lot of people are going to ask why they can't use the $40 coupon the government is using to subsidize digital-to-analog converters toward any kind of box they want.

As currently configured, the government will only subsidize low-cost boxes without any fancy features like built-in DVR's or extra outputs. But why? This is effectively a government-mandated taking of analog set. Why shouldn't anyone with an analog-only set be made whole buy getting a coupon to which they could apply to whatever box they want? It's not covering the cost of the whole box anyway.

It's not like this is only a "lifeline" initiative because the boxes are going to be available to second or third boxes with houses already hooked up to a cable or satellite lifeline.

There is no means test, so the boxes aren't being confined to poor people or ones who can't afford to buy them.

Also unclear is just how many sets will need the boxes after the transition. The figure seems to be somewhere between 8 million and 130 million, depending on what the definition of "need" is. That's quite a range.

Also unclear is how much money is needed for consumer education. Equipment manufacturers suggest some of the Chicken Little predictions of train wrecks and panic are fear mongeringfearmongering," and don't plan to ask for a dime. Others warn that the political futures could hang in the balance if the project is underfunded.

Also unclear is whether retailers will have to start putting little stickers on analog sets that say they are headed for potted-plantdom in February 2009 without a converter. Republicans and Democrats seem in agreement the labels are necessary, while the industry seems in agreement that it isn't.

Also unclear is just how many converters will be on store shelves in January 2008, at which time the govenment government be ready to process coupons and start subsidizing the converters.

A Best buy representative said it wasn't putting labels on its TV's which led at least one legislator to the suggestion that retailers might not want to push the boxes but rather upsell (I like that word) customers to DTVs instead.

Also unclear is just when the massive consumer education campaign will or should get in gear, May, November, or January 2008, depending on whom you ask. Congressman Joe Barton says May, but he is willing to bend. One top broadcaster suggested November, while others say not until the boxes are on the shelves and the government in gear to issue the coupons, wishing to avoid panic in the streets when Seinfeld re-runs are inaccessible.

Also unclear is...Well, you get the fuzzy picture.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/blog/1380000138.html

I think people will eventually tire of Idol...the judge based show is still compelling, but when it opens up to voting it becomes a popularity contest pure and simple. It will never go away, but it will drop in ratings similar to Survivor...still formidable, but not invincible.


As Marc Berman noted today, there has been an erosion over the year-ago ratings of 4.87 viewers in the 18-49 demographic.

Those younger viewers tend to be more fickle with shorter attention spans, but perhaps it could be the beginning the trend you anticipate.

Nonetheless, "AI" still steamrollers all in its path on network TV and probably will for another couple of seasons at least.

Personlly, I am fascinated by today's Sports Business Daily report hinting that Dish will figure out a way to sign on to the MLB-EI package.

That would be great for MLB and DBS in general and would, in my mind, perhaps even force iN Demand to come on board.

Were Dish to agree to place the Baseball Channel in 15 million or so homes, it would give TBC 30+ million homes when it starts in 2009.

That would still be only about 30% of the avaiulable homes were cable to be included, but would give DBS a strong drawing card to differentiate itself from cable.

And by next year, when there will be close to double the HD homes as now, the fact that the vast majority of the games will be delivered in HD will be very persuasive.

In my mind it makes sense for Dish to make the deal...and it doesn';t really hurt DirecTV -- and fact it probably saves a substantial amount of $$.

But unless Comcast and Cox add their Philadelphia and San Diego RSNs to the MLB-EI package, it makes no sense for DirecTV to agree to let iN Demand join the party. And there is no way either of them will do that. The Padres exclusivity to Cox is one major reason that DBS has about a far lower sub rate in San Diego than in most major markets.

TV Sports Commentary
Extra Innings Deal Makes Poor Long-Term Business Sense
By Maury Brown bizofbaseball.com March 28, 2007

there are exclusive deals for cable that involve the Mets

The Mets are partners in SNY with two cable operators, Time Warner and Comcast

Comcast SportsNet in Philadelphia is not delivered by satellite as most regional sports networks like YES and SNY are

How is the Mets deal exclusive for cable when it's available on satellite?
Just because two cable companies are partners in it doesn't make it exclusive. You can get SNY in SD and HD on D* as well as cable, FIOS and U-verse carries it in SD.

Maury was using a quote from the NY Times Richard Sandomir in that particular part of his commentary.

I think Sandomir's point (although it certainly could have been clearer) is that the Mets, White Sox and Cubs have deals with cable outlets owned by cable companies.
And neither Dish nor DirecTV has asked for a share of ownership before carrying those channels.

Probably.

But DirecTV has said for some time that only about three per cent of cable customers are unable to get DirecTV if they really want to subscribe. So in that way the numbers seem to add up.

I am not sure how his numbers relate to apartment dwellers, to be honest. I do know that D* has made a major effort in recent years to get apartment dwellers hooked up through an aggressive MDU (Multiple Dwelling Unit) campaign.

But in watching the hearing yesterday, I would say all the participants were equally as guilty of pulling stats and numbers out of the air to bolster their various (and often preposterous) claims.
I agree that they're both probably pulling numbers out of thin air, but I have to take issue with that 3% figure. I'd stake a huge pile of money that that number is complete BS. I can look on my own block and see that close to 50% of my neighbors don't have line-of-site for D*'s sats(mostly because of the trees on my property.. :p ), and they all have/can get cable. Now obviously, living in redwood country the percentage will be higher than normal, but that number is just pure posturing rhetoric. How many folks in NYC, or San Francisco, have a realistic chance of getting sat? Those are big TV markets.

As far as MDU's, I'd say that cable is by far the dominant provider, I'd be surprised if the sat number was over 15-20% for MDUs.

In my mind it makes sense for Dish to make the deal...and it doesn';t really hurt DirecTV -- and fact it probably saves a substantial amount of $$..

So basically you're saying Charlie should eat the cost of the MLB deal for the mutual benefit of both satellite giants (his own and his biggest competitor) because, in the long run, exclusivity with MLB guarantees both carriers a cache' of exclusivity (with which comes more paying subscribers) that cable will be shut out of during the "booming" years of HD. Right? This is risky because Dish could be stuck with an expensive business deal to honor with MLB while most new satellite subscribers could/would choose Direct TV because it has the whole enchillada (Sunday ticket, more HD channels, etc.) and not just MLB (like Dish).

I think people will eventually tire of Idol...the judge based show is still compelling, but when it opens up to voting it becomes a popularity contest pure and simple. It will never go away, but it will drop in ratings similar to Survivor...still formidable, but not invincible.

I think that they need to change how the public votes. Instead of voting for your favorite singer, they should change it to vote for your least favorite singer. That's more likely to take care of the "Sanjay's" of the world...

But unless Comcast and Cox add their Philadelphia and San Diego RSNs to the MLB-EI package, it makes no sense for DirecTV to agree to let iN Demand join the party. And there is no way either of them will do that. The Padres exclusivity to Cox is one major reason that DBS has about a far lower sub rate in San Diego than in most major markets.

Totally agree with you on this point. The hypocrisy of the cable companies is mind-blowing!

Don

I agree that they're both probably pulling numbers out of thin air, but I have to take issue with that 3% figure.

I don't know, I kind of think that DirecTV, being in the business of selling satellite service to individuals, would have done extensive research as to what percentage of their potential customer base cannot receive their signal , for various reasons. In a business like their's, this is not frivolous information, but vital to their business. My guess is that Echostar has done similar research as well...

Don

So basically you're saying Charlie should eat the cost of the MLB deal for the mutual benefit of both satellite giants (his own and his biggest competitor) because, in the long run, exclusivity with MLB guarantees both carriers a cache' of exclusivity (with which comes more paying subscribers) that cable will be shut out of during the "booming" years of HD. Right? This is risky because Dish could be stuck with an expensive business deal to honor with MLB while most new satellite subscribers could/would choose Direct TV because it has the whole enchillada (Sunday ticket, more HD channels, etc.) and not just MLB (like Dish).


Basically that sums it up.

But MLB-EI would give Dish another powerful reason to keep subs. Dish is in a position (and has been almost from its inception) where it must take risky chances.

With the imminent explosion of HD networks, the VOOMs of the world will not look terribly appealing to the vast majority of folks who will be joining the HD world in the next couple of years. And Dish has an even more rural subscriber base than DirecTV, where baseball is more popular.

There is nothing Dish or cable can do for the moment about the NFL ST situation. Dish has to deal with the cards is has been dealt. To pass up the MLB-EI package would be, it seems to me, a major mistake.

(Were I Charlie, I would call John Malone after he gets control of DirecTV and join him to make a joint offer for the San Diego Padres starting in 2012 -- I think the current Cox deal goes through 2011. I'd offer three times the $$ Cox has been paying for a three-year deal, say $100 million, all upfront money. Once the games were on satellite they could never go back to simply cable. [I would also simultaneously put the Padres games on The Baseball Channel to recoup some of my investment.] Then Dish and DirecTV would walk away after three years. That alone would enable DBS to probably rise from its 10.2% share of the SD market [cable has an 80.7% share] to even as much as 20%, it would represent an extra 105,000 DBS homes. And at, say $60 a month, that would be over $75 million a year for DBS, $225 over the three years. At worst, if Cox were forced to match the deal, it would raise its costs substantially.)

But, as I prove over and over, I could be wrong. :)

I don't know, I kind of think that DirecTV, being in the business of selling satellite service to individuals, would have done extensive research as to what percentage of their potential customer base cannot receive their signal , for various reasons. In a business like their's, this is not frivolous information, but vital to their business. My guess is that Echostar has done similar research as well...

Don
I'm sure there's a statically accurate number somewhere, but I doubt it's one they would offer in a public forum such as yesterday's meeting, especially given the competitive aspects of letting your rivals know who can and who can't use your service. Any number quoted in such a manner is certainly going to fall on the favorable side, whether it's accurate or not.

Same goes for cable, no doubt they inflate the good numbers and downplay the bad ones, it's business.

The Business of Television
Minority Programmers Fight Á La Carte
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 3/28/2007

A pair of minority programmers are pushing back against an effort by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and some in Congress to get the cable industry to move to an à la carte model.

Johnathan Rodgers, President and CEO of African American-targeted network TV One, and Michael Schwimmer, CEO of Sí TV, are creating the Alliance for Diversity in Programming. The alliance is billed as an effort to "protect and promote diversity in programming" and oppose à la carte.

Members of the alliance were not identified in the press statement, but BET Chairman Debra Lee said in February that à la carte could "destroy" diversity. The alliance is also billed as "joining forces with civil rights groups." The NAACP earlier this month wrote Martin expressing its opposition to a la carte .

While Martin, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others have pushed for per-channel pricing as a way for parents to control their children's TV diets and the size of their cable bills, the cable industry counters that bundling channels is the economic model that supports cable's diverse programming offerings.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6428821

TV Notebook
'Underbelly' moves over
ABC comedy to follow 'Grey's Anatomy'

By Michael Schneider. Josef Adalian Variety March 28, 2007

New ABC laffer "Notes From the Underbelly" is getting an upgrade: Series will now air in the plum spot behind "Grey's Anatomy."

. . . . . .

Now, ABC will air back-to-back episodes of "Underbelly" at 10 p.m. Thursdays starting April 12. "Underbelly" replaces "Men in Trees," which has already been picked up for next season, and now may not return until then.



What the #?!#*% ... are they doing, we like 'Men In Trees', they renew it and now they may not show it at all, geez louize. Put it back on Fridays and leave it alone.

I would think ABC is hedging its bets on "Men In Trees".

The network has shown 17 episodes this season, so it should have five remaining. If it orders 13 for next year, it has 18 to start the year and can run them without so many repeats.
And if they expand next year's order to 22 episodes they'll have 27 -- much like they had with "Grey's" in its first full season.

Programming note, Discovery HD Theater is re-airing "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" tonight at 6pm and 9pm PDT.

Odd thing is that I could not find the listing at the DHDT site, I hope they haven't decided to pull it due to the earlier reported controversy. It's listed in my guides though...

Discovery seems to have backed away from this program in every way possible.

Programming note, Discovery HD Theater is re-airing "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" tonight at 6pm and 9pm PDT.

Odd thing is that I could not find the listing at the DHDT site, I hope they haven't decided to pull it due to the earlier reported controversy. It's listed in my guides though...

What's the controversy? I guess I shouldn't have to ask. Anything having to do with religion is bound to p!ss someone or another off.

Discovery seems to have backed away from this program in every way possible.

Who can blame them? Hell hath no fury like a Fundamentalist scorned. ;)
I suspect the pressure put on them to bury this thing was immense. It will be a real shame if they cowardly pull it, as I was looking forward to seeing it.

Discovery seems to have backed away from this program in every way possible.
I know, maybe I'm not looking in the right spot at their website, but I can't find it listed. As I said, it's still showing in all 3 of my guides, but that's not guaranteed to be 100% accurate.

TitanTV is not showing it either, they have "Mystery Of The Sacred Tibetan Mummy" in those time spots.

That is going to suck if it's been pulled... :mad:

What's the controversy? I guess I shouldn't have to ask. Anything having to do with religion is bound to p!ss someone or another off.

The controversy is more having to do with the incredible holes in the documentary. Forget the religious segment: try to find one credible archaeologist not affiliated with the documentary, that agrees with the conclusion. Even one of the archaeologists and the statistician that appeared in the documentary couldn't run away fast enough from the conclusions that it comes to.

After sitting thru the original airing of the show and the post-show discussion show, it is my honest opinion that Discovery is backing away from the documentary due to it's bad science, not it's religious implications (although that probably hasn't helped the situation at all).

Don

What the #?!#*% ... are they doing, we like 'Men In Trees', they renew it and now they may not show it at all, geez louize. Put it back on Fridays and leave it alone.

have they not learned anything this year with Lost hiatus and time move? They've already moved MiT once, now those that are expecting it back in that slot when everything else returns are going to be wondering where it is. If they leave it until next year to return any recently acquired viewers will not care. I'm already beginning to forget it used to be on.

Are ABC just trying to annoy as many viewers as possible with their schedules this year?

Discovery seems to have backed away from this program in every way possible.
I know, maybe I'm not looking in the right spot at their website, but I can't find it listed. As I said, it's still showing in all 3 of my guides, but that's not guaranteed to be 100% accurate.

TitanTV is not showing it either, they have "Mystery Of The Sacred Tibetan Mummy" in those time spots.

That is going to suck if it's been pulled... :mad:

<edit> Comcast-TiVo guide still shows it, Dish guide still shows it, but the DirecTV TiVo guide shows the Tibetan program...

After sitting thru the original airing of the show and the post-show discussion show, it is my honest opinion that Discovery is backing away from the documentary due to it's bad science, not it's religious implications (although that probably hasn't helped the situation at all).

Don

I don't thing anyone is saying their conclusions are anything more than a theory, and there is evidence there that the authors find compelling. Personally, I'd like to see the piece and make up my own mind, not have it removed due to pressure groups who don't like the "message".

I don't thing anyone is saying their conclusions are anything more than a theory, and there is evidence there that the authors find compelling. Personally, I'd like to see the piece and make up my own mind, not have it removed due to pressure groups who don't like the "message".
(I like your posting as it was originally composed) ;)

CBS is definitely the "reliable" network. In my mind, FOX is still really only a one-trick-pony with "AI", "House" notwithstanding.

I really couldn't care less about CBS...if anything, they are the one trick pony -

a) formulaic forensic crime shows
b) some comedy about a fat white guy who has a ridiculously hot wife.

I give Fox credit for trying genre shows (firefly, tru calling, point pleasant etc etc), but the simple fact is..they do not know how to market these shows correctly.

House clicked for them, after they stuck with it and gave it an American Idol lead-in.

Point Pleasant and Tru Calling had ONE chance behind Idol and both did relatively well. If they follow the House formula, it will work. If not, the cancellation wheel is going to keep spinning.

Like I said earlier, "Drive", which premieres April 15th is going to be brilliant...no doubt about it. It will be canceled very quickly, because it is premiering on a Sunday (no one watches Fox sundays anymore) and its regular slot is 8 pm est on Mondays. No lead-in..nothing.

I really couldn't care less about CBS...if anything, they are the one trick pony -

a) formulaic forensic crime shows
b) some comedy about a fat white guy who has a ridiculously hot wife.

I give Fox credit for trying genre shows (firefly, tru calling, point pleasant etc etc), but the simple fact is..they do not know how to market these shows correctly.

House clicked for them, after they stuck with it and gave it an American Idol lead-in.

Point Pleasant and Tru Calling had ONE chance behind Idol and both did relatively well. If they follow the House formula, it will work. If not, the cancellation wheel is going to keep spinning.

Like I said earlier, "Drive", which premieres April 15th is going to be brilliant...no doubt about it. It will be canceled very quickly, because it is premiering on a Sunday (no one watches Fox sundays anymore) and its regular slot is 8 pm est on Mondays. No lead-in..nothing.
We're really talking about two different things here, when I say CBS is "reliable" I mean that they have consistently high-rated programming and rarely ever move the timeslots around. FOX, OTOH, is basically AI, with House and maybe Bones thrown in, and are constantly pre-empting, moving around, pulling off the air, putting back on, all the time.

All these networks have a basic "identity", CBS could be called the conservative go with what has always worked net, ABC the night time soap area channel, FOX the push the envelope, but often get it wrong net, and NBC is the floundering around trying to find anything that will work net.

What's the controversy? I guess I shouldn't have to ask. Anything having to do with religion is bound to p!ss someone or another off.

Not to get into a religious argument here, but James Cameron rather loudly claimed to have found the tomb of Jesus and wife Mary Magdalene, and I don't remember what all else.

But then scientists began to chime in and almost all were, as I recall, extremely skeptical and that word is very generous.

That's why I am glad we have four networks (plus CW, of course) who at least have some different take on what to present.

Personally I disagree about Fox, and although I am not going to prejudge "Drive" I find it hard to believe anything very worthwhile will show up on the network -- although I enjoy "House" and have begun to warm more to "Bones".

But there is too much of a "Who's Your Daddy" and "OJ: The Interview" mindset at the network for me to take it seriously. Maybe they should put David Hill in charge again.

And prejudging shows -- on any network --based on hype is always, at least in my experience, a very dangerous business.

No one thought "Heroes" would do well this year. Ditto for "Grey's Anatomy" and any number of other shows just in the past few seasons.

And if you go back to last July and September and check the critical previews of this season, you'll see an amazing unanimity which turned out to be almost universally wrong.

But I do agree that Fox seems to have an all-or-nothing promo mentality. It almost seems like sort of Network A.D.D. -- if a show doesn't work immediately, they throw it out and bring in another.

ABC just changes schedules like a teen-aged girl changes clothes -- often for about as much apparent reason.

CBS sticks with its programs longer, doesn't move them around, and that has paid off in the past six or seven seasons. It has been proven time after time for half a century in TV that stability works best in the long run.

NBC seems to be sticking with its shows, too, but then it doesn't have much reason not to. And when you have so many failures, it is easier (and probably a better bet) to try to nurture a hit out of quaility programming -- whether it be "The Office" or "30 Rock" or "Friday Night Lights" than just to bring another show in to fail in the same slot.


I really couldn't care less about CBS...if anything, they are the one trick pony -

a) formulaic forensic crime shows
b) some comedy about a fat white guy who has a ridiculously hot wife.

I give Fox credit for trying genre shows (firefly, tru calling, point pleasant etc etc), but the simple fact is..they do not know how to market these shows correctly.

House clicked for them, after they stuck with it and gave it an American Idol lead-in.

Point Pleasant and Tru Calling had ONE chance behind Idol and both did relatively well. If they follow the House formula, it will work. If not, the cancellation wheel is going to keep spinning.

Like I said earlier, "Drive", which premieres April 15th is going to be brilliant...no doubt about it. It will be canceled very quickly, because it is premiering on a Sunday (no one watches Fox sundays anymore) and its regular slot is 8 pm est on Mondays. No lead-in..nothing.

We're really talking about two different things here, when I say CBS is "reliable" I mean that they have consistently high-rated programming and rarely ever move the timeslots around. FOX, OTOH, is basically AI, with House and maybe Bones thrown in, and are constantly pre-empting, moving around, pulling off the air, putting back on, all the time.

All these networks have a basic "identity", CBS could be called the conservative go with what has always worked net, ABC the night time soap area channel, FOX the push the envelope, but often get it wrong net, and NBC is the floundering around trying to find anything that will work net.
I always thought of the nets in a similar way:
CBS was the dramas that everyone watched, alongside the comedies I used to hate (Although, now, I watch HIMYM and TNAOOC and The Class)
ABC is the primetime-feel-good-soap net
NBC is the network that has tons of great shows--that I'll watch in the summer
FOX is the network that is getting better, but still has the network ADD
The WB was the network that had tons of great shows--which nobody watched until 7 years later in syndication
UPN that network that used to have Star Trek and Buffy, but became low-budget-comedy network
CW was forged from the ashes of two great networks, was programming only hits, and then took out Veronica Mars for Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next *****
MyNetworkTV is the network that actually deserves low ratings

Technology Notebook
Best Buy Won't Commit To Labels or Carriage of Converters
By John Eggerton Broadcasting & Cable 3/28/2007
... [Congressman Ed] Markey seemed even more offput by [Best Buy's] Vitelli's refusal to promise that all his stores would stock analog-to-digital converter boxes. "The right answer is yes," he advised. But when he asked Vitelli again, he would not commit to carrying them.

Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) asked whether there should be concern that retailers would be discouraging people from getting the converters so that they would, instead, buy more expensive DTV sets.

Vitelli said no ...

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6428721Actually, I'm more concerned that they're trying to discourage people who just want their freakin' TV sets to work on their local stations without having to subscribe to satellite or cable. They seem to have no problem stocking DirecTV boxes.

Come on, people ... READ MY SIG AND GET ON THE BALL!!! WE GOT LESS THAN TWO YEARS TO MAKE THIS WORK !!!!!

It's official: Discovery chickened and pulled the scheduled HD airing of the Cameron-produced documentary with alternative programming. I know because I scheduled the DVR to record it last Sunday during "Planet Earth." Good luck getting religious people to pay $10+ each for a ticket to see your upcoming Avatar movie in 2009 James! :rolleyes:

TV Sports
FSN Detroit doubles home 60 Tigers games in high-def

The American League Champion Detroit Tigers announced Wednesday the team would broadcast 60 of its games in High Definition this season.

That's double the 30 HD games broadcast in 2006. Fifty of the 60 HD telecasts will be home games.

http://detroit.tigers.mlb.com/det/downloads/hd_schedule_07.pdf

I don't thing anyone is saying their conclusions are anything more than a theory, and there is evidence there that the authors find compelling. Personally, I'd like to see the piece and make up my own mind, not have it removed due to pressure groups who don't like the "message".

That's great, you should see it. I wasn't advocating that the documentary should be pulled. As a matter of fact, I don't believe that the documentary was pulled due to pressure groups. If that was the case, it would never have aired in the first place. I am saying that I believe that the reason it is being pulled is due to the lack of science in the "documentary". As for the "compelling" evidence that the author is putting forth, one atheist archeologist called it "archeo-porn" and suggested that the only motivation for the documentary was $$$. That is my point, not any religious argument.

The WB was the network that had tons of great shows--which nobody watched until 7 years later in syndication
UPN that network that used to have Star Trek and Buffy, but became low-budget-comedy network


UPN only had Buffy for the last two (mediocre) seasons. The WB had it for the first five seasons.

It's official: Discovery chickened and pulled the scheduled HD airing of the Cameron-produced documentary with alternative programming. I know because I scheduled the DVR to record it last Sunday during "Planet Earth." Good luck getting religious people to pay $10+ each for a ticket to see your upcoming Avatar movie in 2009 James! :rolleyes:

I am not sure the arguments which apparently swayed Discovery came from religious people. It seemed like scientists --dozens of them -- heaped the most scorn on the claims of the program.

Frankly, if I were in charge of a network which paid for (and then hyped) a controversial program, and I found out that the hype was very probably innaccurate, I'd probably have pulled it, too.

Let me be clear: I would like to see the program and I am not condoning any form of censorship. But if Discovery felt the program was on shaky ground, I think it has made the correct call in pulling back.

The fact is we all can't "make up our minds" about whether the "facts" are true or not. It would be like trying to make up our minds about two new controversial brain surgery techniques. The vast majority of us just don't have enough knowledge.

And frankly, if you are going to go mess with things people deeply believe, you better make sure you get your facts right, and unchallengeable. There is no need for Disocovery or anyone else to go out of its way to upset the deep-seated and often emotional beliefs of devout Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists or athiests just for a ratings point or two.

The very fact that Discovery is self-censoring (without any major religious campaign that I am aware of) its own costly and highly-promoted production speaks volumes to me. And, given the facts as we know them about this production, I think Discovery's management should be commended.

And frankly, if you are going to go mess with things people deeply believe, you better make sure you get your facts right, and unchallengeable. There is no need for Disocovery or anyone else to go out of its way to upset the deep-seated and often emotional beliefs of devout Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists or athiests just for a ratings point or two.

Atheists have beliefs? That's news to this devout atheist! ;) :p

UPN only had Buffy for the last two (mediocre) seasons. The WB had it for the first five seasons.

The WB was a great network, to me anyway. I think the only thing I ever watched on UPN was Buffy when it moved and I believe it was Enterprise, but I didn't even follow it the last season or so. The WB had some good shows.

I am saying that I believe that the reason it is being pulled is due to the lack of science in the "documentary"...That is my point, not any religious argument.I am not sure the arguments which apparently swayed Discovery came from religious people. It seemed like scientists --dozens of them -- heaped the most scorn on the claims of the program.


I admit that I haven't seen the "documentary" yet...and I don't know that much about the content, so I might be way off about this...but I'm a bit confused about the above claims. Surely this show isn't a scientific documentary. It's either a religious documentary or an archeological documentary. Little scientific evidence is necessary for a religious documentary, and archeology is by no means a "hard science." Thus, for the program to have a "lack of science" seems to me completely unsurprising.

If the show is criticized for a lack of scientific evidence, Cameron could simply reply that it's not intended as a scientific documentary. (Consider by analogy: ought we criticize a religious documentary built from some religion's scriptural documents due to there being a lack of scientific evidence?)

If anyone wants to delve more deeply into this subject, you can always google James Cameron+tomb.

Perhaps as a starting off point, a good article about the controversy may be found at the Scientific American website here:

http://scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa004&articleID=14A3C2E6-E7F2-99DF-37A9AEC98FB0702A

And if that still isn't enough, the documentary will be available next month on video.

I think we have exhausted the topic.

(Hint.)

From what I heard, the problem was the claims of it being more scientifically sound than it was. If this were a documentary just about an archeological dig that unearthed a tomb, you'd expect a fair amount of speculation. In this case, the whole premise of the "documentary" (and the title itself) is centered on that speculation, not the science.

They claim anywhere from 600:1 to 1,000,000:1 chance in the documentary that it is the tomb of Jesus, and even their mathematician that came up with those odds has backed away from that claim. It doesn't make sense to pitch the show with the name "Lost Tomb of Jesus" even based on those odds. Otherwise we could anticipate half a million more documentaries making the same claim for other grave sites.

If Discovery yanked it, it was because of the bad science - if not, that should have been the reason. This is a documentary about a tomb that was unearthed more than 25 years ago, thouroughly analyzed and documented and the claims of "dramatic new information" apparently only refer to the unsubstantiated claims that the bones belong to someone famous.

Sorry Fred - I must have been typing (and getting a snack) before you posted your "hint".

No problem, CP95. You make valid points, as usual.

Critic’s Notebook
Falco cried a river over 'Sopranos' demise
By Gail Shister Philadelphia Inquirer TV Columnist

It's the beginning of the end for The Sopranos, and Edie Falco is hurting.

Falco, who plays Carmela Soprano on the landmark HBO mob drama, made like the Mississippi at the recent cast reading of Sopranos' swan-song script.

"I cried and cried and cried," says the three-time Emmy winner. "I can be pretty stoic, but I couldn't hold it together. It was intense. I was overcome. I couldn't stop. It was embarrassing."

Off the air since June, Sopranos returns for its final nine episodes beginning April 8. Production on the series finale is expected to wrap next week.

All actors say their castmates feel like family - Sarah Jessica Parker (Sex and the City) and Jennifer Aniston (Friends) come to mind - but Falco says it's the real deal with star James Gandolfini, et al.

"Working with these people all these years, they really have become family in the truest sense of the word. I nauseate myself. They're as much family as any I have ever known."

No surprise, then, that Big Jim leaned over and gave his TV wife a peck during her crying jag. His eyes were still dry, she says, but at least one other wiseguy was weeping. She won't name names "to protect the innocent."

Nobody is innocent on Sopranos. That's why the blogosphere is ablaze with theories about which member of Tony's immediate family, if any, will get whacked this season.

According to entertainment analysts at BetUS.com, boss Tony's odds are 2-1, with Carmela at 3-1. Their kids, Jamie-Lynn Sigler's Meadow and Robert Iler's A.J., are 5-1 and 6-1, respectively.

If it's all over for the long-suffering Carm, Falco would never say it. Under Sopranos mastermind David Chase, all plotlines go into Witness Protection. Actors are sworn to silence.

When your blood-family members are serious Sopranos fans, that's not easy.

"My family really tries. They're funny and adorable," says Falco, 43, a Brooklyn native. "My mother tries to couch questions in different ways. I say, 'Mom, stop. I'm onto you.'

"In the beginning, I couldn't believe I wouldn't tell her. Now I think I'm the best employee the company ever had."

Launched in 1999, Sopranos has won every imaginable TV award, including a Peabody. In '04, it became the first - and remains the only - cable series to score an Emmy for best drama.

"It's the experience of being on this show that I'm proud of," Falco says. "Though we're not curing cancer or ending the war, I am, in fact, doing something of value that people seem to get pleasure out of."

Falco is no stranger to cancer. She was diagnosed with breast cancer in '04, the same year she adopted a baby boy. She named him Anderson, after her mother, actor Judith Anderson.

Health-wise, "I'm totally fine," says Falco. "It's a very big club I'm a member of. I talked to another person with cancer who said, 'Man, a year later, you're bitching about the same stuff.' He was right."

Looking ahead to her next project, Falco says she's reluctant to commit to anything "unless I'm really excited about it. I've been spoiled. My standards are pretty high."

As for a long-rumored Sopranos movie, "I would do it in a heartbeat, but I don't think it's going to happen. David said everything he has to say about these people." Ditto for a Sopranos spin-off.

So what's the legacy of Sopranos?

"People are complicated. When you think you know them, you don't," Falco says. Or, as Gandolfini has said, "Fat men have sex, too."

'Idol' chatter. Just when you thought you couldn't possibly get more American Idol . . .

Fox will expand Idol's Wednesday results show to an hour from 30 minutes, the network announced yesterday.

It will air as an hour at 9 p.m. on April 11 and 18 and May 2. Forthcoming mentors include Gwen Stefani, Tony Bennett, Jennifer Lopez,Martina McBride,Bon Jovi and Barry Gibb.

Normal occupant of the 9:30 Wednesday slot, 'Til Death, starring Brad Garrett and Joely Fisher, will have an hour-long season finale at 8 p.m. April 11. Bones returns to that slot April 18 and May 2.

Fox said the bloating, er, expansion, is per request of the Idol producers, who simply had way much "content" for a mere 22-minute window.

http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/television/20070328_Gail_Shister___Falco_cried_a_river_over_Sopranos_de mise.html

Critic’s Notebook
"Studio 60", a Summer Return?
Every Time I Use "Canceled" and "Studio 60" in a Headline, My Hits on Google Head Off the Charts!
By Ray Richmond The Hollywood Reporter in his blog “Past Deadline”

In honor of the above headline -- sorry to be so crassly self-serving and needy, by the way -- I give you the very latest about NBC's "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," aka The Show Whose Fate Will Determine The Future Of Western Civilization -- or at least, you know, that of the True Believers (you know who you are).

A rumor had been going around (imagine that -- a rumor on the Internet!) that after having gone back into production earlier this month on episodes 17 through 22, the show had ceased production and the plug finally, irrevocably pulled. WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! (Imagine it -- an inaccurate rumor on the Internet!) I got the scoop this very afternoon from Lesley Cerwin, the NBC publicist assigned to the show, and she confirmed that production on episode 19 was scheduled to be completed today and work on episode 20 commenced on Thursday.

So yes, it appears that at least the full season complement of shows will make it into the can for Aaron Sorkin's noble but low-rated hour. But all of you "Save Studio 60" cyber sites and blogs, take note: it is now highly unlikely the show will be brought back this spring. The more probable scenario (strictly my conjecture): it will come back in originals over the summer as something of a "bell lap" final farewell.

Don't hold your breath for the show's second-season renewal. That probably ain't happening. Networks typically reserve that stuff for shows that don't bleed millions of dollars, being as they are in the profit business and all. I don't mean to belittle "Studio 60" supporters, as it is an intelligent and worthy piece of television, but the era of petitions making a difference in rescuing a series from the chopping block has long since passed, I'm afraid. This here petition, for example, boasts nearly 17,000 cyber signatures, but unless at least 500 of the signers reside in Nielsen homes I don't really see it turning the tide.

Now remember: this is NOT official. It's just my blubbering into the cyber ether. Or as I like to say, positively certain, as I am never wrong -- except, well, you know, a lot of the time.

http://www.pastdeadline.com/

The Business of Television
DirecTV CFO: HD Plans Moving Along
By Mike Farrell & Linda Moss MultiChannel News 3/28/2007

DirecTV Group chief financial officer Michael Palkovic said the direct-broadcast satellite giant is moving ahead in its plans to launch 100 HDTV channels by the end of the year, but he conceded that some of those channels will be multiple feeds from sports packages like NFL Sunday Ticket.

Palkovic said DirecTV already has about 70 HD channels under contract and that number is growing. But when asked whether Sunday Ticket would count as 13 separate HD channels -- the package airs 13 out-of-market games each week -- he said it would.

“That’s the way you would count that,” Palkovic said, adding that 70 or 80 of the HD channels would be considered year-round channels.

Palkovic added that DirecTV’s HD offerings will be far and above those from cable operators and other DBS companies. He noted that there are currently about 10 national HD channels, and its DBS competitor, EchoStar Communications, offers those packages, as well as about 10 Voom channels, the HD offering from Rainbow Media Holdings. Further differentiating DirecTV’s HD package is that the channels will be compelling.

“First of all, there are no Voom channels, there is nothing like that that people would consider not really quality channels,” Palkovic said. “We’re talking USA [Network], Sci Fi [Channel], some of the Turner [Broadcasting System] networks, The Weather Channel, mainstream programming that’s been around for a long time that’s going to make the leap to HD.”

In other DirecTV HD news, the DBS provider Wednesday began offering local HDTV programming from ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC to customers in Greenville, S.C.;Harrisburg, Pa.; Jacksonville, Fla.; and Spokane, Wash.

DirecTV now offers local HDTV broadcast channels in 53 cities, representing more than 67% of U.S. TV households.

When DirecTV’s capacity expansion is completed next year, it will offer more than 1,500 local HDTV channels and more than 150 national HDTV channels.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6428825

Critic’s Notebook
"Studio 60", a Summer Return?
Every Time I Use "Canceled" and "Studio 60" in a Headline, My Hits on Google Head Off the Charts!
By Ray Richmond The Hollywood Reporter in his blog “Past Deadline”

...I got the scoop this very afternoon from Lesley Cerwin, the NBC publicist assigned to the show, and she confirmed that production on episode 19 was scheduled to be completed today and work on episode 20 commenced on Thursday.

So yes, it appears that at least the full season complement of shows will make it into the can for Aaron Sorkin's noble but low-rated hour.

That's all I needed to hear. Whether it airs in the summer, online or in DVD more episodes of "Studio 60" are been worked on and filmed. Only one word comes to mind at such gargantuan news:

HOORAY!!! :D :D :D

have they not learned anything this year with Lost hiatus and time move? They've already moved MiT once, now those that are expecting it back in that slot when everything else returns are going to be wondering where it is. If they leave it until next year to return any recently acquired viewers will not care. I'm already beginning to forget it used to be on.

Are ABC just trying to annoy as many viewers as possible with their schedules this year?

I'm starting to think that the Lost/DH/Grey's Anatomy turnaround at ABC was pure, dumb luck. This is, after all, the network that thought it prudent to schedule Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? four nights a week at one point (and weren't three of the episodes 90 minutes?).

The Business of Television
Developing:
Discovery Buys Out Cox, Gives Up Travel Channel
By P.J. Bednarski Broadcasting & Cable 3/29/2007

Discovery Communications said this morning it will buy out Cox Communications, one of its part owners, for $1.275 billion in cash. Discovery will give Cox full ownership of its Travel Channel, that channel's Website, and a company called Antenna Audio, which provides headsets and information for museum tours worldwide.

After the deal is completed, it would leave Discovery with just two owners--John Malone's Discovery Holding Corp., which owns two-thirds, and Advance/Newhouse Communications, which owns a third.

Shedding Travel comes shortly after the arrival at Discovery of its new CEO David M. Zaslav, from NBC Universal, who has actively begun reshaping the underperforming Discovery.

"This proposed transaction will simplify Discovery's ownership structure, further streamline our operations and give the company more strategic flexibility," Zaslav said in a statement.

Travel Channel is widely distributed into 88.1 million homes, and Discovery says it is coming off its best-ever quarter in history. Travel was partly acquired by Discovery in 1997, which bought the remainder two years later. The value of those two deals was $57 million.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6428910

The Business of Television
TWC’s Britt Unsure About Local HDTV for Basic-Only Subs

By Ted Hearn MultiChannel News 3/28/2007

Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt said Wednesday that his company hadn’t established policy for making HD local TV signals available to customers who buy just the introductory basic-programming tier.

“We have not addressed yet somebody who buys basic only and might want HD. My guess is that there aren’t very many of those people,” Britt said in testimony at a House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet hearing on cable’s role in the national shutdown of analog TV signals on Feb. 17, 2009.

Presumably, Britt’s point was that a subscriber who had spent hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on an HD set was unlikely to be among the small percentage of customers who don’t buy multiple programming tiers.

Britt’s comments came in an exchange with Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), who indicated that cable subscribers with HD sets shouldn’t have to buy unwanted tiers of service from a cable company just to gain access to local TV signals in HD.

“Broadcasters provided this for free. It seems to me that cable subscribers ought to be able to get those on whatever tier they subscribe to,” Boucher said.

In response, Britt explained that his customers with HD set-top boxes who buy the digital-programming tier currently do receive HD local signals free-of-charge.

“In our case today, if you buy digital service, which does cost more than basic, and if you then want HD, we don’t charge any extra for it. Most of the other cable and satellite companies do charge extra, by the way,” said Britt, whose company serves 13.4 million video customers.

In another exchange, Boucher referred to February 2005 House testimony by Insight Communications CEO Michael Willner that after an analog-TV cutoff, cable operators intended to send local TV signals from their headends to homes both in analog and digital.

“Do you agree with that? Is that still the industry’s plan?” Boucher asked. Affirming a commitment to voluntary dual must-carry, Britt replied: “Yes, I do.”

Afterward, a reporter asked Britt if he believed his company had legal authority to convert digital-TV signals to analog at the headend. “We think we have flexibility to do what we need to do,” Britt said.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6428870.html?display=Breaking+News

The 2007-2008 Season
Gauging the fate of the bubble shows
A lot of factors go into deciding which come back
By Diego Vasquez MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 29, 2007

Five years ago, a show like “Friday Night Lights,” which is averaging a limp 2.3 adults 18-49 rating, would never have been renewed. Its ratings were simply too low.

But these days, with only two new shows averaging above a 4.0 rating and 18-49 viewership generally more fractured, networks are willing to take more chances on promising but low-rated programs.

That makes it even more difficult for media people to predict which bubble shows, the programs whose renewal status remains in question until the upfront, will return.

This year there are a lot of programs on the bubble, including both new and veteran shows whose ratings have been disappointing but may return nonetheless.

Fourth-place NBC, for example, is likely to renew the struggling “Lights” and also new comedy “30 Rock” because it believes they are high-quality shows.

Longtime household leader CBS, whose new comedy “The Class” rates higher than both, can afford to be more selective, and “Class” likely won’t return.

The networks have begun the process of making these decisions, with ABC announcing a slew of renewals last week and the other networks expected to do the same as May’s upfronts near.

To evaluate which bubble shows have the best shots and why, Media Life spoke to two media veterans, Campbell Mithun senior vice president and director of media negotiations John Rash and MediaCom director of broadcast research Jordan Breslow.

Q: When networks evaluate what on-the-bubble shows to renew, what are the factors they take into consideration?

Rash: On-the-bubble shows are evaluated on multiple qualitative and quantitative factors, including -- but not exclusive of -- the creative merits of the show, the ratings trends, the competitive landscape, and what a potential replacement would be.

Breslow: You obviously want to see how well it’s holding up in the ratings, but also how much of the lead-in show’s audience does it retain? There are some instances when you would expect falloff, like with “American Idol” or “Grey’s Anatomy,” but how much is tolerable? You can have a show that has a small rating, but if it holds on to most of its lead-in, it could still be a strong show.

Q: Has this changed over the years? That is, has anything become more important in making these decisions than it used to be?

Rash: The most significant change over the years has been an acceptance of the fragmenting and fractured media landscape and what determines success. Another significant change is program ownership, as many networks and parent studios now own several of the primetime series.

Breslow: It’s hard for me to speak, not being at a network, so I can only speculate that as ratings continue to fall and the marketplace continues to fragment, what used to be considered a hit, that bar has come home. If a show used to have to hit a 10.0 rating, maybe a 6.0 will get it picked up now. I really think because there are lower ratings thresholds now, the networks have to be a little more patient with their programming.

Q: When do decisions about which shows will return start to be made?

Rash: Evaluations are made constantly and can go up to upfront eve.

Breslow: Well, they’re actually happening now. I think the networks start to do them before their press tours. Then that gives them an opportunity with the press to say, “these are some of the shows we’ll be bringing back next season, and there may be others.”

But a lot of the bubble show decisions won’t be made until the actual upfronts in May. It often depends on how much is already in the can. How much is up and coming? Sometimes the network is considering canceling a show, but it may not have anything waiting in the wings to replace it.

Q: Which three bubble shows (on any broadcast network) do you think stand the best chance of returning?

Rash: NBC’s “30 Rock,” NBC’s “Friday Night Lights,” and ABC’s “Men in Trees” [which was picked up last week].

Breslow: A lot of the time, another thing that may come into play, I think the critics have some influence. If a network likes a show and it’s getting praised in the media, that may help swing their decision. One of those examples is “Friday Night Lights,” which really hasn’t found a large following, but those who do watch it are very loyal. From what I’ve been reading, that could be back.

Not to pick on NBC, but maybe “30 Rock,” they’re very high on it. Look, Alec Baldwin just won a Golden Globe. The critics love it, NBC loves it, and it’s not doing too poorly.

I don’t know what Fox is going to do with “Til Death.” Other than animation they don’t have too much in the way of comedies, so they want to get that presence. And you don’t just put a show you don’t care about behind “American Idol.” With it now getting about a 12 share on Wednesdays, I think they may pick it up again.

Q: Which three bubble shows (on any broadcast network) look least likely to return?[/B] [/COLOR]

Breslow: One I happened to be a fan of but I don’t think will be back is “The Class” on CBS, the comedy they ran on Monday. It has a pretty good ensemble, and I thought it was finally finding an audience; however they do have other comedies coming. I think they’re going to definitely have others hitting their schedule next season.

I was surprised ABC brought back “Men in Trees” and “The Bachelor.”

And I have a big question mark about “Jericho.” When it first came out it was doing great numbers, and in the fall I was convinced it would be back. But now it’s doing about a quarter of the numbers it was. I’m not sure the long layoff was good for a new show like that.

I think the CW may have to revamp a lot of their lineup, which doesn’t fare well for “The Game.” If they get rid of “Girlfriends,” they’ll likely get rid of “The Game.”

Also, Fox’s “The War at Home” may have seen its last day, it’s never a good sign when people on existing shows are in pilots for new shows.

Q: Which recent bubble show's renewal surprised you the most?

Rash: A splendid surprise is the likely return of “30 Rock,” which is the type of innovative comedy that takes longer to catch on.

Breslow: Well, “Bachelor” coming back definitely, I think that show’s run its course. At the same token I think NBC needs to finally let Donald Trump go. I think it’s time for him to go out to pasture. Other than ABC, not a lot, I think they’re really one of the only networks to announce their pickups.

Q; In a year like this, when there were very few standout new shows on broadcast, will networks be more willing to give a low-rated show a shot, or are they more likely to start over again with fresh fare?

Rash: A network's patience is often reflective of the genre -- for instance, serial dramas are less likely to be given the benefit of the doubt as opposed to episodic dramas or sitcoms.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11093.asp

Wednesday’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.

TV Sports
Buck won't do Fox's NFL pregame show
By Dan Caesar St. Louis Post-Dispatch Thursday, Mar. 29 2007

Fox, the maverick in sports television, won't be bucking the trend next fall as
it did last season when Joe Buck served as its NFL pregame show host and lead
play-by-play broadcaster. It was the first time a network television announcer
filled both roles simultaneously.

Buck will do only play-by-play next season, as the network will split the
duties after incurring higher-than-expected costs for taking "Fox NFL Sunday''
on the road last year. It was conducted at the site of the game Buck was
working.

Curt Menefee, who filled in for Buck when he was broadcasting postseason
baseball last October and also bridged the gap when Buck had to leave the
pregame show set to prepare for the broadcast, will become the host and work
from the network's studios in Los Angeles.

The contract Buck signed when he agreed to the double duties called for him to
have his choice of jobs if Fox decided to split them. And he said it was an
easy decision, because his first love is doing play-by-play and he has become
close friends with his broadcast partner, analyst Troy Aikman.

He said Fox executives agreed that was the right move.

"That made the decision even easier,'' Buck said Wednesday night. "I wasn't
forcing something, it's what everybody wanted.''

He said his relationship with Aikman played a major role in staying in the
booth. They've been together since 2002, when they replaced the legendary Pat
Summerall-John Madden team.

"I love doing games with him, I value his friendship, he's one of my best
friends,'' Buck said. "Our families vacation together, we really enjoy one
another and ... I would really hate myself for walking away from that. That was
really the decision for me: Do I want to go out to LA every week and be part of
the pregame show, or do I want to continue building with Troy to try to get to
that level where the class in the history of network television football
play-by-play booths is Madden and Summerall. That's what everybody is striving
for, that takes decades.''

The pregame program provides more of a forum for individualism, where the focus
is on the cast, than being in the booth, where the focus is on the field.

"It's always nice to have a little face time and it's nice to show a different
side of yourself, kind of exercise different muscles on the pregame show,''
Buck said. "But really, the fun for me is calling the games."

Buck, who took over on the pregame show after James Brown moved to CBS, said
he had a blast filling both roles and would have liked to do it again.

"I didn't feel any more worn out after this year than I typically do,'' he
said. "Stress-wise, that was not an issue. But I think there was an
underestimating of what kind of a toll it would take on everybody who was used
to going to the studio. People say to me, 'How'd you get through the day?'
Compared to the people who were lugging all the stuff and setting that stage up
every week and dealing with stadiums and their operations departments and
trying to worry about crowd control, there were a lot of people who worked a
lot longer hours than me.

"I think it was a bigger production than anybody anticipated.''

Buck said David Hill, chairman and CEO of Fox Sports, summed things up: "David
said it was a great success for a year, but financially we can't continue to do
it on the road. We should all feel good about what we did for a year and we
move on.''

Buck added, "I'll miss this, absolutely, because I like challenges.''

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/emaf.nsf/Popup?ReadForm&db=stltoday%5Csports%5Ccolumnists.nsf&docid=9B98955B14EE6BF9862572AD00123676

Looks like they gave up JB for nothing.

I think it was JB's choice -- he wanted a bigger variety of assignments.

Scott Ackerson, who runs the Fox pre-game show will figure something out. He is a certifiable TV genius.

Maybe JB wants his own weekly variety show like Cosell used to have.

JB doesn't fly, so the on location studio format wasn't a possibility for him. He did like being on the East coast with CBS because it was closer to home and family, but I think if FOX had stayed at the LA studio, JB would have stayed, and FOX would have wanted to keep him.

Great Memory, Howie!

"Saturday Night Live With Howard Cosell" lasted less than a full season in 1975-1976, Saturdays at 8 PM ET/PT.

God, it was awful!

Critic’s Notebook
Nothing lasts forever -- not even “Rome”
By Tim Goodman San Francisco Chronicle Television Critic

What do they say in that Belle & Sebastian song again? Oh, yeah: "I always cry at endings."

There's a lot of that going around. Endings, mostly. But apparently some crying, too. This is the time of year when television series begin to ramp down to the end of their seasons, and the TV gods often demand a Big Moment if not a Big Finish. Just this weekend we've seen three great endings -- two for the last time -- and the imminent nine-episode swan song of "The Sopranos," one of the most important and influential dramas in recent memory. That's a lot of goodbyes.

The Sci-Fi Channel series "Battlestar Galactica," a critical darling and one of the most obsessed-over shows on television, concluded its third season on Sunday with a note-perfect finale. There were a couple of big twists and, most interesting, a stunning development that will probably reshape the entire series.

You don't see that every day. And the episode immediately had TV fan sites buzzing and critics trying to discern not only what happened but what happens next. You know if a show can set all of that in motion, it did something right -- or at least something bold.

Sunday was also the bitter end of two of television's finer series. "Rome" on HBO ended its second (and last) season by truncating or partially racing through Roman history. At least with "Rome," one of the most expensive series in TV history, the writers knew ahead of time that they were out of time. A joint production of HBO and foreign investors, chiefly the BBC, "Rome" cost more than $100 million and was shot in Italy on the world's largest stage. But, at least initially, none of that translated to high ratings or even much buzz back in August of 2005 when it premiered.

With production delays and rising costs, HBO and other investors had to pull the plug before the series rallied, and well before the bountiful DVD box set of the first season began to sell and create awareness. By the time American viewers even saw the start of the delayed second season in January, the series was long dead, the sets dismantled and the actors off to other projects.

Pity, then, that ratings perked up and fans that may have been merely curious in late 2005 were all of a sudden rabid in 2007. "Rome" has sparked devout attention from fans, most of them already clued in to the show's pre-ordained demise -- and shortened by a full two episodes as well. When it ended on Sunday, there was an outpouring of feelings about loss. (For a sample, check out my blog, www.thebastardmachine.com.) Contributing to the sense of loss is that "Rome" accomplished what any successful drama must do -- it got viewers to care deeply about the characters. Though most were based on historic figures (Caesar, Mark Anthony, Cleopatra, etc.), it was the melding of two lesser-known soldiers (Titus Pullo and Lucius Vorenus, played exceptionally well by Ray Stevenson and Kevin McKidd respectively), into a dramatic device (soldiers, friends, tragic figures) that really hooked viewers.

To see that bond severed and to know, simultaneously, that Sunday was the last "Rome" ever -- well, there were tears indeed.

There's a lot wrapped up in these endings for viewers. There's an emotional investment that is, upon the show's conclusion, severed.

In some cases, there are worries about series that are leaving too soon, or too late, even the ultimate fear of many fans -- not being able to have a favorite series wrap up storylines or end appropriately.

If beginnings are hard -- and most viewers make a definitive decision based on one viewing -- endings can seem exponentially harder. You've just lost your favorite show, which had many of your favorite characters that you've come to know through the years. And what, given the dreck you've seen elsewhere, will take its place? A sense of loss is only natural.

Fan reaction for television series is always an interesting emotion to gauge. At the end of the season, there's always a demand for something big. If it doesn't come, many fans deem the season to be either a failure or unfulfilling. And yet, there's a natural dread of the all-too-common cliffhanger. It's a cheap conceit and many viewers are wary of it, but you can almost predict a windfall of them come May, when the broadcast season ends.

About the only thing worse than a cliffhanger or an unsatisfactory story conclusion that can't be found out or fixed for another four months at least, is the premature end of a serialized drama. That has already happened numerous times in this, the poster season for serialized dramas. Fans feel cheated if they invest in a season-long mystery only to have the plug pulled out after four or eight episodes of a scheduled 22-episode season. This is an age-old problem for the TV industry, but this is also a season that had a glut of these dramas and so their early ending caused a lot of viewer dissatisfaction (a backlash that will no doubt result in fewer serialized dramas next season).

The question at hand may be this -- is no resolution worse than a final resolution? Where "Rome" fans are mourning the fall of their favorite history drama, "Battlestar Galactica" fans are reeling (joyfully) from the shocking revelations in that finale, but there's also a tinge of paranoia about what the future holds now that the season has ended. Specifically, Sci-Fi Channel only this month -- late, by industry standards -- increased next season's order of episodes on "BSG" from 13 to 22. The channel had previously moved the series off of Friday nights (where, apparently, a significant amount of the audience was time-shifting it -- meaning recording it and watching it later) and onto Sunday nights, where stiffer competition saw ratings decline.

The fan fear, based on what networks and cable channels do when they see declines instead of quarterly increases, is that Sci-Fi has given the producers 22 episodes to come to some conclusion. But with Sunday's eye-popping twists, the logic and direction of the series will be affected and -- gulp -- might take more than 22 episodes to explain. So, what do the producers do? Keep an eye on that 22nd episode as possibly their last? Or push on boldly with the new direction, confident that there might be 13 or even 22 more where that came from?

Dicey.

A series that did not have the luxury of such worries represents another (equally important) part of the viewing experience. "Slings & Arrows," a Canadian drama that has never been less than brilliant in each of its previous seasons, ended its third -- and final -- season on the Sundance Channel on Sunday. Many people came to "Slings & Arrows" late -- the second, or even final season, and discovered a real gem, a smart import on a niche cable channel all but lost on the dial. There were only six episodes per season and for new fans, that wasn't nearly enough. To find out after discovering it and falling in love with its boundless quirks, solid humor and relentlessly fine acting that it was to be no more? Tears, indeed.

Extrapolate that sorrow to the ending of "The Sopranos" and what do you get? A river of tears? No doubt the final nine episodes of one of the great achievements in television will stir a wide mixture of feelings -- sadness being the most prominent. People don't want the famed mafia drama to end. They have formed, through each exceedingly-hyped season, an attachment to many of the colorful, well-drawn characters. "The Sopranos" is, arguably, going out of business with plenty of stories to tell.

The languid pacing of the first 12 in this final "extended" season caused considerable frustration among fans. Why? Because knowing there's an endgame gets everyone's anxiety and expectations up. Each episode has to be perfect and memorable. They have to lead -- almost as quickly as those in "Rome" -- to some satisfactory conclusion. And yet, if "Rome" was rushed and condensed, the knock on "The Sopranos" is that, given the remaining number of episodes, the writers will never be able to tie up all the loose ends.

And the bitter truth is -- they won't. Creator David Chase has already said his series will not go out neat and tidy. That all but guarantees that in addition to the tears, there might also be some frustration or even anger. Everybody likes a good ending, but apparently those don't truly exist.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/03/28/DDGIFOS2F41.DTL

Buck won't do Fox's NFL pregame show

Dang. I wish Buck would have stayed in the studio and out of the booth. As I've said before, I think he's a great baseball guy. He just doesn't fit as a football announcer to me.

-Reagan

Dang. I wish Buck would have stayed in the studio and out of the booth. As I've said before, I think he's a great baseball guy. He just doesn't fit as a football announcer to me.

-Reagan

Agreed. His baseball coverage is great (although his partner McCarver is terrible...too old. Bring in someone new)

In football he is just boring to me...and he has a tendency to overreact. His overreaction to the Randy Moss incident always stands out in my mind...

Sorry for the delay, Nielsen had some problems today, but Wednesday'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.

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
ABC's 'Dream Vote' sacked at the polls
Second airing draws a dreadful 1.5 in 18-49s
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 29, 2007

“The Great American Dream Vote” has turned into a nightmare for ABC.

The network’s new Donny Osmond-hosted reality show sank to a 1.5 overnight rating among viewers 18-49 in its regular Wednesday 8 p.m. timeslot last night, down 21 percent from the dismal 1.9 its premiere episode posted the night before.

In sinking so badly, the show dragged down ABC’s schedule for the entire night as well.

“Dream’s” 1.5 was off 32 percent from the 2.2 ABC posted in the 8 p.m. timeslot last week for “George Lopez” and a repeat of “According to Jim,” creating an even weaker lead-in for the network’s 9 p.m. comedies.

At 9 p.m., an original “Jim” and an episode of “In Case of Emergency” combined to average a 1.9 rating among 18-49s last night, down 14 percent from the 2.2 the two shows averaged last week. And last week’s episode of “Jim” was a repeat.

With such a slow start to the night—ABC averaged just a 1.7 among 18-49s those first two hours—“Lost” at 10 p.m. hit another series low, posting a 5.0 among 18-49s and averaging 11.2 million total viewers. The show did, however, finish first in its timeslot among 18-49s and total viewers.

On the strength of its “American Idol” results show, Fox ended up leading the night among 18-49s with a 6.0 average rating and a 17 share. ABC was second at 2.8/8, CBS third at 2.7/7, NBC fourth at 2.1/6, CW fifth at 1.9/5 and Univision sixth at 1.8/5.

Fox led each of its two hours of the night, starting with a 3.6 rating at 8 p.m. for “Bones.” CBS and CW tied for second that hour at 2.4, CBS for “Jericho” and CW for “America’s Next Top Model,” with NBC fourth with a 2.1 for “Friday Night Lights,” Univision fifth with a 2.0 for “La Fea Mas Bella” and ABC sixth with its 1.5 for “The Great American Dream Vote.”

Fox extended its lead at 9 p.m., averaging an 8.5 rating among 18-49s for “Idol” (10.7) and “Til Death” (6.3). CBS was second that hour with a 2.7 for a repeat of “Criminal Minds,” with ABC and NBC tied for third at 1.9, ABC for “Jim” (1.8) and “Emergency” (1.9) and NBC for “Crossing Jordan.”

That left Univision fifth with a 1.8 for “Destilando Amor” and CW sixth with a 1.4 for “Pussycat Dolls Present: The Search for the Next Doll.”

ABC took the lead at 10 p.m. with its 5.0 for “Lost,” followed by CBS with a 2.9 for a repeat of “CSI: NY.” NBC was third that hour with a 2.4 for “Medium” and Univision fourth with a 1.6 for “Don Francisco Presenta.”

Among households, Fox led the night with a 9.5 average rating and a 16 share. CBS was second at 6.6/11, NBC third at 4.6/8, ABC fourth at 4.3/7, CW fifth at 2.7/5 and Univision sixth at 2.2/4.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_11127.asp

The TV Column
Sigh. We're Missing Chris, but Sanjaya Is Still Hair
By Lisa de Moraes Washington Post Columnist Thursday, March 29, 2007

David Hasselhoff will not be reduced to tears again. Simon Cowell will never again be nicked for his Teletubbies work.

Yes, Chris Sligh and his lush locks are no more on "American Idol" -- Chris, who charmed us during the lousy auditions phase when he told the judges he wanted to compete in hopes of making Hasselhoff cry like he'd been caught on camera doing in the audience during last season's finale. Chris, who fought back when Simon dissed his performance with a snarky comment about Simon's time producing Teletubbies tunes.

We will miss Chris.

On the bright side, Haley Scarnato squeaked through -- she was runner-up to get booted -- so viewers will get to ogle her incredible legs, and maybe even some shoes, for another week.

And Sanjaya Malakar will get to do his hair up to look like a toupee in honor of next week's guest coach, the incomparable Tony Bennett. Sanjaya wasn't even in the bottom three. Remember, if he wins, judge Simon has vowed to quit.

"Idol" last night officially decided to embrace the Sanjaya. Show host Ryan Seacrest dressed in a wig done up to look like the ponyhawk Sanjaya sported on the program the previous night. "I've been Sanjaya-ed," Seacrest said. Sanjaya roared in his timid little way. Even Simon smiled his brilliant smile.

Having announced they must expand the 30-minute results show (starting two weeks from now) because there's just too much good stuff to be able to also fit in the Teary-Eyed Booted One's Swan Song, Fox managed last night to fit in Chris's repeat slaughter of the Police's "Every Little Thing She Does Is Magic."

But not until this week's guest coach, Gwen Stefani, sang "The Sweet Escape" with Akon.

At least she was singing. Akon mostly waved an arm back and forth; he didn't seem to notice his pants starting to fall down. Don't you love live television?

After her performance, Ryan asked about Stefani's tour. She prattled merrily about that and how happy she is.

Then, Ryan said they'd have to give the results of this week's viewer votes and see which Idolette was getting the hook. He looked at her, having given her her cue to erupt with comment about how talented the contestants all are and how great it was to mentor them. Instead, Stefani stared, speechless and confused because this information had absolutely nothing to do with her.

• • • • • • • • • • •

More reporting from the Bloody Scheduling War between Fox and ABC:

Fox, you'll recall, seized control of the full hour at 9 p.m. Wednesdays by expanding the "American Idol" results show from half an hour, starting April 11. This thwarted ABC's plans to establish its new comedy, "Notes From the Underbelly," at 9:30 that night.

"Underbelly" now will try to establish a beachhead on Thursdays at 10 hour -- where it's certain to avoid a clash with "Idol" or any other grenade Fox might lob at it -- because Fox does not program that hour any night of the week. It's the Fox Demilitarized Zone of prime time.

ABC yesterday proclaimed its intention to air two episodes of "Underbelly" after "Grey's Anatomy" each Thursday throughout the run of the series. So far as we can tell, ABC has ordered six episodes, which our calculations show means three weeks of intense "Underbelly."

Ironically, Fox may have won the "Underbelly" battle on Wednesdays but helped the series in the long run. After all, when was the last time ABC launched a hit sitcom on Wednesday night? Wednesday night is where ABC sitcoms go to die -- except "According to Jim," which cannot be killed.

But now in the best time slot on ABC's lineup and one of the best on any network, this chick-com about "the politics of pregnancy," according to ABC, will get a big boost from the gimongous chick-concentrated audience clocked by "Grey's Anatomy," a drama superficially about doctoring and mostly about sex -- lots and lots of hot doctor sex.

Meanwhile, in that other skirmish between the two networks: ABC's "Dancing With the Stars" results show survived Tuesday's sneak attack by "Idol." Let's recap: Fox decided it had to stretch this week's "Idol" performance show by seven minutes, pushing it into the same hour as ABC's first results show of the fourth edition of "Dancing."

Tuesday, ABC responded by starting "Dancing" a full four minutes late -- so the two competition behemoths only engaged in genuine smackdown for a mere three minutes.

"Dancing With the Stars" drew a strong 18 million viewers -- its best start ever, beating the January '06 results show debut by a whopping 5 million viewers and the September '06 debut by 2 million. ("Dancing" did not have a separate results show during its first edition.) ABC reported just one casualty in the fight: Model Paulina Porizkova was the first "celebrity" dancer axed.

Fox's "House," which took over after "Idol" finally bowed out, took a slight hit in the fracas, logging 20.8 million viewers. While nothing to sneeze at, that is the show's smallest audience this season following "Idol." Its previous low was 24.4 million on March 6 -- the last time "House" aired. "House" has aired five times this season after "Idol."

But the biggest casualty of the evening aired on ABC after Fox quit for the night. The premiere of "Queen for a Day," er, "Dream Vote," hosted by Donny Osmond, plunged to 6 million viewers at 10.

ABC put up a strong front, celebrating the new show's second-place finish in the hour among the 18-to-49-year-olds it sells to advertisers. What ABC did not say was that "Dream Vote" was finishing a distant second to NBC's older-skewing "Law & Order" and it beat a rerun of CBS's old-skewing "Shark" by just one-tenth of a rating point. But we admire ABC's pluck.

• • • • • • • • • • •

Just days after the Miss USA pageant posted its smallest audience on record, NBC announced that it had renewed its exclusive agreement with Donald Trump and the Miss Universe Organization to broadcast the Miss Universe and Miss USA competitions for three more years, effective 2008.

NBC Universal-owned Telemundo also will continue to broadcast the Miss Universe pageant, as well as produce a Spanish-language simulcast and pre-pageant show, the company said.

Interestingly, the head of NBC Entertainment, Kevin Reilly, cited "renewed interest in these series of beauty pageants, especially among a new generation of younger viewers."

Looking over the numbers, we think that in the case of the Miss USA pageant, Reilly was referring to men between the ages of 18 and 34. The beauty pageant was up 18 percent in that demographic group. The pageant also was up among women 55 and older, but Reilly forgot to mention that. Isn't it interesting to contemplate what 65-year-old women have in common with 18-year-old guys? One of the things that makes covering the TV industry so invigorating. Do "Tara Conner" and "rehab" figure into your theory, too?

Anyway, for the sake of thoroughness, this year's Miss USA broadcast showed year-to-year declines among teens, children, women 18-34, 18-49 and 25-54, and men 25-54 and 55 and older.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/28/AR2007032802290_pf.html

Great Memory, Howie!

"Saturday Night Live With Howard Cosell" lasted less than a full season in 1975-1976, Saturdays at 8 PM ET/PT.

God, it was awful!

But, if I remember what the critics said correctly, it was better than anything else ABC had on the air at the time. (This is one year prior to the arrival of "Charlie's Angels" on the air and the re-emergence of the network under Fred Silverman - was FS already there?)

I doubt that, humdinger (Silverman joined ABC in 1975).

The top shows for ABC in the 1975-76 season were:
2. Rich Man, Poor Man
3. Laverne and Shirley
5. The Bionic Woman
9. The Million Dollar Man
10. The ABC Monday Night Movie
13. The ABC Sunday Night Movie
16. (tie) Starsky and Hutch
16. (tie) Good Heavens
18. Welcome Back, Kotter

So the ABC cupboard (at least in the ratings) was not exactly bare.

The next season (1976-1977), Fred Silverman's first full year at ABC, the network had seven of the top ten shows on TV:
1. Laverne & Shirley
2. Happy Days
3. Three's Company
5. Charlie's Angels
7. The Six Million Dollar Man
8. (tie) The ABC Sunday Night Movie
8. (tie) Baretta

TV Sports
MLB-EI update

I am hearing from a number of sources that (no surprise) cable will not be offering MLB-EI this year – or for the next seven, apparently.

But there is continuing word that Dish is close to making a deal. Scott Greczkowski over at satguys.us says Dish and MLB are still in “heavy meetings”.

On the Dish site, this announcement is available:

“We are currently working very hard to bring the MLB Extra Innings out of market baseball package to Dish Network subscribers. We will post updated information as soon as it is available….”

http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/whats_on_dish/pay_per_view/sports/baseball/index.shtml

TV Notebook
ABC Cancels “Dream Vote” After Two Episodes
By James Hibberd Television Week March 29, 2007

ABC has canceled “Great American Dream Vote” after only two episodes, the network confirmed Thursday.

The new reality series hosted by Donny Osmond generated very low ratings during its two airings.

A premiere preview episode following “Dancing With the Stars” on Tuesday night earned a 1.9 rating among adults 18 to 49. Then last night’s 8 p.m. outing scored a 1.5 rating.

The setback came on the heels of ABC having a pair of late-season successes, with new drama “October Road” scoring a strong audience following “Grey’s Anatomy” on Thursday nights and the record setting return of “Dancing” earlier this week.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11806

Good grief, ABC have had a real programming mess with Wednesday this year.

Note:

ABC says two episodes of "The George Lopez Show" will replace "The Great American Dream Vote" starting next Wednesday at 8 PM ET/PT.

Maybe they should just run the previous two weeks of Lost at 8pm and 9pm. They may as well just make a night of it. It can't get much worse and at least it will stay consistent for a few weeks.

ABC better think of something to do to help prop up "Lost".

Although I suspect had J.J. spent more time on the show rather than his other commitments, the show might seem a little less, well, lost.

Note:

ABC says two episodes of "The George Lopez Show" will replace "The Great American Dream Vote" starting next Wedneday at 8 PM ET/PT.

Gee, thanks for that note. The anticpation was killing me. Will they sub George Lopez, or According to Jim repeats? :D

You'd think ABC would just get some syndicated Seinfeld episodes to fill in their gaps. By the time they go to syndicate GL and ATJ, they'll have as much value as a thrice used teabag.

Great Memory, Howie!

"Saturday Night Live With Howard Cosell" lasted less than a full season in 1975-1976, Saturdays at 8 PM ET/PT.

God, it was awful!


Hey - He introduced us to the "Bay City Rollers". That's just a tad below the Beatles appearence on The Ed Sullivan Show.

Nielsen Notebook
ABC Benefits Most From Out-of-Home Viewing by College Students
By John Consoli MediaWeek March 29, 2007

ABC ratings have benefited more than any other broadcast network in prime time from Nielsen Media Research's new measurement of out-of-home viewing by college students,according to an analysis by media agency Magna Global USA. And, ironically, The CW, with the youngest median age, had the second to the fewest number of shows among the Top 20 which benefited most.

According to the Magna analysis, ABC Thursday night drama Grey's Anatomy has gained three rating points among the 18-24-year-old demo group, from a 6.0 to a 9.1, and that has boosted its rating by one rating point in the overall adult 18-49 demo group, since Nielsen began measuring out of home college viewing in January.

ABC's other Thursday night dramas Ugly Betty and Men in Trees have also gained among the 18-24 audience, off lower bases. Ugly Betty rose from a pre-college out of home measurement 18-24 rating of 2.4 to a post measurement rating of 3.7, a gain of 56 percent, while Men in Trees went from a 1.4 to a 3.3, a gain of 140 percent. Other ABC shows showing gains of between 17-31 percent in the 18-24 demo with the addition of out of home college viewing were 20/20 Friday, Wife Swap, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, According to Jim and Supernanny.

The Fox series showing the largest jump was drama House, which went from a 4.0 to an 8.3 among the 18-24 demo when out of home college viewing was added. Surprisingly, Fox freshman sitcom 'Til Death, which has struggled in the ratings overall, jumped 79 percent in the demo, from a 1.5 to a 2.7. Fox's Bones and Nanny 911 are also popular shows among college students, the analysis showed.

NBC sitcom The Office showed the largest gain for that network among college students, with ratings in the 18-24 demo rising one full rating point, from a 2.6 to a 3.6. NBC's Deal or No Deal and Dateline were also helped by the new measurement of college student viewing.

CW's America's Next Top Model gained almost one rating point in the demo, to a 3.5 from a 2.6, and Friday Night Smackdown gained 0.3 of a rating point.

The only CBS show to show a significant gain was freshman drama Shark, jumping from a 1.9 to a 2.2 in the demo.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003565245

Gee, thanks for that note. The anticpation was killing me. Will they sub George Lopez, or According to Jim repeats? :D

You'd think ABC would just get some syndicated Seinfeld episodes to fill in their gaps. By the time they go to syndicate GL and ATJ, they'll have as much value as a thrice used teabag.


Given their ratings, I can't imagine they have all that much value as it is.

Hey - He introduced us to the "Bay City Rollers". That's just a tad below the Beatles appearence on The Ed Sullivan Show.

Well, with their hit of "Saturday Night" I guess they would be appropriate guests for Howard's show.

A note about the BCR -- a few weeks ago the original members sued Arista Records for what they claim is "millions of dollars" in unpaid royalties.

The estimates of their record sales range from 60 million to as high as 300 million.

Who knew?

I doubt that, humdinger (Silverman joined ABC in 1975).

The top shows for ABC in the 1975-76 season were:

Fredfa, you cease to amaze me with the information you post here.

BTW, is Fred Silverman related to Mark Silverman, the new President of the Big Ten Network.

I have no idea. There is no reference to a relationship I can find quickly.

The Business of Television
TWC’s Britt Unsure About Local HDTV for Basic-Only Subs

By Ted Hearn MultiChannel News 3/28/2007

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6428870.html?display=Breaking+News

TWC Clarifies Britt’s House Testimony
Basic-Only Subscribers Can Receive HD-Capable Set-Tops
By Ted Hearn 3/29/2007 6:30:00 PM

A Time Warner Cable official said Thursday that subscribers who buy just the basic tier and lease an HD set-top box have free access to local TV signals in HD, clarifying CEO Glenn Britt’s testimony before a House subcommittee the previous day.

“As an operational point-of-fact, Time Warner Cable offers basic-only customers the opportunity to receive an HD-capable set-top box without any requirement to step up to the digital tier of services,” said Mark Harrad, senior vice president of corporate communications at Time Warner Cable. “With such a box, customers can get the HD signals of all channels they would otherwise get in standard-definition, including broadcast networks.”

Responding to questions, Britt said the company hadn’t addressed basic-tier subscriber access to local HD signals. When Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) raised concern about cable subscribers having to buy more than one programming tier in order to receive local HD signals, Britt indicated that his company required purchase of a digital tier as a prerequisite to gaining access to local HD signals free-of-charge.

“In our case today, if you buy digital service, which does cost more than basic, and if you then want HD, we don’t charge any extra for it. Most of the other cable and satellite companies do charge extra, by the way,” Britt told the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.

Harrad, correcting the record, said the company does not require a digital-tier purchase to gain access to local HD signals.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6429385.html?display=Breaking+News

TWC Clarifies Britt’s House Testimony
Basic-Only Subscribers Can Receive HD-Capable Set-Tops
By Ted Hearn 3/29/2007 6:30:00 PM

A Time Warner Cable official said Thursday that subscribers who buy just the basic tier and lease an HD set-top box have free access to local TV signals in HD, clarifying CEO Glenn Britt’s testimony before a House subcommittee the previous day.

“As an operational point-of-fact, Time Warner Cable offers basic-only customers the opportunity to receive an HD-capable set-top box without any requirement to step up to the digital tier of services,” said Mark Harrad, senior vice president of corporate communications at Time Warner Cable. “With such a box, customers can get the HD signals of all channels they would otherwise get in standard-definition, including broadcast networks.”

Responding to questions, Britt said the company hadn’t addressed basic-tier subscriber access to local HD signals. When Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) raised concern about cable subscribers having to buy more than one programming tier in order to receive local HD signals, Britt indicated that his company required purchase of a digital tier as a prerequisite to gaining access to local HD signals free-of-charge.

“In our case today, if you buy digital service, which does cost more than basic, and if you then want HD, we don’t charge any extra for it. Most of the other cable and satellite companies do charge extra, by the way,” Britt told the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.

Harrad, correcting the record, said the company does not require a digital-tier purchase to gain access to local HD signals.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6429385.html?display=Breaking+News
The question I have is, does TWC require a HD converter box to receive those local HD channels, or are they in the clear QAM? Doesn't look like that question got asked.

TV Notebook
CMT drops Miss America
Channel won't be picking up pageant option
By Josef Adalian Variety March 29, 2007

There she goes: Miss America has been given the boot by CMT: Country Music Television.

Cabler told the Associated Press that it won't be picking up its option for the pageant, leaving Miss America homeless for the second time in three years. ABC, the pageant's longtime home, dropped Miss America in 2004.

CMT and the Miss America org had a deal in place that gave the cabler rights to the perennial pageant through 2011. But after delivering record ratings for CMT in 2006, this year's Miss America tumbled in the ratings, falling from 3.1 million viewers to just 2.4 million, according to Nielsen.

News of the cancellation comes just a day after NBC said it was reupping its deal with the Miss Universe organization for Miss USA and Miss Universe--but not Miss Teen USA.

Pageants have had a tough time attracting auds in an era of reality television and changing social mores. CMT and Miss America (and previously ABC) had tried to spice things up by making Miss America feel more like a reality show, but the gimmicks didn't work.

A rep for Miss America told the AP the org had already started looking for new broadcast partners.

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117962142&categoryid=14

I doubt that, humdinger (Silverman joined ABC in 1975).

The top shows for ABC in the 1975-76 season were:

9. The Million Dollar Man

So the ABC cupboard (at least in the ratings) was not exactly bare.

The next season (1976-1977), Fred Silverman's first full year at ABC, the network had seven of the top ten shows on TV:

7. The Six Million Dollar Man

Of course it went up in the ratings. Silverman changed the name of the show from "Million Dollar Man" (booooring!) to "Six Million Dollar Man" (cool)! :rolleyes:

Of course it went up in the ratings. Silverman changed the name of the show from "Million Dollar Man" (booooring!) to "Six Million Dollar Man" (cool)! :rolleyes:

That was after he got the insurance claim back from the hospital!

ABC better think of something to do to help prop up "Lost".

Although I suspect had J.J. spent more time on the show rather than his other commitments, the show might seem a little less, well, lost.I personally think the show has been excellent and steadily re-footing itself (excluding the Jack-back episode) since the return from hiatus.

I read elsewhere that the shift from 9:00 to 10:00 should reflect approximately a 12% drop in viewership because of smaller potential audiences at the later hour as people go to bed. Any idea if that's truth or just exaggerated ratings spin?

In any case, Lost's ratings shortcomings are inevitable given the horrible setup of the hiatus and ABC's failure to schedule any useful lead-in whatsoever.

I don't know about the 12% drop being attributable to the hour. Remember that Fox and the CW don't broadcast after 10. Therefore all those eyeballs are available. In the 9-10 hour last week there were 46.39 million viewers watching the five networks. From 10-11 31.81 million watched

As with anything concerning numbers there are all kinds of ways you can analyze them, Matt.

Just taking a close look at the numbers. three of the top eight programs in Nielsen's 18-49 ratings for last week for 10 PM shows (including Lost at #7). In the total 2+ viewers, four of the top 16 programs began at 10 PM (including Lost at #16). I suspect the eraly start of Daylight Savings Time is far more responsible for at least some slippage of the past two weeks than the 10 PM start.

As to Wednesday's dreadful lead-in, I would think that a lead-in shouldn't make a major difference to the "Lost" audience any more. People know the show, and I would suspect those who haven't watched it are very leary of joining in at this stage.

If you check almost any thread for fans of any show, the ratings failure is blamed on the network, its promotion, its lead-in or just the fact that the viewers aren't smart enough to get it.

Lost has some serious Nielsen problems. It has been renewed for next year, of course, so hopefully the showrunners can get it back on track for the remainder of this year and going into season four.

Are there fewer viewers available at 10? Maybe, but the reason "Lost" was moved was because it was hemorraghing viewers at 9, too.

I personally think the show has been excellent and steadily re-footing itself (excluding the Jack-back episode) since the return from hiatus.


Well my wife and I have been steady watchers from the beginning, but last nights show is a perfect example of why this show is losing viewers. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with furthering the story line. It was just another stupid attempt to milk another week before teasing you again with previews of next week that appear to be about something that really matters to the viewer and advances the story line.

Do the producers and/or writers of shows really watch TV?

Fredfa, any reviews of the upcoming showtime mini-series The Tudors?

Got damn it! My f***ing Time Warner Cable system just replaced Universal HD with WWOR-DT on my HD cable package here in NYC. This sucks because Universal HD had first and second day coverage of the Masters (aired in SD on USA) on HD in previous years that I was looking forward to this time. UHD also showed HD repeats of Stargate Atlantis, Battlestar Galactica and a variety of uncut older movies. Thanks TWC, the upconverted-and-stretched WOR-TV syndicated shows and My Network soaps are just what I bought my new HDTV for... NOT! :mad:

Got damn it! My f***ing Time Warner Cable system just replaced Universal HD with WWOR-DT on my HD cable package here in NYC. This sucks because Universal HD had first and second day coverage of the Masters (aired in SD on USA) on HD in previous years that I was looking forward to this time. UHD also showed HD repeats of Stargate Atlantis, Battlestar Galactica and a variety of uncut older movies. Thanks TWC, the upconverted-and-stretched WOR-TV syndicated shows and My Network soaps are just what I bought my new HDTV for... NOT! :mad:

Ouch that hurts....are you sure they didn't just move UHD to a different channel? Don't they have a carriage agreement with UHD?

First TV Show to Arrive on 50 GB Blu-ray Disc® From
Sony Pictures Home Entertainment
RESCUE ME:
THE COMPLETE THIRD SEASON

Series Stars Emmy® and Golden Globe® Award Nominee Denis Leary
with Guest Stars Including Academy Award® Winners
Susan Sarandon, Marisa Tomei, and Tatum O'Neal

Available on DVD and Blu-ray June 5

CULVER CITY, CALIF. (March 28, 2007) – On June 5, Rescue Me: The Complete Third Season will become the first TV on DVD release from Sony Pictures Home Entertainment on Blu-ray disc format. The four-disc DVD and Blu-ray release includes all 13 episodes along with exclusive bonus features, including a blooper reel, deleted scenes and six all-new featurettes with the cast and producers. The series stars Emmy® and Golden Globe® nominee Denis Leary (Ice Age, The Ref), who was described by USA Today as "... the best actor playing the best character in the best show on basic cable." Rescue Me: The Complete Third Season will be available on DVD for $49.95 SLP or Blu-ray disc for $79.95 SLP.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/03/29/sony-releasing-rescue-me-the-complete-third-season-on-bd-50-dis/

Funny, in 2006 Sony said Stargate Atlantis Season 1 would be the first TV show on Blu-ray and since then we've heard nothing. "Atlantis" airs in HD on Universal HD so there are masters already available for that one. Mmmphhh...

BTW, what is it with high-definition TV releases of seasons in progress? The Sopranos Season 6 Part 1 (HD-DVD, Blu-ray) and Smallville Season 5 (HD-DVD), like this upcoming "Rescue Me Season 3" Blu-ray release, are no go for potential HD buyers that aren't familiar with the previous seasons of these shows. I might be tempted to get into "Smallville" or "Rescue Me" if I caught them in HD from the beginning, but not in the middle of a narrative that's already in progress. It smells like Sony wants to test the pricing/demand for TV-on-Bluray with an expendable TV property instead of the big guns that would appeal to the PS3-owning crowd (like the aforementioned "Stargate Atlantis").

...are you sure they didn't just move UHD to a different channel? Don't they have a carriage agreement with UHD?

You're right. I checked the Local NYC TWC HDTV forum here at AVS and they're saying UHD has been moved into a cluster of HD channels far removed from the 701-725 group I was used to checking for HD. Thanks for setting me straight! Now to wait until next Thursday for my first ever glimpse at the Masters in HD (USA coverage)! :)

You're right. I checked the Local NYC TWC HDTV forum here at AVS and they're saying UHD has been moved into a cluster of HD channels far removed from the 701-725 group I was used to checking for HD. Thanks for setting me straight! Now to wait until next Thursday for my first ever glimpse at the Masters in HD (USA coverage)! :)

Whew! Close one!

Time Warner Cable system just replaced Universal HD with WWOR-DT on my HD cable package here in NYC. This sucks because Universal HD had first and second day coverage of the Masters (aired in SD on USA) on HD in previous years that I was looking forward to this time.

Just so you know, live first and second round HD coverage of the Masters will also be available on the HD CBS channel, but the SD CBS channel will have regular programming. So even if you don't have UHD you can see it in NY on WCBS-DT.

First TV Show to Arrive on 50 GB Blu-ray Disc® From
Sony Pictures Home Entertainment
RESCUE ME:
THE COMPLETE THIRD SEASON

Series Stars Emmy® and Golden Globe® Award Nominee Denis Leary
with Guest Stars Including Academy Award® Winners
Susan Sarandon, Marisa Tomei, and Tatum O'Neal

Available on DVD and Blu-ray June 5

CULVER CITY, CALIF. (March 28, 2007) – On June 5, Rescue Me: The Complete Third Season will become the first TV on DVD release from Sony Pictures Home Entertainment on Blu-ray disc format. The four-disc DVD and Blu-ray release includes all 13 episodes along with exclusive bonus features, including a blooper reel, deleted scenes and six all-new featurettes with the cast and producers. The series stars Emmy® and Golden Globe® nominee Denis Leary (Ice Age, The Ref), who was described by USA Today as "... the best actor playing the best character in the best show on basic cable." Rescue Me: The Complete Third Season will be available on DVD for $49.95 SLP or Blu-ray disc for $79.95 SLP.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/03/29/sony-releasing-rescue-me-the-complete-third-season-on-bd-50-dis/
Cool, this would seem to indicate they'll do Season 4 as well, so if FX doesn't go HD before then(unlikely), then I'll just wait for the hidef discs release from Netflix and forgo watching it in crappy low PQ SD.

With the constant erosion of PQ on TV, the more TV shows that get released on the HD shiny discs the better. I can stand to wait for most all cable net shows other than Battlestar Galactica, that one I don't have the will power to wait for. :D

The Shield, The 4400, Nip/Tuck all in HD, now that would be nice. :)

Fredfa, any reviews of the upcoming showtime mini-series The Tudors?

There have been several, and I'll start posting them in a bit. As you know, the show debuts Sunday night.

TV Review
“The Tudors”
Renaissance Romping With Henry and His Rat Pack
By Alessandra Stanley The New York Times March 30, 2007

Thomas More obeyed his conscience. Anne Boleyn followed The Rules.

“A Man for All Seasons” was a 1966 movie that focused on the moral struggle of Sir Thomas, Henry VIII’s most trustworthy adviser. So surely a mini-series about the king’s love life could deconstruct how Anne Boleyn enticed Henry to divorce Catherine of Aragon and break with Rome to marry her.

“The Tudors,” a Showtime mini-series that begins on Sunday, weaves its way through all kinds of court intrigue and bawdy sexual escapades, but for some reason it leaves the greatest romance of the Renaissance hazy.

Henry, played by Jonathan Rhys Meyers, is shown practicing his droit du seigneur with bodice-ripping relish, murmuring, “Do you consent?” without much anxiety. Ladies-in-waiting were no more likely to withhold their favors than courtiers were inclined to let the king lose at tennis. His dalliances were short-lived and plentiful: Anne’s more compliant sister, Mary, was one of the many.

Yet somehow one young woman, a commoner, managed to keep Henry ensorcelled for more than seven years, perhaps the most effective use of the “just say no” strategy in history. Natalie Dormer, whose sly, feline beauty is well suited to the role, is given many lingering close-ups, but Anne Boleyn’s withholding ways and cleverest wiles are unexplored.

And so it goes. “The Tudors,” which was created by Michael Hirst, who also wrote the screenplay of “Elizabeth,” the 1998 film starring Cate Blanchett, is enjoyable but not exhilarating, engaging but not hypnotic. At times, it’s closer to Mary Boleyn than Anne: beautiful to behold but not quite clever and beguiling enough to hold fickle viewers’ attention for 10 episodes. And yet the Tudor reign is one of the best known periods in British history: the golden age of Shakespeare, the Protestant Reformation and the Renaissance; an epoch of war, diplomacy, discovery and, for some reason, pheromones that rocked the ship of state.

Every generation wants a turn at those legendary figures. Mark Twain and Ford Madox Ford wrote historical novels set in the court of Henry VIII. Ernst Lubitsch directed a German “Anna Boleyn” in 1920. Charles Laughton played Henry VIII in 1933. Sarah Bernhardt, Bette Davis, Glenda Jackson and many other actresses played Elizabeth I; so did Quentin Crisp.

And at the moment the Tudor dynasty is particularly in vogue: Helen Mirren won an Emmy last year for playing the aging queen in HBO’s “Elizabeth I.” Scarlett Johansson plays Mary and Natalie Portman plays Anne in “The Other Boleyn Girl,” a film version of a Philippa Gregory novel that is scheduled for release this year.

“The Tudors” looks wonderful; the sets and costumes are magnificent, the cinematography is luminous and lush. The fragility of life in 16th-century Europe is vividly rendered, as is the subservience of women — even among princesses and privileged members of elite. Children die or are taken away and raised by strangers, husbands are chosen by fathers and brothers, lovers spurn women without redress, and kings have absolute power even over their queens.

Mr. Rhys Meyers is a gifted actor and works the shadows of his character with gusto, even though he is an odd fit for the larger-than-life role of Henry. It’s not just that his build and coloring are so different from the way the king was depicted by Holbein and other painters; the actor’s mien is broody and watchful, better suited to a scheming courtier or pining poet than an extroverted royal peacock.

When the camera follows the young king and his rat pack of randy, rambunctious courtiers, “The Tudors” is a captivating romp, “Ocean’s Eleven” in ruffs and doublets. There are delicious details, like Henry boning up for a summit meeting with Francis I by quizzing the British ambassador to France about the French king’s looks. “What about his legs?” he asks Thomas Boleyn. “Are his calves strong, like mine?” The ambassador is all tact. “Your majesty,” he purrs, “no one has calves like yours.”

The pacing is uneven however. When the narrative turns to governance and political intrigue, the action slows nearly to a standstill, almost as if the writers hope that solemnity will pass for depth.

The series ends before Henry and Anne marry, possibly because the creators hope for a sequel. But there are too many scenes of Queen Catherine (Maria Doyle Kennedy) praying and suffering in noble silence and Cardinal Thomas Wolsey (Sam Neill) looking pained over the king’s foreign policy. The warring influences on the king are schematically contrasted: boating with Thomas More (Jeremy Northam), Henry mentions this philosopher’s “Utopia” then praises Machiavelli’s “Prince.”

And it is bad enough that in the first six episodes there is only one beheading; at the moment the ax strikes the camera looks away.

Henry had strategic reasons for wanting a divorce, namely to sire a male heir, a motive that is underscored again and again. Catherine, who was the widow of his elder brother, Arthur, had a daughter, Mary, with Henry, but all their other children were stillborn or died soon after birth. Henry sees that as a sign that God is punishing him for marrying his brother’s wife, even though the pope gave him his blessing. When one of his mistresses gives birth to a boy, Henry shifts blame to his wife, crying triumphantly, “I always knew it wasn’t my fault.”

On the other hand sex and romance also come along early and often, so there are many compensatory, if somewhat fanciful, digressions. In real life Henry’s sister Princess Mary was married against her will to the aged Louis XII of France, though luckily for her he died shortly after their wedding.

“The Tudors” uses the name of the king’s other sister, Margaret, to avoid confusion with Henry and Catherine’s child, and also changes the princess’s royal bridegroom from a French king to the ruler of Portugal. On the series a feisty Margaret (Gabrielle Anwar) has torrid premarital sex on the high seas with one of Henry’s closest friends.

Thomas Tallis (Joe van Moyland), a composer and organist in the Tudor court, is a real historical figure, but the creators added a homosexual liaison with another of Henry’s boon companions.

“The Tudors” covers all the bases, but Henry’s love affair could have used more scrutiny. There are lessons to be learned from Anne Boleyn besides “watch your head.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/30/arts/television/30tudo.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=television&pagewanted=print

There have been several, and I'll start posting them in a bit. As you know, the show debuts Sunday night.
If you watch anything on Showtime there's no way they'll let you forget either, what with their promotion banners during programming...thanks for turning Showtime into a really expensive TNT, FX, SciFi, etc...

B] TV Review[/B]
“The Tudors”
Meyers makes a right handsome Henry VIII
By Ellen Gray Philadelphia Daily News March 30, 2007

Since Showtime itself admits that its latest series, "The Tudors," (10 p.m. ET Sunday) was conceived as an attempt to turn the English royal dynasty into something akin to "The Sopranos," I have just one question:

What happened to Tony?

Because honestly, it would be easier to buy James Gandolfini - at least the late-'90s version, the one many of us first saw as Tony Soprano - in the role of Henry VIII than it is Jonathan Rhys Meyers. The Irish-born Meyers, who's no doubt destined to be People magazine's Sexiest Man Alive one of these days, made a terrific Elvis.

Loved him in "Bend It Like Beckham." Adored him in "Match Point."

Henry? C'mon.

HBO may have given a balding, slightly pudgy actor the TV role of a lifetime, but Showtime, while insisting that its writers and producers feel free to push beyond all sorts of other boundaries, doesn't necessarily extend the same freedom to its casting directors.

We're talking, after all, about the home of one gorgeous dope-dealing suburban mom ("Weeds"), a terrorist group full of hotties ("Sleeper Cell") and a serial killer ("Dexter") whom most women would be happy to take home to mother.

And for those who might not be so inclined, Showtime has "The L Word," where I'm pretty sure the "L" stands for lipstick.

Showtime, whose press kits are almost as gorgeous as its actors, put the pouty-lipped Meyers on the cover of the kit for "The Tudors."

Hair close-cropped, the hilt of a sword next to his face, he looks like a rock star.

Which is kind of the point.

Because on one of the glossy pages inside, "Tudors" costume designer Joan Bergin declares that Henry, who famously married six women, "was the Mick Jagger of his day."

Jagger, of course, is now too old to be considered.

If we're talking age, you could argue that the 29-year-old Meyers has as much right to play Henry as any of the actor's predecessors.

As nearly as I can figure the chronology in the six I've seen of the 10 episodes that make up the first season, Henry would perhaps be in his early to mid-30s during the period when he was falling in love with Anne Boleyn (Natalie Dormer), which happens fairly early in the season.

Richard Burton was in his mid-40s when he played Henry at that juncture in "Anne of a Thousand Days," Keith Michell in his early 40s when he took on all of Henry's marital adventures in "The Six Wives of Henry VIII."

Life expectancy was shorter in the 16th century - Henry got in all his marrying, divorcing and beheading by the time of his death at 55 - and based on portraits of the time, Botox wasn't yet in vogue.

By those standards, Meyers would be well into middle age.

By ours, though, he's just about the right age to play a high school senior on a CW show.

Henry became king and married Katharine of Aragon (Maria Doyle Kennedy), his brother's 23-year-old widow, shortly before his 18th birthday, and though there are hints in "The Tudors" that theirs was once a love story, it's a love story the show's buried in favor of wife-to-be No. 2.

In choosing to fast-forward to the sexier part of the story, "Tudors" creator Michael Hirst may be leaving Henry's handsomest years behind, but it does give him an opportunity to deal with his break with the Roman Catholic Church and to paint a portrait of a king far more complicated than most rock stars.

For those less interested in the roots of Protestantism in England than in sex and sword fights, there's a pretty romance involving Henry's sister (Gabrielle Anwar), who for some reason, perhaps to reduce confusion with some other Marys, is called Princess Margaret in "The Tudors." (Henry did have a sister Margaret, who married James IV of Scotland, but it was Mary Tudor who was sent off to marry an old man and instead fell in love with a young one.)

There are other fictions introduced here - a king of Portugal is inexplicably substituted for a king of France and there's a wholly unnecessary murder - but Mary/Margaret's is a lesser known story, and even without the embellishments, makes for good television.

Sam Neill's a fine Cardinal Wolsey and Jeremy Northam a positively utopian Thomas More, though both at times seem like grownups who've wandered into a children's crusade.

I don't want to beat up on Meyers here. He does justice to Hirst's Henry, if not entirely to history's, and being young and good-looking is hardly a crime.

But like Tony Soprano, Henry VIII brings more to the table than charisma: Corrupted by absolute power, he's a bit of a monster.

I'm just not sure that a man who could probably hypnotize people just by looking at them would ever have needed to cut off anyone's head. *

http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/television/20070329_Ellen_Gray___Meyers_makes_a_right_handsome_Henry_VI II.html

TV Notebook
Fred Thompson's Presidential Hopes Could Put 'Law' Reruns in Lockup

By Michael D. Shear Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, March 30, 2007

If Fred Thompson, the onetime Tennessee senator better known to most Americans as District Attorney Arthur Branch on "Law & Order," runs for president, some fans may be in for a letdown. Television stations are expected to suspend reruns of the show if he makes a real-life bid for the White House.

Federal campaign law requires broadcasters to give all candidates equal time on the airwaves. That rule applies to entertainment programs like "Law & Order," meaning stations that run the show would be required to give other GOP candidates a like amount of prime-time exposure.

With as many as a dozen or more Republican candidates competing for the nomination, that would be prohibitively expensive.

"As a practical matter, [the television stations] would in all likelihood have to pull all of the Fred Thompson shows for the duration of his candidacy," said Andrew Jay Schwartzman, president of the Media Access Project.

Thompson, who remains a member of the "L&O" cast, would likely leave the show if he decides to run, observers said.

The equal-time provision, enforced by the Federal Communications Commission, has been a staple of political campaigning for decades. Its primary goal is to make sure that candidates cannot be frozen out of crucial television time for their campaign commercials.

Candidates' appearances on newscasts, interview programs and at news events are exempted from the rule. So are incidental appearances in documentaries.

But the rule has been applied to television and movie stars in the past.

During the 2003 gubernatorial race in California, television stations dropped all Arnold Schwarzenegger movies out of fear that showing them would require them to give countless hours of free airtime to all 134 other candidates for governor.

Stations also dropped "Bedtime for Bonzo" and other Ronald Reagan movies during his campaigns for governor of California and president.

"Yes, this is a kind of weird application of what is a very good law," Schwartzman said.

There is potential good news for "Law & Order" fans. The FCC rules have never been applied to cable channels, though several legal experts said cable often abides by an equal-time guideline in the hopes of avoiding a legal case that would set a precedent.

Thompson's situation could spark such a case, though a spokesman for NBC Universal, which syndicates "Law & Order," said the network had no comment.

The TNT cable network shows several hours of "Law & Order" reruns every day and often holds all-day marathons. If that continues while Thompson is running for office, one of his rivals could seek to apply the equal-time rule to cable TV.

To do that, the other candidates would have to monitor each of Thompson's appearances, count the minutes he appeared, and then request equal time within seven days of each episode.

Only the actual time that Thompson appears in each episode is counted, legal experts said.

But even if Thompson announces that he's getting in the race, the equal-time provisions -- and the blackout for the reruns -- would not immediately kick in. The law applies only to candidates whose names appear on official state ballots, a step that none of the candidates have yet taken.

"All they've done is filed papers," said Jack Goodman, the former general counsel for the National Association of Broadcasters and now a Washington attorney. That doesn't trigger the rule, he said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/28/AR2007032802174_pf.html

TV Review
“The Tudors”
Withering royal gazes, from Henry VIII
From Maureen Ryan’s Chicago Tribune blog “The Watcher”

Showtime's "The' Tudors" (9 p.m. CT Sunday) takes great pains to demonstrate that it's not your father's historical epic.

The Henry VIII of this 10-part series is a lusty, energetic, swashbuckling hottie, a monarch who beds nearly every woman at court, even after his marriage to the pious Catherine of Aragon. And because
this is premium cable, those frequent (frankly, too frequent) bedroom romps are shown in great, sweaty detail.

But sweat is part and parcel of this slick, superficial portrait of Henry, who plays tennis, hunts and wrestles the French king just for kicks. Take that, Prince Charles!

To demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that this Henry is not the portly eminence we usually picture, thanks to the iconic Hans Holbein portrait of the English king, the producers of "The Tudors" have cast Jonathan Rhys Meyers as the much-married ruler.

There's not an ounce of fat to be seen on this Henry's bodacious bod, and the beard he sports at
times is the merest scrub of trendy facial decoration. You wouldn't be surprised to find that this Henry VIII put the 15th Century equivalent of gel in his hair.

Still, for all its ferocious ambition to be more than just another heavily corseted, respectful historical drama, "The Tudors" falls flat in more than one arena. Meyers certainly is easy on the eyes, but his
portrayal of Henry consists of a smoldering glower and not much else. An hour or two of this fine-looking man glowering hotly is not exactly cruel and unusual punishment. Ten hours? Too much.

It's not all the actor's fault; the script is so thin and obvious that it borders on self-parody at times. At one point, Henry says of Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, "His dominions are vast!" Yes, and he has "huge tracts of land," to quote from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail."

"I can't wait for the summit" he says of a scheduled meeting with the foppish French king. "It'll change the world forever!" Of course, it doesn't, but never mind.

Sam Neill and Jeremy Northam are on the scene as well, as Cardinal Wolsey and Sir Thomas More, respectively, and both do typically faultless jobs. But there's a bland superficiality to the proceedings
that would be off-putting at the best of times.

It's even less forgivable in a television environment that has given us, in the last couple of years, HBO's fantastic "Elizabeth I" miniseries, mini-series, starring the sensational Helen Mirren, and the highly engaging "Rome," which did this sort of romping historical adventure/drama far, far
better. Titus Pullo on a bad day was much more interesting than this monarch.

Henry VIII may have been a lusty reprobate with immortality as his only goal, as appears to be the case in this series, but the fact that this learned monarch is still both a pop-culture touchstone and the
subject of historical study 500 years later proves he was much more than that.

And who knows, the real Henry may have even looked good playing tennis.

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