AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 2654

post #79591 of 87879
TV Notes
On The Air Tonight
WEDNESDAY Network Primetime/Late Night Options
(All shows are in HD unless noted; start times are ET. Network late night shows are preceded by late local news)

ABC:
8PM - The Middle (Season Finale)
8:30PM - Modern Family
(R - Feb. 15)
9PM - Modern Family (Season Finale)
9:32PM - Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23 (Seson Finale)
10PM - Revenge (Season Finale)
* * * *
11:35PM - Nightline (LIVE)
Midnight - Jimmy Kimmel Live! (Josh Brolin; Bethenny Frankel; Kimbra performs)

CBS:
8PM - The Big Bang Theory
(R - Nov. 10)
8:30PM - Two and a Half Men
(R - Feb. 20)
9PM - Criminal Minds
(R - Jan. 18)
10PM - Criminal Minds
(R - Jan. 25)
* * * *
11:35PM - Late Show with David Letterman (Piedmont Bird Callers; TV host Bill O'Reilly; Pitbull performs)
12:37AM - Late Show with Craig Ferguson (Jennifer Love Hewitt; Rutina Wesley)

NBC:
8PM - Betty White's Off Their Rocker
8:30PM - Betty White's Off Their Rocker
(R - Jan. 16)
9PM - Law & Order: Special Victims Unit
(R - Feb. 8)
10PM - Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (Season Finale)
* * * *
11:35PM - The Tonight Show with Jay Leno (Charlize Theron; Jeffrey Dean Morgan; Juanes performs)
12:37AM - Late Night with Jimmy Fallon (Edie Falco; comic Jim Gaffigan; magicians Penn and Teller)
1:36AM - Last Call with Carson Daly (Comic Matt Walsh; music producer Flying Lotus; Band of Skulls performs)

FOX:
8PM - American Idol (Season Finale, LIVE, 127 min.)

PBS:
(check your local listing for starting time/programming)
8PM - Nature - Salmon: Running the Gauntlet (R - May 1, 2011)
9PM - NOVA: Killer Subs in Pearl Harbor
(R - Jan. 05, 2010))
10PM - NOVA: Missing the MiG Alley
(R - Dec. 18, 2007)

UNIVISION:
8PM - Una Familia Con Suerte (Series Finale, 120 min.)
10PM - La Que No PodÃ*a Amar

THE CW:
8PM - America's Next Top Model
(R - May 16)
9PM - America's Next Top Model

TELEMUNDO:
8PM - Una Maid en Manhattan
9PM - Corazón Valiente
10PM - Relaciones Peligrosas

TBS:
11PM - Conan (Howie Mandel; Alice Eve; comic John Ramsey)

E!:
11PM - Chelsea Lately (Animal expert Donald Schultz; comic Ben Gleib; comic Jen Kirkman; TV personality Ross Mathews)
post #79592 of 87879
TV Notes
Wednesday's Highlights: 'Modern Family' on ABC
By Los Angeles Times' 'Show Tracker' Blog - May 22, 2012

[ALL TIMES LISTED ARE PACIFIC TIME]

ED O'NEILL and Rico Rodriguez star in the season finale of Modern Family at 9 p.m. on ABC.

SERIES

The Middle:
Mike's (Neil Flynn) brother Rusty (Norm Macdonald) has big news: He's getting married. And bigger news: He's getting married at Mike and Frankie's (Patricia Heaton) house in the season finale (8 p.m. ABC).

American Idol: The top 12 contestants reunite on stage in the season finale, featuring performances by Rihanna and Scotty McCreery (8 p.m. Fox).

America's Next Top Model: This new episode features highlights from the series (9 p.m. KTLA).

Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23: In the season finale, June (Dreama Walker) finally thinks she has a chance of keeping up with Chloe (Krysten Ritter) and James (James Van Der Beek) discovers another Dancing With the Stars participant has a bigger dressing room in the season finale (9:32 p.m. ABC).

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Benson and Amaro (Mariska Hargitay, Danny Pino) are cautioned to tread carefully when investigating the death of an underage escort at a bachelor party, as there were some big names on the guest list. A former colleague (Dean Winters), who's now working under cover helps the investigation in the season finale (10 p.m. NBC).

Revenge: Emily (Emily VanCamp) intends to finally follow through with her plan for revenge in the season finale (10 p.m. ABC).

Around the World in 80 Plates: This new episode brings the contestants to Barcelona, Spain, where they work alongside fishermen on the docks (10 p.m. Bravo).

Hot in Cleveland: This new episode features highlights of the final two episodes, including Betty White's finale night surprise (10 p.m. TV Land).

SPORTS

Baseball:
The Angels visit the Oakland Athletics (12:30 p.m. FSN); the Washington Nationals visit the Philadelphia Phillies (4 p.m. ESPN2); the Dodgers visit the Arizona Diamondbacks (6:30 p.m. KCAL).

Basketball: NBA Playoffs: The Boston Celtics visit the Philadelphia 76ers (5 p.m. ESPN). (7:30 p.m. ESPN).

Hockey: NHL Playoffs: The New Jersey Devils visit the New York Rangers (5 p.m. NBCSP).

Soccer: The Earthquakes visit the Galaxy (7:30 p.m. KDOC).


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/show...ly-on-abc.html
post #79593 of 87879
TV Notes
Idol' Grapples With Its Own Competition
By Brian Stelter, The New York Times - May 23, 2012


(Photo: Michael Becker/Fox)

As Fox's American Idol wraps its 11th season this week with a sing-off between Phillip Phillips and Jessica Sanchez, those involved with the show are asking what went wrong, a rare dose of soul-searching for a show that has been the runaway hit of this century.

Idol lost nearly a quarter of its audience this season (it is still huge), dipping below 20 million viewers for the first time since 2003, when a ratings surge made it the No. 1 entertainment program on American television. The drop-off was even more steep among viewers ages 18 to 49, the demographic mostly highly sought by the networks.

As a result, there is no longer bluster in the voices of the Idol judges and Fox executives who had confidently predicted that they would fend off The Voice, NBC's one-year-old competitor, this season. Though some at Fox were initially dismissive of The Voice, they now think it was among the reasons for the double-digit decline.

Kevin Reilly, the president of entertainment for Fox, said last week that there would be some creative reinvigoration of the Idol franchise for next season.

But first there's another winner to crown, which will take place live on Fox on Wednesday night. The choice is stark this season, between Mr. Phillips, 21, who would become the fifth consecutive white male guitarist to win the competition, and Ms. Sanchez, 16, who would become the youngest Idol winner. She would also be the first Latina to win, visibly representing change for a program that some TV critics have labeled boring.

Given that the series has been on TV since 2002, Ms. Sanchez probably can't remember a world without American Idol,' said Jeff Alexander, who dutifully recaps the show each week as M. Giant for the Web site Television Without Pity. She's trained to be on the show since she was 5, and it's like watching somebody who was grown in a vat for this purpose.

Some might say the same about Mr. Phillips, a Dave Matthews sound-alike who follows in the footsteps of the past four winners, Scotty McCreery, Lee DeWyze, Kris Allen and David Cook. Online odds-makers say Mr. Phillips is favored to win, but some social-media analysis companies say Ms. Sanchez, a powerhouse singer who idolizes Beyoncé, is more popular among online commenters. Fox has been paying close attention to the social-media chatter this season, and it says the millions of comments affirm that Idol remains the most culturally relevant show on television.

But the ultimate judge remains the Nielsen ratings. Last year, when Idol rebounded slightly from lows that were a record in 2010, a typical episode garnered 24.7 million viewers, excluding the finale week. Of those viewers, 10.8 million were between the ages of 18 and 49. Compare that with this year, when a typical episode has attracted about 19.2 million viewers, 7.5 million of whom are in that same demographic.

The Voice, which benefited from a post-Super Bowl premiere, came close to tying Idol in that demographic, with 7.2 million on a typical night. And ABC's Dancing With the Stars came close among total viewers, with 18.3 million on dancing nights, and 16 million on results nights.

This is something new for Idol: true competition. Peter Rice, chairman of the Fox Networks Group, said in an interview that the ratings decline for Idol was a surprise at first, but, in hindsight, when you look at it, it became a much more crowded space.

Though The Voice, with its trademark red revolving judges' chairs, was shown earlier in the week than Idol, the two still competed for attention and DVR space. Nigel Lythgoe, an executive producer of Idol, cited The Voice when he was asked to explain the ratings drop last week. It's never been like this before, he said.

Mr. Lythgoe also cited The X Factor, the rival singing competition created by Simon Cowell that had its premiere on Fox last fall. Presumably some viewers feel committed to The X Factor and Mr. Cowell instead of Idol. Fox had little choice but to broadcast The X Factor; Mr. Cowell would have taken it to another network if Fox had not bought it. The X Factor helped to juice Fox's fall lineup last year, and it's almost impossible to know what effect it has had on Idol this spring.

For now Idol remains No. 1 after 11 seasons, an accomplishment even rival network executives note with awe. But it will have to fight to stay there. The X Factor, with two new judges in Britney Spears and Demi Lovato, will rival The Voice again in the fall, leading to even more concern that viewers will tire of the star-search format.

Jess Cagle, managing editor of Entertainment Weekly, said he had seen evidence of Idol fatigue in the magazine's sales and Web traffic. While the show still does solid numbers for us online, it's no longer the juggernaut it once was, Mr. Cagle said. Online page views for Idol coverage this season are about half of what they were in 2010, he said.

So cue the talk of changes to Idol, just as there was a few years ago when the show's ratings started slipping. There is speculation that one Idol judge, Jennifer Lopez, will leave the show after this season, speculation aided by Ms. Lopez, who has said she has not decided whether to return. Fox has declined to comment.

Chase Carey, the chief operating officer of Fox's parent, News Corporation, reminded investors early this month that Idol was a big, valuable franchise and makes a lot of money. He added, We certainly think we've got a lot of life left in it. But this year, he suggested, the producers probably didn't do enough to make the show feel fresh.

They will do more next season, Mr. Lythgoe told reporters last week, though he had already ruled out one change: I've rejected the revolving chairs.

Bill Carter contributed reporting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/23/ar...levision<br />
post #79594 of 87879
Q&A
Ryan Murphy Dissects Glee and American Horror Story, Addresses Fans and Critics
By Denise Martin, New York Magazine's 'Inside TV' Blog - May 22, 2012

Ryan Murphy has never been known for keeping his schedule light. In addition to running Glee and American Horror Story, planning to direct a feature-film adaptation of Larry Kramer's AIDS drama The Normal Heart, and writing the all-star musical One Hit Wonders for pal Gwyneth Paltrow, Reese Witherspoon, and Cameron Diaz, he now will also run The New Normal, a new NBC comedy premiering this fall about a gay couple who decide they want to start a family. The show stars The Book of Mormon's Andrew Rannells and The Hangover's Justin Bartha alongside Ellen Barkin, who plays the bigoted, ultraconservative grandmother of their surrogate.

Somehow, in the midst of all that, he found time to sit down with us for a Vulture Transcript, an in-depth conversation covering everything from the "hard road" of making Glee (which concluded its season last night) and his plans for next season, to details of the next, sixties-set season of American Horror Story, to his response to those who think his shows blow up too fast.


Three TV shows and two movies how do you stay focused with so many ongoing projects?
I don't know how to answer that other than I just have a passion for all of them. They feed each other. I never get bored; I'm always excited. It just feels like a very circular gerbil wheel of creativity, to be quite honest. I started off as a journalist when I was young and I did not get paid unless I wrote three stories a day. So I was brought up with that mentality, that productivity was a good thing. And I do have a great support system and bosses who understand.

And will you be the showrunner for all three of your series?
Yes. I'm still the showrunner, but Brad Falchuk [co-creator and co-executive producer on Glee and American Horror Story] is working really closely with those writing staffs. And we're bringing on people to Glee who have run other shows, so that's very helpful. Ali Adler co-created The New Normal and has run and staffed many rooms before. That show also will have a very overexperienced staff that we're bringing on.

Last year, FX president John Landgraf told me what he loved so much about American Horror Story was that you had planned it as an anthology, which would keep things fresh and new for you. Is it a fair assessment to say that you like the beginnings of things best?
Certainly I am aware people say that about me, which I always find interesting and I guess I understand it ... well, yes and no. I would say for American Horror Story, I do like the freshness of that and I love that show because it's a miniseries; it's a beginning, middle, and end.

When you write stories 22 episodes a year, it's a daunting task. Even though Glee is sometimes a hard road, I am very excited about writing a multi-year arc. For example, Rachel Berry, meeting her as you did, hopefully by the end of her journey she will be a star. That's a very long, long period. That's harder, because you don't get instant satisfaction. But I know where she'll end up; I know what the last scene will be. The New Normal is also a really great template because I know the last scene of the first season is the birth of that baby. It's a five-year plan first season is about getting ready for the baby, second season is about the baby, the third season is like, We're in our ****ing mid-forties and we need to have another baby! New Normal is almost like a weird hybrid of Glee and American Horror Story. It's good for me to write to something in the long and the short term.

One of the things your critics say is that your shows have a supernova quality. They ignite and everyone's talking about them, and at some point they inevitably fall back to earth. Then those critics fall all over themselves saying, Yes! This is what we've said all along!
I suppose I get what that is about because the things that I have done so far in my career seem to have started with a big burst of attention. Magazine covers, awards, nominations all that stuff that you really can't create or control. So I get that by comparison the third season of Glee was maybe not as sexy and shiny and red hot as the other seasons. People said the same thing about Nip/Tuck and the fourth season wound up being its highest rated in that show's life of seven. I guess what I have learned is that people can say what they want to say, and I respect it. Everybody has a right to put people in a box or a niche because that's their job. I used to do that [as a journalist]. I don't think that's true about me, but time will tell.

At the beginning of this season of Glee, you said no big tributes, no guest stars. But the truth is, you began doing both in the second half of the season. What happened there? Do you feel pulled in both directions?
I don't feel that I'm pulled in those directions. And you know, the first season, which now everyone has put a halo on, did exactly that: We had guest stars, we had the Madonna tribute. .. I think the thing about the fan base is you can't take anything too personal because it all comes from a place of passion. There are some people who love the characters. There are other groups of people who love the spectacle. When you do the spectacle, the people who love the characters get pissed. **** them, why aren't they doing a Brittany and Santana story instead of a Michael Jackson celebration? Then when you do the opposite they're like, You know, where's the tribute to Frank Sinatra? This is ********. You just can't win. So I think you try to do the best that you can, and I really do respect the fans, because I think it's a young audience, and I think it's a very Internet-savvy audience. We care about the show and we care about the characters and the tributes, but it's a young, rollicking show by design. I get that sometimes people fall in and out of love with it in the course of two episodes.

It's also hard when you do a show that no one thought would work even the people who ran the network did not think it would work. Some of the critics thought it was gonna be five episodes then out. And I think that it's a show that the fans made. They found it, they loved it, they bought the music, they turned it into a phenomenon, they bought the tickets for those concert tours, they created the ability to do multi-platforms, they had a really strong proprietary grasp on it. I think the critics did, too, and I think a lot of the bloggers did. So whenever you have something like that, and then you evolve and you grow and you try different things and you experiment and you risk, [they say] We don't like it, go back to what you used to do. And then you say Well, we are kind of doing what we used to do, but I understand how you would see it was different.

I will say the story for season four gets back to the underdog status [for the characters] and that will appease people, maybe. Sometimes I feel that you can't win. It's just a volatile group of people that watch it, and for that, I like their passion. Anybody who's ever done a show about youth has told me they went through this exact same thing.

What did you think of Fox entertainment president Kevin Reilly saying next season would be a creative renaissance for the show at the network's upfront?
I don't think that Kevin was particularly a fan of what I was trying to do with the beginning of this season. We did an episode of all show tunes, we did several of them. There was the West Side Story thing that I loved, but I don't think the audience did. Kevin wants a Glee that's about Top 40, pop culture, big stars. So I know that he loved the end of this season, and I went and pitched him the next season and I think he loves it because it's very pop-culture-based. We're doing a great tribute right off the bat, another Britney Spears episode. Many of the characters will be starting over as underdogs, which is a good thing for the show. I really made an effort, talking to all the regulars about it.

What do you mean?
We had a meeting, and you know that we've become like a family, and I said to them anybody who wants to stay on the show will stay on the show. I asked all of them, What do you want to do? What are you interested in doing? That said, the show next year will have less characters than we've ever had and I think that's a good thing. But I don't think that you'll see a show that suddenly you don't recognize. A lot of people have been writing Dianna [Agron]'s off the show, Amber [Riley]'s off the show they're not off the show.

You know why they're saying that about Amber, though. Amber tweeted that she had closed a chapter of her life.
I think she was talking about a bittersweet feeling of, "I'll never be in the choir room with that exact group of people." At least that's what she told me. When I read that [tweet], I said, "I think people will misconstrue that. She's excited about where her character is going. They all are. I wanted to do the right thing by all of them. I think that was the problem in the media last year when people thought that I was getting rid of Lea [Michele], Cory [Monteith], and Chris [Colfer] because I couldn't talk about the spinoff. Oh, you're getting rid of my beloved characters? **** you, I hate you, how dare you.

I wanted the actors to know that if they wanted to have a home, they have a home. If they want to explore new and different things while having a home, that's also an option. When I told them about the next season, they liked it because they all get to grow and be back to struggling, [wondering] where is my place in the world. I think that the fans of the show will grow up with them.

What about Will Schuester? Do you feel like there are more stories to tell for him, especially since he's about to become happily married?
He doesn't get married.

Spoilers!
[Laughs.] We have really good things planned for Matt [Morrison], and we have really good things planned for Jane [Lynch]. What I like is they will no longer be playing the same stories. Jane needs to get a new enemy and fast. Same for Matt. Matt has to have a new challenge and a new thing. We did not want to repeat the formula we've done. The show will be very different, but I think very satisfying.

So, Jayma Mays, Mark Salling ... everyone is coming back?
They're all coming back. Anybody who was a regular is coming back. Everyone said yes. That doesn't mean everyone will be doing 22 episodes, but everybody wants to stay in our family, in our world. But there will never be a day where you'll see another Glee tour with all those same people. That won't happen.

What do you think of Glee moving to Thursdays after The X Factor?
I think it's a really great night of television. I love Britney. I think Britney's going to bring a lot of eyes to that screen and the flow of a musical show into a musical show is great. It's always what I wanted. I'd been begging for that for two years. I wanted to be on after American Idol or X Factor just because when I'm watching Idol, and I'm having a fun, young pop-culture experience, I don't want to watch a hard drama after. Thursday is going to be a night of pop-culture celebration for Fox. There's gonna be a lot of tie-ins that we're gonna do. I also love that we're gonna be at nine, which we were before, because I think we can go back to a little bit more [mature] writing. We're doing that.

Both Glee and your new show, The New Normal, are set in Ohio.
Well, I'm from Indiana. So to me when I was a little kid growing up, Cincinnati was the glamorous New York of it all. But after the first episode of The New Normal, everyone moves to L.A., so there's no more Ohio. The surrogate Goldie comes out to try and go to law school in L.A., and grandma isn't going to let her do that alone, so she also comes out. She's got a real estate license, so she's going to be selling condos. I really love Ellen Barkin's character Jane, this idea of women in their forties and fifties who are now single and having second lives.

Tell me about the inspiration for The New Normal. Series star Andrew Rannells said his character is based on you.
If I was much better looking and could be played by Andrew Rannells, yes. My partner David Miller and I have been talking about having a family for a year, and we've been going through some of that process. It's just fascinating, and I was telling [chairman of 20th Century Fox Television] Dana Walden about it and I thought it was a really great idea for a show. But there are a lot of other characters in that show who are not based on people in my life, people who are also going through the new normal. Georgia King (Little Dorrit) plays [Goldie the surrogate], a woman who wants to have a better life for her daughter.

What do you do when you're pregnant and you want a date? What do you do if you're Ellen Barkin's character and you've been single for a long time and you move to Los Angeles and have a one-night stand with a 25-year-old guy?
It's a lot of different ways of looking at families and the way our society is different now, thus the title. But that was my way in, certainly, my own story. I love that experience of going into a writers' room and saying, Oh my God, this happened to me last week, what do you think? and then working on that experience. That show is very personal to me.

You're engaged now. Are you still talking about having kids?
Yes, still talking about it. It's a long process. We've known each other for fifteen years, we've been together for two, but even like four years ago we started talking about, What if we had a baby as friends? So it's something that we've always been very interested in and what to do about it.

I think it's something that's definitely in the water in terms of society talking about it, and there's a lot of controversy with both pro and con sides to the story. All of that is addressed in the show. But you know it's also interesting to write and deal with somebody like Barkin's character, who is a staunch Republican, who is definitely going to vote for Mitt Romney, who is definitely not down with gay people, and definitely doesn't think gays should have a family. To articulate that in a dramatic scene that's interesting for me.

The New Normal is a half-hour, which isn't something you've tried before. Why now?
When I was growing up my favorite show was The Mary Tyler Moore Show, and I loved all the stuff that Norman Lear did. This show in a weird way is a salute and an homage to his work in that it's really about tackling social issues. The seminal childhood TV viewing experience for me was the episode of All in the Family where Edith almost got raped. Also on Maude, when Bea Arthur made the decision to have an abortion. I remember watching those shows and talking to my parents about them, and it was a way for my parents to talk about those things with me and feel comfortable doing it. So it really is something I've always loved since I was a kid, that form. I'm interested in doing a family show that presents difficult, sometimes controversial topics wrapped up in a very loving arena. This show is surprisingly gentle and very loving.

I'll admit that I read the script for the first episode and teared up a little bit.
I'm surprised how many times people watched that pilot and say how emotional they got watching it. It's about people who are looking for connections in life and about the power of family. There's something there for everybody, even conservatives.

Do you know a lot of conservatives?
I do know a lot of conservatives. I wouldn't say I hang out with a lot of them [laughs], but our writing staff is very diverse. In an election year, it's an interesting voice to get out. This season on Glee we had a Christian character, who very much stuck to his guns and did not have sex. I like doing those people and those voices and trying to remain true to them. The important thing about the Barkin character, and she feels this too, is that I really wanted her to be a modern-day Archie Bunker. That voice is not on television right now.

You're about to host a fund-raising dinner for President Obama, who just two weeks ago endorsed gay marriage. Is this dinner a result of that proclamation?
No. I was asked to do this dinner many, many months ago. I always have supported him. He made that statement the week the invitations were sent out, so it was interesting timing. What he's done has ignited a lot of passion and ignited his base and made people eager to work for him, to really work hard to get him reelected.

What do you serve when you host the president?
[Laughs.] I'm just in the middle of all that. I don't know yet, but his staff obviously has a large say in it. It's going to be 80 people coming to my house, and it's very exciting and an honor because I really believe in him.

To move on to your other show, American Horror Story was about marriage and infidelity set in a haunted house. What is the second season about?
It's set in an institution for the criminally insane that Jessica Lange's character runs, which is a really, really, really fun thing to do because you can write all these people locked up in it. And I guess if the first season was about infidelity, the second season is about sanity. What makes someone sane or insane? Sometimes the people you think are insane are actually the most sane of all. It's fun to write about people who society throws away.

I haven't said this publicly, but the new season is set in the sixties and Chloë Sevigny, for example, plays a character who was put in an asylum because she was a woman who likes sex, so her husband sends her away. At the time, you were able to put people away for that. Another character is institutionalized for being a lesbian. To me, there's nothing more scary than somebody coming to you and saying they're going to take you away and put you in a mad house and you have no legal rights and there you shall stay till the end of your days. That is a real horror. Everybody has felt people thinking, "You're ****ing crazy." Even somebody saying that to you is scary.

You've said the second season will be very much The Jessica Lange Show. Did you come up with the idea in response to how well she was received in the first season?
I actually had the idea first. I knew the first season was about a very contemporary haunted house, and I knew the second season was gonna be if we were lucky enough to be picked up about an insane asylum done in a very different way. I pitched it in the very beginning, and FX said, Good. We hope the first season works cause we love the second season. I even know what the third season would be. There are very, very many different kinds of haunted houses in our culture. And there are a lot of different social topics that you can weave through that sort of prism.

You've compared the way you're working with the same actors in the second season of American Horror Story with Orson Welles's Mercury Theatre. But are you concerned about viewers being able to adjust to seeing the same actors in new roles?
I think they will. I think that people will love seeing Evan Peters, who was last season's ultimate badass bad boy and this year is the hero of the show. It's not like the actors are playing similar parts. They're going to look different, they're going to sound different, they're going to have different accents. It's a different time period. The actors are so excited to do that and hopefully their enthusiasm will translate. I mean, I would pay to watch Jessica Lange read the phonebook. And she's so the opposite of Constance this year. Like, if she was the wilting Blanche DuBois character, there's not a shred of that now.

How aggressive are you in pursuing the talent you want for your projects? You wrote Madonna a love letter to get her catalogue for Glee and Lange has said on more than one occasion that you swept her off her feet.
Well, Chloë Sevigny is a perfect example where I had written this role that I really wanted her to play. I finagled a little and got her number, and I convinced her to meet with me and I said, I love you for the following reasons, these are the reasons why I think you should play this role, and I kinda won't take no for an answer, so please ... That's how I do the show: I call people and say I've always loved your work, you have to play this part. I'm passionate about actors and I'm passionate about showing actors in different lights. She's playing a really screwed-up but very important part that she's never played before, and I think she responded to the fact that somebody saw that in her and was interested in bringing something else out.

How did One Hit Wonders come together? And come on, is this really going to happen with that cast?
That was about Gwyneth Paltrow. Gwyneth had done Glee and loved it so much, and said, I really wish that I could have done what I did on Glee in a movie, but they don't write them anymore, and I said, Well, we should do that. You should be a producer. You should find a piece of material that you love, and you should be the boss. She called a couple of her friends, and came back to me and said they would also love to do a musical. So I came up with an idea and then we had a dinner and pitched them all and they loved it cause it's very raunchy.

That must have been some dinner.
It was literally like sitting with the spotlight on us because it was attack of the blondes. It was hilarious. Everyone was looking like, What the hell is going on at that table? because we were laughing and pitching. I obviously think the world of her. I would do anything for her. And it's true they don't write a lot of movie musicals, but this one is very contemporary. Andy Samberg is doing the music and playing a role. And we're doing it for a price, which is great. [Co-chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment] Amy Pascal really gets the importance of female stories. I think it's really important to have female producers in this town and female stories.

You've also got a star-studded cast for The Normal Heart, including Mark Ruffalo, Julia Roberts, Alec Baldwin, Jim Parsons, Matt Bomer ...
That is another passion project. I love Larry Kramer's advocacy and I love him as a person, and I think young people need to see that story. I came of age during AIDS and the terror of that and the sadness and the death and the overwhelming despair. I love the story of these guys coming together and saying okay, the government is not helping us, we need to do something. Larry has been writing the script for several months with me. The other day I wrote him and said, Were you ever scared? We need to do a scene about that. But he said, I was never scared, I was just angry. So, now there's a scene about that. It's a big privilege for me to talk to somebody who I feel is such a great, important historical figure. We're shooting it in two halves. We're shooting for four weeks, and then we'll go down and Matt has to lose like 25 pounds and then we'll resume.

So other than your own many projects, what are you obsessing over in pop culture right now?
You know what is really great? I love that Joss Whedon finally got that big, huge kickass hit [in The Avengers] that he has deserved for so long. I love him. [Editor's note: Whedon directed the Dream On episode in the first season of Glee.] Book of Mormon I continue to marvel over; Venus in Fur, because [Nina Arianda] is a big star. What else ... I love Girls on HBO, because it's brave and cool. I love The Walking Dead. I know it just ended but, yeah, I never miss an episode. It's the one show I always have to watch live.

People weren't into the first half of this season when the group was stuck on the farm, but if I were in a zombie apocalypse, I'd want to stay on the farm, too.
It's very hard for people after the first season to love you universally. Does that ever happen anymore?

I think because every episode gets reviewed now online.
True, true. I get that, yeah. When I started off with Nip/Tuck, I remember they would review the first episode and the last episode and that was it. They never, ever wrote about anything else. And usually those are two episodes where you put a lot of time and energy, so for the most part it was always pretty good for shows. But yeah, right now there's a much bigger spotlight on everything because of the Internet.

http://www.vulture.com/2012/05/ryan-...ror-story.html
post #79595 of 87879
TV Notes
Actor Michael McKean of Laverne & Shirley' struck by car on upper West Side in Manhattan
By Sarah Armaghan, New York Daily News - May 22, 2012

Actor Michael McKean, who starred in the film This is Spinal Tap and TV's Laverne and Shirley, was recovering Tuesday night in a Manhattan hospital after he was struck by a car on the upper West Side, police sources said.

McKean, 64, who played Lenny on the hit television show, was seen bleeding from the head after a car barreled into him at W. 86th St. and Broadway just before 3 p.m., witnesses and the FDNY said.

The actor, who also portrayed Spinal Tap's lead singer and guitarist David St. Hubbins in the cult classic This is Spinal Tap, was initially taken to St. Luke's Hospital in critical condition, fire officials said.

His status was upgraded to stable condition at the hospital where doctors discovered he had a broken leg, according to his publicist Harriet Sternberg.

He'll be okay, hopefully he'll be fine said Sternberg. It's pretty devastating.

McKean's wife, actress Annette O'Toole, was flying from Los Angeles where the couple also has a home to be by her husband's side, Sternberg said.

No criminality was suspected in the smash-up, according to police. Two other people were taken to the same hospital, although the extent of their injuries was unknown, officials said.

McKean was slotted to perform Wednesday night at 8 p.m. in his latest Broadway role as Dick Jensen in Gore Vidal's The Best Man at the Gerald Schoenfeld Theatre on W. 45th St., Sternberg said.

It's the first time he will have ever missed a curtain in his entire life, Sternberg said. He's never missed stage, screens in film or television. His understudy has never gone on in 40-plus years, she said.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.1082864
post #79596 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRinDenver View Post

That's the guy, and you are welcome. If you like his Spenser novels, you will enjoy the "Paradise" series with Jesse Stone. Selleck has done a much, much better job bringing the Jesse Stone character to the screen than anyone has ever done with the Spencer series (superior, IMP, to the JS series, but only on the printed page, or in your case, on audio playback!). BTW, "Spencer For Hire" was the title of only the ill-fated TV series of several years ago. The novels do not carry, nor are they burdened with, that label.

Oh, and the Parker estate has "authorized" a new Spenser novel out later this year. Critics say it captures Parker's style perfectly. We will see. I have ordered in on my Kindle. Hope to be pleasantly surprised.

So I went to my Audible account today [I didn't know they were aquired by Amazon] and as I mentioned, I have a couple of credits to spend. Each credit is worth an audiobook. So which Jessie Stone novels would you recommend as first offerings?
post #79597 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

Nielsen Notes (Cable)
CNN Hits 20-Year Weekday Primetime Low
By Dominic Patten, Deadline.com - May 22, 2012

The only ratings news CNN is getting lately is bad news. Last week, the cable news network had its lowest-rated weekday primetime in 20 years in terms of total viewers. From May 14-18, CNN averaged 395,000 viewers in primetime with Anderson Cooper's AC360 and Piers Morgan Tonight. The full seven days of last week was the third-lowest-rated full week in primetime since March 1997. Additionally, last Monday to Friday was also the network's fourth-lowest-rated weekday primetime week among adults 25-54. CNN scored just 111,000 viewers in the demo. CNN's previous worst weekly weekday primetime among adults 25-54 was May 15-21, 2000, when the network recorded 91,000 viewers among adults 25-54.

This ratings news comes less than a week after the network hit its lowest primetime among adults 18-49 in 15 years on May 15 with Pier Morgan Tonight. That followed a terrible April where CNN had its lowest-rated month in a decade.

http://www.deadline.com/2012/05/cnn-...primetime-low/

me thinks Mr. Morgan isn't going to come close to Larry King. Perhaps some moving around is in order. They need a new face and a new program. People are changing and CNN needs to be the face of that change if they are to stay relevant - especially with this being an election year.
post #79598 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahard View Post

Why would anyone pay money for something that is free? Even if Aero takes out the commercials why would someone pay $12 for that?

Some of us have no choice. I can't get anything except one Spanish channel and a kids channel OTA and neither one is something we'll watch.
post #79599 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

FCC Notes
The questions Genachowski should be asking about data caps
“Business model innovation is very important,” Genachowski said. “There was a point of view a couple of years ago that there was only one permissible pricing model for broadband. I didn’t agree.”

A bigger question is whether or not he agrees to practices that would exempt an ISP’s traffic from their own broadband cap, as Comcast is doing with its Xfinity service over the Xbox. And from a consumer point of view, a cap isn’t terrible in and of itself, but it can be a tool used to protect an ISP’s pay TV business or their profits absent robust competition in the market.

So even though Genachowski is in favor of new pricing models for broadband, it would be awesome if he started asking questions about how those caps are set and what impact they have on consumer behavior. Because it’s not like consumers have that much choice in their broadband provider.

So it's called 'business model innovation' when you're the only game in town and can impose anything you want on the customer to protect your business? While simultaneously exempting all of your own video delivery services from caps and tiered pricing?

The Rockefellers that founded Standard Oil would approve. I am appalled and saddened by the absolute cravenness of the FCC and Congress when it comes to meaningful wired broadband competition, and the fact that they are willing to look the other way every time a cableCo wants to take advantage of that situation.
post #79600 of 87879
TUESDAY's fast affiliate overnight prime-time ratings -and what they mean- have been posted on Analyst Marc Berman's Media INsight's Blog
post #79601 of 87879
Nielsen Overnights (18-49)
Final 'Idol' performance show dips by a third
But still the night's No. 1 program with a 4.2 in 18-49s
By Toni Fitzgerald, Media Life Magazine - May 23, 2012

The final performance episode of season 11 of "American Idol" fell steeply compared to last year, but it still did well enough to lift Fox to No. 1 on the penultimate night of sweeps.

"Idol" averaged a 4.2 adults 18-49 rating at 8 p.m., according to Nielsen, sliding 34 percent from a 6.4 for last year's last performance show.

"Idol" boosted lead-out "Glee" to its best rating since February, a 3.0, for its season finale, placing second in the 9 p.m. hour behind NBC's "America's Got Talent," which drew a solid 3.2.

"Idol" was the highest-rated show of the night among 18-49s but not in total viewers. That distinction went to ABC's "Dancing with the Stars," which also saw a big dip versus last year.

The "Stars" season finale averaged 17.5 million total viewers from 9 to 11 p.m., 3.1 million more than "Idol." That was down 18 percent from last year, when the "Stars" finale drew 21.4 million.

"Stars" averaged a 3.2 in 18-49s, down 30 percent from a 4.6 last year.

Fox finished first for the night among 18-49s with a 3.6 average overnight rating and a 10 share. ABC was second at 2.6/7, NBC third at 2.1/6, Univision fourth at 1.7/5, CBS fifth at 1.5/4, Telemundo sixth at 0.5/1 and CW seventh at 0.2/1.

As a reminder, all ratings are based on live-plus-same-day DVR playback, which includes shows replayed before 3 a.m. the night before. Seven-day DVR data won't be available for several weeks. Forty-four percent of Nielsen households have DVRs.

At 8 p.m. Fox led with a 4.2 for "Idol," followed by Univision with a 1.9 for "Una Familia con Suerte." NBC was third with a 1.6 for a repeat of "Talent," ABC fourth with a 1.3 for a "Stars" rerun, CBS fifth with a 1.1 for a repeat of "NCIS: Los Angeles," Telemundo sixth with a 0.6 for "Una Maid en Manhattan" and CW seventh with a 0.3 for a repeat of "Hart of Dixie."

NBC took the lead at 9 p.m. with a 3.2 for a new "Talent," while Fox slipped to second with the 3.0 for "Glee." ABC was third with a 2.9 for the first half of the "Stars" finale, Univision fourth with a 1.7 for "Abismo de Pasion," CBS fifth with a 1.6 for a repeat of "NCIS," Telemundo sixth with a 0.5 for "Corazon Valiente" and CW seventh with a 0.2 for "The L.A. Complex."

At 10 p.m. ABC was first with a 3.4 for more "Stars," with CBS second with a 1.8 for another hour of "NCIS." NBC and Univision tied for third at 1.6, NBC for "Dateline" and Univision for "La Que No Podia Amar," and Telemundo was fifth with a 0.4 for "Relaciones Peligrosas."

ABC led the night among households with a 9.5 average overnight rating and a 15 share. Fox was second at 6.5/10, CBS third at 5.8/9, NBC fourth at 4.0/6, Univision fifth at 2.2/3, Telemundo sixth at 0.7/1 and CW seventh at 0.4/1.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/art...by-a-third.asp
post #79602 of 87879
TV Notes
Mark Hudis To Succeed Alan Ball As True Blood' Showrunner, Inks HBO Overall Deal
By Nellie Andreeva, Deadline.com - May 22, 2012

EXCLUSIVE: True Blood co-executive producer Mark Hudis will take the reins of the hit HBO vampire drama if it gets renewed for a sixth season. With True Blood creator/executive producer Alan Ball stepping down as showrunner at the end of the upcoming fifth season, Hudis would be upped to executive producer/showrunner for Season 6 as part of an overall deal he has signed with HBO. The two-year pact also includes a development component.

Hudis has been on True Blood for the past two seasons last year's Season 4 and Season 5, which premieres June 10. While his and Ball's paths previously crossed on the CBS comedy series Cybill, where they co-wrote several episodes during the 1997-98 season, the two first met two decades ago working at trade publication AdWeek. UTA-repped Hudis' series credits also include Fox's That '70s Show and Showtime's Nurse Jackie. While leaving True Blood full-time after Season 5, Ball is staying in business with HBO through his overall deal there. He will continue to be involved in True Blood and also executive produces new series Banshee for HBO sibling Cinemax.

http://www.deadline.com/2012/05/mark...-overall-deal/
post #79603 of 87879
Business Notes
If Video Sites Could Act Like Cable Companies
By Brian Stelter, The New York Times - May 23, 2012

BOSTON Most consumers have no idea what an M.V.P.D. is, but they mail a check to one every month. What they call Comcast or Time Warner Cable or DirecTV, the government calls a multichannel video programming distributor, or M.V.P.D. for short.

When that mouthful of a phrase was coined decades ago, it was pretty easy to identify what was a multichannel distributor any cable or satellite company and just as important, what wasn't. But the Internet is changing that so profoundly, in fact, that the Federal Communications Commission is now rethinking even the definition of the word channel.

In a public comment period that ends in the coming weeks, the commission is asking whether the rules of multichannel distributors like the right to carry certain popular channels and the responsibility to carry some less popular ones should apply to new online distributors like Hulu and YouTube. If it decides that they should, then more companies could stream TV shows to computers and smartphones, hastening an industrywide shift to the Internet.

We recognize it's going to have very, very broad implications, said Austin Schlick, the F.C.C. general counsel, at a cable industry conference here on Tuesday.

Many companies are urging the F.C.C. to move carefully, citing the pace of change in the media industry. The Internet has already changed what it means to publish, mail and copy dictionaries certainly haven't been able to keep up.

We're barely into the second inning of how video distribution will ultimately work, said Will Richmond, the editor of VideoNuze, an online publication that covers the industry. Broadband delivery is leveling the playing field for new, deep-pocketed, over-the-top entrants to disrupt the traditional pay-TV model.

Going over the top means atop the Internet infrastructure provided by companies like Comcast. Somebody's going to come over the top and sell a package of cable channels via the Internet at some point, David M. Zaslav, the chief executive of Discovery Communications, predicted at the conference on Monday. He did not name any names, but Apple, Google, Sony and Intel, among others, have all at least considered such an offering.

Those companies could theoretically give consumers new ways to buy bundles of programming, breaking open the cable model though an incumbent cable or telecommunications company would most likely still need to provide Internet access.

A change to the definition of multichannel distributor could make it easier for the companies to acquire programming, analysts say which may explain why the incumbents have opposed any such change.

This notion was tested a few years ago when a Christian media company called Sky Angel tried to add Mr. Zaslav's Discovery Channel to the lineup of family-friendly channels that it sells over the Internet. Discovery did not want to sell, but if Sky Angel were legally deemed a multichannel distributor, it would have had to, under current rules.

The F.C.C. staff initially sided with Discovery, but Sky Angel persisted and this spring, the commission decided to ask for input. That is when the panel asked for input: in this day and age, how should we be defining M.V.P.D. and channel, anyway?

Suddenly, television executives and public interest lobbyists were doubling as lexicographers. If the F.C.C. comes out the right way on this, it would make it possible for online services like Sky Angel to easily carry popular cable channels and broadcast TV, said John Bergmayer, a staff lawyer for the public interest group Public Knowledge. Video distribution could become much more diverse Sky Angel is a Christian service, after all, and there's no reason different groups shouldn't be able to buy TV services tailored to their needs.

Mr. Bergmayer said Public Knowledge wanted the F.C.C. policies to enable more competition and demonstrate that new entrants are welcome to try to reach viewers.

Major distributors like Comcast and Time Warner Cable want the definition of M.V.P.D. to remain rather narrow, to include only those who provide the transmission path for programming, like themselves.

Some broadcasters, however, want the definition to be broadened to include online video sites, because then the sites would be subject to the same rules as cable operators, called retransmission consent, and would have to pay fees for their station signals. A number of online TV start-ups, including the Barry Diller-backed Aereo, are trying to sidestep these rules.

Jack Perry of Syncbak, which helps stations simulcast their signals on the Web, said his company would be able to grow more rapidly if the F.C.C. adopted a 21st-century definition of M.V.P.D.'s.

The impact could be huge, he said. Still other stakeholders, including trade groups that represent giants like Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Netflix, have said that the F.C.C. should take more time before deciding.

In one of many such letters to the F.C.C., the Motion Picture Association of America cautioned that even small changes to video programming regulations can have a far-reaching impact.

All this over a four-letter abbreviation proof that every step toward online TV will be done with care.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/23/bu...i3p9xDyA<br />
post #79604 of 87879
TV Sports
Beadle on Andrews: 'I don't even know the person'
By Michael Hiestand, USA Today - May 22, 2012

If an asteroid hits the earth, as least there'll be more space in cyberspace to cover it now that Michelle Beadle on Monday finally officially moved from ESPN and landed at NBC.

In a telephone interview with USA TODAY Sports on Monday, the online it girl suggested she found all the typed-out attention to her career more than puzzling.

"I find it ridiculous. It's a little stupid," Beadle said. "I've changed jobs a couple dozen times since I started in an amusement park at 16. … I got a little sick of myself. It's been an odd situation. Hopefully, it will come and go and everybody will get back to their business. Very weird. Who knew?"

But the deal with NBC Sports and NBC-owned Access Hollywood syndicated show was a big deal personally.

"I'm 36 and I knew whatever I signed next would be a threeish-year deal. If I was 25, you'd have time to play with. You know, with high-def TV, women get the short end of the stick."

OK, whatever. Here's what we really want to know: Will Beadle, in this column, issue some sort of smackdown challenge to ESPN's other it girl, Erin Andrews?

As anybody who's ever Googled knows, they're supposedly feuding. "Oh, wouldn't that be great for everyone? I don't even know the person," Beadle said. "We're very different. I don't hang around in the same circles. Maybe it's because she's another blond girl in the business. I guess everybody loves a good catfight. That was fun."

Beadle will co-host ESPN2's SportsNation weekday talk show until May 31, then move from ESPN in Bristol, Conn., to Manhattan.

She'll start at NBC in mid-June and she'll do "anything they ask me to do — I'm super-excited." On Access, the former host of shows such as Travel Channel's Beach Week, Discovery Channel's Get Packing and Fine Living Network's I Want Your Job will work big-event red carpets. For NBC Sports, she'll pop up on horse racing's Triple Crown and NFL Kickoff coverage. For both outlets this summer, she'll file reports from London from her first Olympics. She doesn't know exactly what she'll do for the NBC Sports Network cable channel, but she has an idea: "I feel like they should let me juggle for 30 minutes and throw to whatever's next."

Unlike some past ESPN refugees, Beadle is careful not to bash placid Bristol and says at ESPN "for the first time in my life I truly loved the people I worked with." She simply wanted to do both sports and show biz TV, "and it's hard for (ABC/ESPN) to compete (with NBC) on the entertainment side. It's not their fault."

And she's a "big fan of New York" and succinct about her plans for The City That Never Stops Talking: "Sushi every night! Yoo-hoo!"

ESPN's CharissaThompson is expected to replace Beadle on SportsNation to co-host with Colin Cowherd, who has an option in his ESPN contract to leave the show by year's end. But Beadle suggests the show could go on: "You know, something is working the way they have it now. I know it's beaten into our heads (at ESPN) that we're all replaceable. It looks like Charissa will take my place. I told her people will forget my name in a week."

Probably not. NBC's formal release Monday had a minor miracle: In one of English's most bloodless genres, Beadle managed to be quoted saying she will be "trying to kick ass" in her new job. Not a bad start.

Pioneer: Pam Ward, first reported by Sports Illustrated's Richard Deitsch, was pulled off ESPN's college football coverage. Spokesman Mike Humes noted the play-by-play announcer was "a trailblazing voice" and will still call college softball and basketball and the WNBA.

Ward, in recent seasons, seemed to be falling down the depth charts of ESPN college football announcers. But she'll matter more in the long run. Starting in 2000, Ward became the first female to call college football on national TV.

Ward broke through the circular logic that prohibited women from calling college football. They couldn't be college football analysts — who, in the formula, have to be former players or coaches — and couldn't do big-time play-by-play because they hadn't worked their way up the ranks. Except they couldn't really work their way up the ranks because women weren't TV football announcers.

ESPN now has one female —Beth Mowins— left on college football. But Ward was the ultimate TV sports walk-on.

Box office: Weekend TV ratings were down, compared to last year, for Fox's MLB action and its UEFA soccer final and for NBC's NHL playoffs. The weekend's top draw — ABC's Miami Heat-Indiana Pacers NBA playoff game — drew 5.9% of households in the 56 urban markets used for overnights, down 9% from comparable coverage of a Los Angeles Lakers-Dallas Mavericks game last year.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colum...121958/1<br />
post #79605 of 87879
Nielsen Notes
NBC, with Bob Greenblatt at helm, to snap 8-year ratings losing streak
By Scott Collins, Los Angeles Times' 'Show Tracker' Blog - May 23, 2012

It looks as if NBC's long ratings nightmare may be over.

NBC Entertainment Chairman Bob Greenblatt is poised to end his first full TV season on the job with the network No. 3 in the key demographic of adults aged 18 to 49, according to Nielsen. The last night of the 2011-12 season is Wednesday.

That would be the first time that NBC has avoided a last-place finish for a TV season since 2004. In other words, many eons ago in the world of TV.

NBC looks set to earn a 2.5 rating in 18-49 for prime time, compared to a 2.4 for ABC. Fox, meanwhile, will finish first, with CBS No. 2. Among all viewers, CBS will win for the ninth time in 10 years.

However, there is a small asterisk to NBC's creep past ABC. The Super Bowl, which set ratings records in February, is really what made the difference. Without it, NBC would be on track for a 2.3 rating -- and thus would have been in the dog house yet again. Most of Greenblatt's scripted series this season, it should be noted, quickly tanked.

But as in politics and in sports, glory goes to the person who happens to be sitting in the executive chair when it arrives. And that means Greenblatt can chalk this one up in his "save" column.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/show...ng-streak.html
post #79606 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbiscuit View Post

So it's called 'business model innovation' when you're the only game in town and can impose anything you want on the customer to protect your business? While simultaneously exempting all of your own video delivery services from caps and tiered pricing?

The Rockefellers that founded Standard Oil would approve. I am appalled and saddened by the absolute cravenness of the FCC and Congress when it comes to meaningful wired broadband competition, and the fact that they are willing to look the other way every time a cableCo wants to take advantage of that situation.

And for those who are still delusional about caps being a legitimate need, hear it right from the horse's mouth,

Quote:


David Cohen, executive vice president for Comcast, said the company has no intention to raise prices on its existing tiers of service. On a conference call with reporters after the announcement, he said that the new policy was meant to free its users from the worry of having their service cut off.

"We didn't like the message that we were giving our customers with the static 250GB cap," he said. "Now, we are sending a signal to our customers that we want them to use our broadband service and to feel free to use it for all lawful purposes. We want them to subscribe to Netflix and stream YouTube and use Skype to their heart's content without worrying about hitting some artificial data cap that results in them losing their service."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-574...nd-who-loses/?



Data caps have never, ever, been about controlling line congestion, they have ALWAYS been about limiting access to content, content that competes directly with an ISP's own offerings.
post #79607 of 87879
By Alex Sherman on May 23, 2012

Time Warner Cable Inc. Chief Executive Officer Glenn Britt says not everything on cable is worth watching.

“There are too many networks,” Britt said in an interview at the National Cable & Telecommunications Association annual cable show in Boston.

For years, U.S. cable carriers have provided TV in large chunks, pushing up the average monthly price to about $80 as even the cheapest packages have ballooned to include hundreds of channels. The increase in the number of little-watched channels, which content providers often sell to cable companies only in bundles with more popular networks, is causing cable bills to rise without any customer benefit, Britt said.

“There are a lot of general-interest networks that have lower viewership, and the industry would take cost out of the system if they shut those networks down and offered lower prices to consumers,” he said. “The companies involved would make just as much money as they do now because of the costs.”

Content providers, including Walt Disney Co., Viacom Inc., Discovery Communications Inc. and AMC Networks Inc., structure deals with cable carriers that bundle many of their networks together. To get AMC, with popular shows such as “Mad Men” and “The Walking Dead,” pay-TV companies also need to buy AMC Networks’ IFC, Sundance Channel and WE tv.

That structure allows the content providers to boost the number of households that receive the less-watched channels -- on which the networks then sell advertising and receive carriage fees from pay-TV operators. Many customers wouldn’t subscribe to those less-popular networks if they were able to pay separately for each channel.

Increasing ‘Diversity’
Britt says the only way networks will be eliminated is if a “courageous” media CEO agreed to offer popular networks to cable providers without forcing them to pay for other channels that aren’t as highly watched. Britt didn’t name the networks he said should be shut down and said some stations with lower viewership are beneficial if they attract a loyal following.

Josh Sapan, CEO of AMC Networks, said he doesn’t believe there are too many networks because they enhance the diversity of thought and ideas.

“The growth of the cable TV industry has gone hand in hand with the diversity of networks out there,” Sapan said in an interview. “Certain networks that may have been thought to be niche have, over time, proven to be potent and popular.”

It’s important to give networks the time to evolve, said Sapan, citing AMC’s progression from airing old movies to featuring Emmy-award-winning dramas such as “Mad Men” and “Breaking Bad.”

Time Warner Cable, the second-largest U.S. cable provider, fell 1.6 percent to $74.98 at 2:27 p.m. New York time.

‘Bloated’
Coleman Breland, the chief operating officer of Time Warner Inc.’s Turner Network Sales, agreed with Britt and said networks like his own should begin to rethink the issue. Time Warner Cable was spun off from Time Warner in 2009.

“The elevator’s full, there’s no more room,” Breland said. “It’s something content providers have to deal with. The system is bloated.”

Basic cable customers must navigate through hundreds of channels even if they watch only 10 or 15, a problem American Cable Association president Matthew Polka says he’s been fighting for years.

“It used to be that programmers sold on the merits of the substance of their channels,” Polka said. “Now that so many programmers are large conglomerates, customers lose choice.”

Time Warner Cable, based in New York, is working on an improved user interface with better search functionality to help customers navigate through programs, Britt said. The new guide may be available by the end of the year, he said.

Comcast Corp., the largest U.S. cable provider, will introduce a Web-connected TV guide May 30 in Boston and make it available in hundreds of thousands of households this year.

Usage-Based Pricing
Another way to lower customers’ bills is to offer usage- based pricing for services such as Internet access, Britt said. The company is already letting light Internet users in southern Texas pay for broadband by the amount they consume. Customers that use less than 5 gigabytes a month -- the equivalent of streaming two high-definition full-length movies -- save $5 on their bill by opting out of an unlimited plan.

Time Warner Cable may eventually offer many pricing tiers, on the basis of the amount of data consumed, though an unlimited option will also remain an option for consumers, Britt said. Julius Genachowski, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, yesterday reiterated his support for usage-based pricing.

Britt also said Time Warner Cable may make another acquisition in the managed Internet-services business to enhance its business-services division. The company purchased NaviSite Inc. last year to help support e-mail, data security and storage capability for business customers.

To contact the reporter on this story: Alex Sherman in New York at asherman6@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Nick Turner at nturner7@bloomberg.net

http://www.businessweek.com/printer/...type=bloomberg
post #79608 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nayan View Post

Some of us have no choice. I can't get anything except one Spanish channel and a kids channel OTA and neither one is something we'll watch.

Ok. But you would pay $12 dollars instead of going to the network's website and watching it for free?
post #79609 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahard View Post

Ok. But you would pay $12 dollars instead of going to the network's website and watching it for free?

But then you'd be missing local programming, syndicated shows, and a good deal of sports.
post #79610 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul View Post

But then you'd be missing local programming, syndicated shows, and a good deal of sports.

Yep, no sports is a deal killer for me. I need and love my sports! And quite honestly it would cost me more to dump cable and just keep my internet than what I pay now. Did I mention I love sports?
post #79611 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

TV Notes
Wednesday’s Highlights: 'Modern Family' on ABC
By Los Angeles Times' 'Show Tracker' Blog - May 22, 2012

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Benson and Amaro (Mariska Hargitay, Danny Pino) are cautioned to tread carefully when investigating the death of an underage escort at a bachelor party, as there were some big names on the guest list. A former colleague (Dean Winters), who’s now working under cover helps the investigation in the season finale (10 p.m. NBC).

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/show...ly-on-abc.html

Can't wait

Have a good dinner and sit back to enjoy.

Gotta exercise for 1.5 hours first
ha
post #79612 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleron Ives View Post

This is why I will never subscribe to a paid TV system. Commercials exist to support OTA TV, and if I'm paying a monthly fee, I won't tolerate them. I never even watch the ones from broadcast shows, since recording the shows enables the ability to skip over the interruptions.

As for the networks' rage over Dish's new automatic commercial skipping feature, since the DVR only works with Dish systems, they shouldn't really be complaining, as commercials exist to support OTA TV, which the DVR won't record. They should just stop embedding commercials in the program streams for Dish customers completely and have Dish raise its subscription fee. Viewers get their commercial-free viewing, and the networks get their money. IIRC cable essentially used this model when it was first introduced, but it started incorporating advertisements as soon as it became clear that the subscribers would tolerate them. Returning to the advertisement-free model would, of course, only happen around the same time paid TV services start offering À la carte channel options, which will require them to become far more starved for revenue than they are currently.

I think anyone who believes that the networks can survive on OTA ad revenue alone is naive. Eliminate ads on cable/sat, take those eyeballs out of the equation, and you'd see ad rates plummet and network offerings/quality, such as they are, also plummet. Cable/sat viewers subsidize OTA viewership as well as "free" internet viewing, etc. Keep believing that you'd be able to continue viewing what you do without those of us willing (or stupid enough) to pay ridiculous cable/sat bills.
post #79613 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahard View Post

Why would anyone pay money for something that is free? Even if Aero takes out the commercials why would someone pay $12 for that?

If you are talking about cable/sat subscribers, we don't "choose" to pay for free TV. We choose to pay for everything else cable/sat offers. We have NO choice but to ALSO pay for local channels.
post #79614 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahard View Post

Ok. But you would pay $12 dollars instead of going to the network's website and watching it for free?

And if everyone did that, how long do you think it would be "free?" There are already some sites that require a cable/sat account for you to watch content online and I suspect more are on the way. There is no such thing as free TV, just those who benefit from others paying for cable/sat and buying advertised items.
post #79615 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDAZ View Post

I think anyone who believes that the networks can survive on OTA ad revenue alone is naive. Eliminate ads on cable/sat, take those eyeballs out of the equation, and you'd see ad rates plummet and network offerings/quality, such as they are, also plummet. Cable/sat viewers subsidize OTA viewership as well as "free" internet viewing, etc. Keep believing that you'd be able to continue viewing what you do without those of us willing (or stupid enough) to pay ridiculous cable/sat bills.

But only a tiny, tiny percentage of your "ridiculously high" cable bill goes to the network that actually create the programming. Most retrans fees go to network affiliates, and the networks get a small cut.

I read an article that states NBC only received a paltry 21 million in retrans fees in 2011, mostly from stations it owns (but that is expected to up an order of magnitude in 5 years). Consider there are roughly 100 million US households with cable. Each paying about $1000 a year for it. 21 million out of 100 billion ain't much. The networks still make the overwhelming majority of their money from ads. They want as many eyes watching their channel as they can get.
post #79616 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul View Post

But only a tiny, tiny percentage of your "ridiculously high" cable bill goes to the network that actually create the programming. Most retrans fees go to network affiliates, and the networks get a small cut.

I read an article that states NBC only received a paltry 21 million in retrans fees in 2011, mostly from stations it owns (but that is expected to up an order of magnitude in 5 years). Consider there are roughly 100 million US households with cable. Each paying about $1000 a year for it. 21 million out of 100 billion ain't much. The networks still make the overwhelming majority of their money from ads. They want as many eyes watching their channel as they can get.

Yes, I realize the direct dollar amount is pretty small. That's why I included the eyeballs and ad-rate calculation comments.
post #79617 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDAZ View Post

If you are talking about cable/sat subscribers, we don't "choose" to pay for free TV. We choose to pay for everything else cable/sat offers. We have NO choice but to ALSO pay for local channels.

For some cable or satellite customers "everything else cable/sat offers" includes watchable delivery of broadcast channels where the OTA reception is inadequate or nonexistent.

For some it pretty much consists of that, as it did for me at one time.  We (admittedly, I'm no longer among them, as now I watch some non-OTA fare as well) have no choice except also to pay for cable/satelliete channels.

My first cable account was solely for getting OTA channels at an apartment facing away from the transmitters, where my indoor antenna was impotent.
post #79618 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDAZ View Post

And if everyone did that, how long do you think it would be "free?" There are already some sites that require a cable/sat account for you to watch content online and I suspect more are on the way. There is no such thing as free TV, just those who benefit from others paying for cable/sat and buying advertised items.

I've had folks tell me to watch ESPN3 since it's free 'for them' and then I can dump cable. Well, my provider requires you to have ESPN through their system in order to watch it, same with Speed 2, and a couple other sports channels. So, no it's not really free.
post #79619 of 87879
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDAZ View Post

If you are talking about cable/sat subscribers, we don't "choose" to pay for free TV. We choose to pay for everything else cable/sat offers. We have NO choice but to ALSO pay for local channels.

Just as those of us who abhor paying for ESPN and all the other sports crap. And I'll bet that adds more to our bill than the OTA stuff. Just my guess.
post #79620 of 87879
TV Sports
NBCU Plans More Than 5,000 Hours of Olympics Coverage
By Tim Molloy, TheWrap.com - May 23, 2012

The days of a few hours of tape-delayed Olympics coverage at night are over.

NBCUniversal announced Wednesday that it plans 5,535 hours of coverage for the 2012 London Olympics -- compared to 2,000 hours of coverage for the 2008 Beijing Olympics -- spread across its vast media empire.

In one sign of how much that empire has expanded, and how important cable and online viewing has become, NBCU's Telemundo will air almost as much coverage in Spanish as NBC did in English for the entire 1996 Atlanta Olympics. Telemundo plans 173 hours, compared to 176.5 hours for NBC in 1996.

This time, NBC will air 272.5 hours of Olympics coverage, the most of any broadcast network, largely because of increased daytime coverage. NBCU's coverage will also include tennis on Bravo, boxing on CNBC, and a special platform for 3D.

Olympics coverage will also air across the NBC Sports Network, MSNBC, NBCOlympics.com, two specialty channels, and its first-ever 3D platform.

“We are only able to provide this level of coverage to U.S. viewers because of the unmatched array of NBCUniversal assets,” said Mark Lazarus, chairman of NBC Sports Group. “Whether on television or online, on broadcast or cable, in English or in Spanish, NBCUniversal has the London Olympics covered, providing the American viewer with more choices than ever to watch the Games.”

Here are some of the coverage plans NBC announced in a news release Wednesday:

-NBCU will provide coverage of all 32 sports and all 302 medal competitions

-NBC will broadcast 272.5 hours of London Olympic coverage over 17 days, nearly 50 hours more than the 225 hours for Beijing in 2008.

-Daytime coverage will begin on most weekdays at 10 a.m. ET/PT, immediately following NBC News’ "Today," which will originate from London.

-Weekend daytime coverage will begin as early as 5 a.m. ET/PT.

-NBC Sports Network will be the home of U.S. team sports, with 292.5 hours of total coverage, including 257.5 hours of original programming, the most ever for an Olympic cable network.

-CNBC will serve as the home of Olympic boxing, including the debut of women's boxing. It will televise 73 hours of coverage over 16 days, from elimination bouts to the men’s and women’s finals.

-Bravo will televise 56 hours of long-form tennis coverage from July 28 to Aug. 3.

-NBCOlympics.com will live stream every event and sport, for the first time ever. The site will live stream more than 3,500 total programming hours, including the awarding of all 302 medals.

-NBCOlympics.com will live stream NBCU cable channels NBC Sports Network, MSNBC, CNBC and Bravo, only making them available to authenticated cable, satellite or telco customers.

-Two apps -- one focused on live streaming, one on highlights, schedules, results, columns, and more -- will be available for mobile and tablet users.

-Specialty channels for basketball and soccer will be available to cable, satellite and telco providers, and will total 770 hours of coverage.

-As announced in January, Panasonic and NBC Sports will make the Games available in 3D to all U.S. distributors who carry Olympic coverage on cable, satellite and telco. They will provide 242 hours of 3D coverage. -- nearly 100 percent of the multichannel industry.

-MSNBC will carry 155.5 hours of long-form Olympic programming, including up to 18 medal rounds and 20 sports, from badminton to basketball to soccer to wrestling.


NBCUniversal’s 2012 London Olympic coverage begins on MSNBC on Wednesday, July 25 -- two days before the Opening Ceremony -- when Great Britain faces New Zealand in women’s soccer, the first official competition of the Games. The game will air live from Millennium Stadium in Cardiff, Wales beginning at 10:30 a.m. ET/7:30 a.m. PT.

http://www.thewrap.com/tv/article/nb...coverage-41241
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information