Short Takes – July 30, 2007

Well this at least I'll be able to get out on time – or at least right now it looks like I'll be able to get it out on time – which means I can finally get back onto something like a schedule. Writing to deadline was never a strong suit of mine, even at the University of Saskatchewan. Now let's get on with the week's news and my opinions.

This is News?: All of the network news divisions seem to be out to redefine their prime time News shows and their News divisions. NBC is devoting a considerable portion of their Dateline NBC shows to the To Catch A Predator shows (a concept that I truly abhor – see below), while CBS long since converted their show 48 Hours (which I liked) into 48 Hours Mysteries (which I don't). However the News division which has adopted the most "flexible" definition of "News" is undoubtedly ABC. A couple of years ago (IMDB says 2004 but my records say the summer of 2005) ABC had a "documentary" called Hooking Up that was supposed to be a documentary about women looking for love and finding dates/relationships online. This pseudo-documentary came from ABC News. Now, ABC News is producing a "documentary" called 6 Degrees of Martina McBride in which aspiring country music singers who can prove some sort of "connection" to Country superstar Martina McBride in six moves or less – a la the 6 Degrees Of Kevin Bacon game – will get a studio session with McBride and the best will get a recording deal. The special airs on July 30, and it's a vaguely interesting subject (but I'll be watching Hell's Kitchen. According to an article in the Chicago Tribune ABC News Division executive producer David Sloane said that the show is "a serious examination of business school management theory." It's all part of Sloan's philosophy about News: "My definition [of news] is limitless. I think we constantly have to explore different places at the table for news. Just like you guys [in newspapers]. You have a front page. You have a [features] section. You have an entertainment section. You have a page 47. You have page 3. I think we're looking for new ways of engaging the viewer. I'm really all about that." In my book, while 48 Hours Mysteries and To Catch A Predator at least have the patina of news, Sloan's advocacy of shows like 6 Degrees of Martina McBride blurs the lines between News and Entertainment to virtual non-existence, and from a network that lauded the legacy of Peter Jennings this is disappointing to say the least.

Musical showrunners: Well not quite – that assumes that the people involved are swapping jobs in some sort of bizarre daisy chain which isn't what's happening here. What has happened is that Rob Thomas, who was creator and showrunner for Veronica Mars became showrunner for ABC's Miss/Guided when Veronica Mars was cancelled, left his new show after a month. The reason given was "creative differences." Apparently Thomas wasn't entirely happy with the decision to make the show "more of a straight-ahead comedy." The other departure is former Angel co-creator David Greenwalt, who left the CBS show Moonlight after two months in which every role except the lead had been recast. According to the Hollywood Reporter Greenwalt's departure is due to "personal, health reasons."

Comebacks, of sorts: Three shows and an actor to be exact, although the nature of the returns are not necessarily in the form that they previously held.

• ReBoot was a groundbreaking computer animated series from Mainframe Entertainment which ran from 1994 to 2001 (and was one of my favourite series). The series had trouble finding an American network and when it did occasionally ran into censorship problems. Mainframe, now known as Rainmaker Entertainment after being acquired by Rainmaker Income Fund, will be producing three feature length films to relaunch the franchise. One thing that I find vaguely worrying is that Rainmaker will be working with the website Zeros2Heroes to allow fans of the show to choose between five "completely new takes on the ReBoot world" as created by five previously unknown writers.
  
• Another show that will be returning as films will be Futurama. It was announced at ComicCon that the show will return as a full-length high-def movie called Bender's Big Score that will be sold on DVD. This will be followed by a further three films. The four movies will then be split into four half-hour episodes each (16 in total) to be aired on Comedy Central.
  
• Also at ComicCon, Joss Whedon revealed that Anthony Stewart Head will be returning to the role of Rupert Giles in a movie for the BBC called Ripper. The project had actually been planned as a miniseries during the latter period of Buffy The Vampire Slayer's run but it was apparently difficult for the parties involved to come to an agreement. In 2005 Whedon had said of the project, "it's something I really want to get off the ground, but the ground is kinda sticky."
  
• Finally (and this is a strange one) Rory Cochrane will be returning to the cast of CSI: Miami playing his original character of Tim Speedle. You may recall that Speedle died in an episode of the show's second season, at Cochrane's request because he disliked the "daily grind" and wanted to do more film work. However he later expressed his displeasure in the way that Speedle was written out of the show; his pistol misfired because he hadn't been diligent in cleaning it. A CBS spokesman confirmed to E! News that Cochrane will be returning to the show. There was no explanation of how the character will return except in this remark from the CBS spokesman: "He will be reprising the role of Tim Speedle and it's not a flashback. He will be interacting with his old partner and friend, Eric Delko (Adam Rodriguez)." This has led to a lot of speculation of how the character can return after having his brains spilled over a jewelry store floor; one popular theory is a faked death and witness protection. However there may be a clue in the CBS spokesman's statement – "He will be interacting with his old partner and friend, Eric Delko." It doesn't say that he'll be interacting with any of the other characters on the show. This lead me to think that seeing Speedle will be a symptom of Delko own brain injury, suffered when the character was shot in the season which ended this past May. It makes as much sense as any other theory.
  

To Catch A Predator sued – twice: NBC's Dateline NBC has a major sensation with their To Catch A Predator episodes, but they may have gone too far. The show and NBC have been sued by the family of Louis Conradt who committed suicide after being confronted by police and NBC journalists at his home in Terell Texas. According to a Reuters report on the suit, Conradt had been targeted after he arranged to meet a "13 year-old boy" at a house in Marshall Texas. However Conradt did not actually go to the house. The "13 year-old boy" was in fact a member of the private vigilante group Perverted Justice posing as a child. When Conradt did not appear at the house, police and members of the NBC team travelled to his home, Conradt admitted them and then shot himself. The lawsuit, brought by his sister Patricia Conradt on behalf of his estate claims that the NBC team "steamrolled" local authorities to arrest the retired district attorney. To quote from the article, "The lawsuit said police and members of the Dateline crew traveled to Conradt's house 'with neither a search warrant nor an arrest warrant' that met legal standards. Both police officers and other members of the party were wearing cameras ... very large cameras, on the cutting edge of technology, that normally are worn only by television reporters,' the lawsuit said. 'They were met by (Conradt). He told them "I'm not gonna hurt anyone" and shot himself. Then a police officer said to a Dateline producer, "That'll make good TV." Death was an hour later,' it said."

This is not the first suit faced by NBC in connection with the To Catch A Predator series. According to The Smoking Gun former NBC producer Marsha Bartel has sued for wrongful dismissal after she was fired by NBC News less than six months after she became sole producer of the series. Bartel's firing came after she complained that the show violated journalistic ethics in a number of ways and many of NBC's own journalistic guidelines. These included the financial relationship between NBC and Perverted Justice that represents a "financial incentive to lie to trick targets of its sting", and that "Perverted Justice does not provide 'complete transcripts from its trolling operations,' so network officials 'cannot independently verify the accuracy' of the group's transcripts." She further stated in her suit that NBC has covered up various things about the To Catch A Predator stings including leading sting targets "into additional acts of humiliation (such as being encouraged to remove their clothes) in order to enhance the comedic effect of the public exposure of these persons", and police officers acting improperly when working with the NBC crew including "goofing off by waving rubber chickens in the faces of sting targets while forcing them to the ground and handcuffing them." When Bartel complained about controversial statements made by Perverted Justice founder David Corvo she was told by higher ups at Dateline NBC and NBC News, "We all know they're nuts." Bartel is seeking at least $1 million in her suit.

I may be alone in this but I find this whole To Catch A Predator concept to be a dangerous step down an incredibly dangerous slope. This is dangerous in so many ways. Start with this one – by partnering with Perverted Justice, NBC isn't reporting the news they are creating the news and doing it in such a way that violates virtually every journalistic standard. This isn't like the FOX series Cops which has documentary crews riding along with police officers, this is NBC subsidizing a private organization using potentially unethical means to target people. Does NBC's involvement taint the court process for the people that are caught – you know the ones who actually expect to have an untainted jury pool and a fair trial. The details of the Conradt case are even more egregious. The fact that he did not visit the "sting house", regardless of the reason – he apparently intended to go but his sister came to visit before he was going to leave – makes it questionable whether the police could have obtained either an arrest warrant or even a search warrant. In the normal course of events – like if this were a police sting rather than one set up by a private organization at the behest of a TV network – the procedure would probably have been to set up another meeting at a different time and location. But because of the involvement of the TV show and its limited time in the region – and no doubt because Conradt was a prominent member of the community that NBC and Perverted Justice wanted to out as a pedophile because of his prominence – little niceties like warrants and burden of proof were set aside. Based on comments in other forums, a lot of people don't find this particularly troubling, and a lot of people seem disappointed that more of the alleged pedophiles caught by Dateline don't take the route Conradt did (and some seem to think that they should be given some "help" with the process). For myself, between the questionable legal situation, the violation of journalistic ethics, the apparent targeting of some people because of their prominence in the community (the way they went after Conradt), and the financial relationship between NBC and Perverted Justice, I find this whole concept smarmy and more than a little disgusting. The sooner it is driven off the air the better.

Who does the PTC hate this week?: Well, certainly not the FCC. The PTC has a press release making a very big deal of their appointment to the FCC's Consumer Advisory Committee. The fact that the release is dated July 26, 2007 is a bit misleading given that they were appointed to the committee when it was rechartered in early June (link is to a PDF file). The purposes of the committee – stated in the recharter document – are (1) Consumer protection and education (e.g., cramming, slamming, consumer friendly billing, detariffing, bundling of services, Lifeline/Linkup programs, customer service, privacy, telemarketing abuses, and outreach to underserved populations, such as Native Americans and persons living in rural areas), (2) Access by people with disabilities (e.g., telecommunications relay services, video description, closed captioning, accessible billing and access to telecommunications products and services), and (3) Impact upon consumers of new and emerging technologies (e.g., availability of broadband, digital television, cable, satellite, low power FM, and the convergence of these and emerging technologies). The committee has 28 members including the PTC including groups as diverse as the AARP, Appalachian Regional Commission, Communication Service for the Deaf, Communication Service for the Deaf, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, League of United Latin America Citizens, National Association of Broadcasters, and The Seeing Eye, Inc. Of course you won`t find any of this out in the PTC press release. It stresses items that the Consumer Advisory Committee isn`t even involved in: "The Parents Television Council represents 1.2 million parents, grandparents, and citizens who are concerned about the content on television and in other entertainment media. The PTC's voice will result in a positive impact for all Americans as we are distinctively positioned to provide opinion and insight into how consumers think about a wide range of communication issues facing our country."

Speaking of content, the PTC has added new content to their weekly best and worsts: Misrated! In this section they go after shows that they feel have been inaccurately rated by the networks in an effort to get innocent children and adult to see and hear smut and violence. This time around they have decided that the ABC summer series Greeks (which normally airs on ABC Family on cable) is misrated. Despite the fact that the series is rated PG-14 the PTC feels that "Parents relying on the TV Ratings or the V-Chip to protect their children from graphic sexual content would have been let down, because this TV-14 episode did not carry either the "S" or "D" descriptors." Their complaint focuses first on a scene where on character (Casey) confronts another character (Rebecca) about sleeping with her boyfriend (Evan). I won't reprint the dialog that the PTC shows in their release, not because it is "smutty" but because it is extensive. There is also a scene in which Casey receives a video message on her cell phone which shows Evan and Rebecca apparently having sex. This is how the PTC describes the scene: "Although the screen that Casey is viewing the video on is small, it is clear what is going on and the clip is rather intense. The video depicts Rebecca on top of Evan, without a shirt, with a clear instance of Rebecca thrusting while kissing Evan." This does not sound too unlike some scenes in mainstream movies or even some TV shows. However the PTC insists that this show is mislabelled: "Though the rating is TV-14 indicating that it is not intended for viewers under the age of 14, parents of teens would have been caught off guard by the intense sex scene between Rebecca and Evan which was not signaled by the presence of an "S" descriptor. Parents would have also been unprepared for the heavy sexual dialogue (with no discussion of risk, responsibility or consequences) because the episode carried no "D" descriptor. The TV-14 rating alone did not give parents adequate information to judge the appropriateness of this episode for their teen." The problem with this argument is that the "intense sex scene" is not seen clearly but is only visible on the screen of the cell phone. As for the dialogue, the bit that the PTC quoted was downright innocuous, with the most explicit statement coming after Casey accuses Rebecca of having sex with Evan but before knowing that he is Rebecca's boyfriend: "I did. Rush night, and it was amazing..." That's it. If there was more intense dialogue, the PTC certainly didn't record it for posterity.

I will pass over this week's Broadcast Worst of the Week only because the PTC, apparently having no new targets to overanalyse, has chosen to declare a rerun of My Name Is Earl to be the worst of the week. Instead, let us look at the Cable Worst of the Week which is the MTV series Scarred. According to Wikipedia "On each episode of Scarred, several real-life risk-takers share the stories of how they were scarred or injured while attempting dangerous stunts on, primarily skateboards (but, occasionally, in-line skates, skis, snowboards, and bikes). The show features a segment called "Scar Stories", which broadcasts videos caught on the scene of individuals dramatically injuring themselves to a great extent, (the wound often leaving a scar), hence the show's name." The Wikipedia article also notes that the show, "like many shows in the same genre, such as Jackass, provides a warning to audiences that they should not attempt the stunts or send in home videos." The PTC takes the opportunity of the return of the show for its second season to go through the five video sequences in the episode in aggressively describing each of the accidents in gory detail. This is one of the shorter descriptions: "Jared gruesomely cuts his face after his skateboard pops up into his eye. His eye is bloodied and bruised and his face is shown with blood pouring out, as Jared's friend exclaims enthusiastically, "Holy [bleeped 'f*ck'] dude, your whole face is a bloody [bleeped 'f*cking'] mess! Holy [bleeped 'sh*t'] dude! Your [bleeped 'f*cking'] eye is [bleeped 'f*cked'], dude…your eye is, like, popping out of your head!" The PTC sums up its review by stating "It is difficult to know which element of Scarred is most repugnant: that MTV considers such programming entertainment; that by showing it, MTV is actually encouraging other teens to mutilate themselves in hopes of getting on TV; or that every cable subscriber in America is forced to support this show through their cable fees."

Setting aside my personal view on shows like Scarred and Jackass, neither of which is to my taste and indeed Scarred sounds like an incredibly stupid show, I would like to tackle the whole assertion that a show like this is "encouraging other teens to mutilate themselves in hopes of getting on TV." Certainly it's a common accusation about this show and Jackass but how is this different from someone setting up a situation in which he gets injured in order to appear on America's Funniest Home Videos – assuming of course that such things occur on either show. In my opinion it seems to be a matter of degrees. The truth of course is that in this era of relatively inexpensive video equipment, and the usually exhibitionistic nature extreme sports types their accidents are likely to be recorded for posterity. A quick and by no means extensive search on Youtube for "Skateboarding Accidents" produced a listing of 1,440 videos. And it's not as if kids have ever needed the possibility of appearing on a TV show to do stupid things – when he was about 9 my brother Greg did a pretty good job of abrading his face when he tried ramp jumping something on his bicycle. So yes, a show like Scarred sounds quite repugnant to me and if it were to be taken off the air tomorrow I probably wouldn't shed a tear, but I am not the intended audience. And, not only does MTV "considers such programming entertainment" but so does that intended audience, an audience that also watches professional Wrestling and Ultimate Fighting. And yet again, people need to be reminded that this is a show that has advertisers. "Every cable subscriber in America" is not supporting this show with their cable fees, advertisers are, and if the show was not attracting an audience those advertisers would take their money and go elsewhere and hte show would be cancelled. But of course that wouldn't "prove" the PTC's point.

Short Takes – July 24, 2007

Apologies are in order. I meant for this to be longer, earlier, and more interesting. The longer and earlier were harmed by a bit of a problem that's developed with the fingers of my right hand; I suspect it's arthritis, and me without any of Granny Clampett's (well strictly speaking Granny Moses's) Rheumatis medicine. It's made typing a bit of a pain literally. I have a system, really I do, but implementing it has been a bit hit and miss.

Given that this is the time when the professional critics head for Los Angeles for the semi-annual Television Critics Association press tour there's more than a little news out there, but in most cases the news tends to be in the form of who is in what (Katee Sackoff – yay – and Isaiah Washington – not so much of a yay – have both been signed to play recurring roles in Bionic Woman; just an example) and promotional material. It doesn't mean that I wouldn't love to be down there (all I need is someone to pay me for writing this stuff in dollar amounts large enough to pay the costs of two or three weeks in Los Angeles every six months), but the fact is that a lot of what the TCA press tour is about is the attempt to spin the stories about the networks and their new and returning shows. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Oh, by the way, don't forget to vote in the poll!

The new host of The Price Is Right is...: Drew Carey. One of the only good things about this problem with my hand is that I'm able to feed you this bit of fresh news. Carey, who is hosting the new CBS prime time game show The Power Of 10, revealed that he had finalized the deal to host The Price is Right during his appearance on The Late Show with David Letterman on Monday night, although since the show is taped earlier in the day it was actually completed Monday afternoon. According to Carey he was notified that the deal had been completed less than fifteen minutes before his appearance on the Letterman show. Drew Carey will probably do all right as the host of The Price Is Right. On the plus side, he has had experience hosting a live or live to tape show both from The Power Of 10 and earlier with Whose Line Is It Anyway? In addition he's personable and has something of an everyman vibe about him. On the downside he's not as polished as Barker was and hasn't shown that much experience in dealing with the mass audience on a personal level. The biggest strike against him may be that he's a comedian and sometimes has something of a sarcastic bent to him. The thing about The Price is Right or almost any game show is that you have to take it and the contestants seriously. It's going to be interesting to see how Carey adapts to his new job. The pressure is going to be on him, not unlike the way it was for Katie Couric, to live up to the standards of his predecessor while still making the job his own. But I don't expect Drew Carey to be under the same sort of constant and hypercritical scrutiny that Couric has had to endure.

Schedule changes at NBC: You know what they say about an old broom seeping clean? Well Ben Silverman hasn't exactly swept the NBC schedule clean of the shows that his predecessor as head of the NBC Entertainment Division announced but he did shake the schedule up a bit. He started by moving the new series Chuck from the second hour of Tuesday night to the first hour of Monday as a lead in for Heroes, making Monday night "Science Fiction Night" (Chuck, Heroes, JourneyMan). Next, he extended Biggest Loser from one hour to ninety minutes and put a half-hour version of The Singing Bee on from 9:30 to 10 p.m. (Eastern). The Singing Bee, which had a very successful debut two weeks ago and had been scheduled to alternate with 1 vs. 100 on Friday night. On Friday night, 1 vs. 100 has been shelved and replaced by the second episode of Deal Or No Deal. The game show will serve as the lead-in for Friday Night Lights, which has swapped with Las Vegas, which moves to Friday's third hour.

On the whole I think that this tinkering has been an improvement to the NBC schedule. It gives Friday Night Lights a more accessible time slot with a stronger lead while allowing the comedy-drama Las Vegas to play around with more adult storylines (although the PTC will likely insist that Friday Night Lights is too smutty even for the second hour in much the same way they did with Las Vegas). The Singing Bee will probably do better in its current format as a half-hour show than it would have done at an hour. My one reservation here is that the later time slot puts it up against the last half hour of the Dancing With The Stars results show. The Singing Bee could very easily work as the first show of the night, particularly up against ABC's Cavemen. Finally, by moving Chuck to the first hour of Monday night Silverman has not only established a clear theme for the night but installed a show that probably going to be "friendly" to the "family" audience – youth oriented – in a time slot where it will be effective. There's a lot less contrast in having that show leading out a themed night than serving as the jump between Biggest Loser and Law & Order: SVU. About the only show that is really screwed by these changes is 1 vs. 100, a show that I personally enjoy more than either The Singing Bee or Deal Or No Deal. Best of all this is not the sort of mass schedule modification that Kevin Reilly engaged in last year to "save" Studio 60 from the combination of Grey's Anatomy and CSI, which was immensely destructive to NBC's line-up and didn't even accomplish its main goal. This is more along the lines of surgical tinkering with a sense of logic to it.

Who does the PTC hate this week?: Well the PTC positively loves the US Senate Commerce Committee for "protecting children from indecent content on television." The Committee passed a Bill (do committees actually pass bills?) to institutionalize the ban on any use of "profanity and indecent images" that the FCC attempted to enforce, including the notion of fleeting obscenities that was struck down by the Second Circuit decision. As the PTC writes in their press statement, "We applaud the Senate Commerce Committee, and especially the bipartisan leadership of Senators Rockefeller, Inouye, Stevens, and Pryor, for putting the interests of families above the self-serving interests of the broadcast industry." They further go on to say that "It is clearly in the interest of children and families that nudity and inappropriate sexual content -- such as the infamous Super Bowl strip show -- should not be shown on television before 10 pm. The public interest was clearly served by today's bipartisan Senate action, and we now call on the full Senate to vote on this measure before the August recess." What the PTC misses in its self-congratulatory rhetoric is the quite serious question of whether any such bill would be able to withstand challenge on constitutional grounds, which after all was a major point of the Second Circuit Court's decision. But no, they don't seem to believe that the Television industry has the simple right to sue for redress against arbitrary actions or to seek a clear and consistent definition of what constitutes acceptable behaviour. Note in this excerpt how they define the industry's efforts as "absurd," that the FCC's ruling was an example of "common sense," and how they make it a point to downplay the validity of the Second Circuit's decision by pointing out that it was only two judges: "Through their lawsuits asserting the 'right' to air profanity during the hours when children are in the audience, and the absurd notion that a striptease during the Super Bowl is not indecent, the broadcast networks continue to show they are not responsible stewards of the public airwaves; but as licensees, the responsibility is theirs. The FCC's authority to enforce common sense decency standards, which were recently stripped by two judges in New York City, must be restored. Today's action is a significant step in the right direction." Of course if the two judges had been a majority in favour of their position, the PTC would have said that they were more than enough and would deny any attempt by the industry to appeal to the Supreme Court, an option which the broadcasting industry does not deny to the FCC.

The fact is that the FCC decision overturned by the Second Circuit was not an example of "common sense decency standards" because it went against previously established precedent on the handling of such situations which had been the standard of behaviour for thirty years. Indeed the FCC has contradicted itself since their decision on obscenities by saying that it was in fact acceptable for stations to air Saving Private Ryan with the language uncensored despite the fact that it was an example of scripted obscenities rather than "slips of the tongue" or incidental uses of words like "fuck" or "shit" during something like an awards show. This in and of itself is representative of an inconsistent standard on the part of the FCC. If the words are acceptable in Saving Private Rayan then why not NYPD Blue?

The Cable Worst of the Week is Rescue Me. The Cable Worst of the Week is almost always Rescue Me. And it is almost always Rescue Me for the same reason every time. Details change but the essence lingers on. Allow me to summarise the PTC's complaints in the stylings of Mr. Charles Brown: "Blah blah blah 'graphically and crudely'. Blah blah blah 'hand job.' Blah blah blah, 'eye-popping view of Tommy and Janet sexually healing their ruinous relationship.' Blah blah blah 'nymphomaniac former nun.' Blah blah 'sex during church services.' Blah blah 'penchant for pornography.' Blah blah blah 'salacious slate of programming.'" After that there is of course the usual condemnation of the "fact" that "all cable subscribers are forced to subsidize such programming." I put quotes around the word 'fact' because the PTC insists on using the word "subsidize" which my dictionary at least defines as "to aid or assist with a grant of money or by guaranteeing a market."And while I suppose that the existence of FX as a cable network where shows are – for now at least – unrestricted by the regulations that the FCC imposes on over the air stations might be defined as "guaranteeing a market" the implication of a subsidy is that the product or the manufacturer would not continue to exist without the payment of the grant of money. The only way in which cable subscribers are "subsidizing" Rescue Me is by making FX a profitable corporate entity and the degree to which they do that is subject to scrutiny given that FX sells advertising time of the channel. Certainly it is unfair to say that cable subscribers are subsidizing the program when, at the same time, the PTC condemns advertisers who put their commercials on the show. In fact it might be more valid to say that cable subscribers who pay for FX are subsidizing the commercial-free Fox Movie Channel since the fees paid for FX go into the coffers of News Corp which owns Fox Movie Channel.

Broadcast's Worst of the Week is Big Brother. They state that "In the first two episodes this season sex and foul language dominate" and it seems as though the PTC has feels the need to be more explicit about the language in their press release than the show ever was. The PTC's normal method of dealing with obscenities – and they have a far larger list of such things than most people – is either to give only the first and last letter or to use the initials, like "the S-word" or "the F-word." Here's what the PTC press release on Big Brother being the worst of the week said: "Foul language on the two episodes included poorly bleeped words such as 'asshole,' 'shit,' 'tits,' and eleven instances of the word 'fuck.'" Of almost as much interest as the fact that the PTC used the actual words in their press release is their reasoning for condemning the program (well one of them; we'll get to the other shortly). They acknowledged that the words were bleeped, including the ones which have been used on TV before, but it's not good enough for them. The show should be condemned because the bleeping of the words in question does not meet the PTC's standards for such things!

Ah, but that wasn't the only reason for the PTC to be down on the show. There was it seems explicit sexual references on what the PTC is now describing as "the traditional Family Hour." These references came from "flamboyantly homosexual housemate Joe," and dealt with his accusation against his former boyfriend Dustin. "Joe openly and unapologetically announces that he has contracted the disease from implied unprotected sex with Dustin. Dustin adamantly denies that it was he that gave Joe the STD." I'm sure of course that the PTC would just as rigorously condemn any statement by a heterosexual houseguest about contracting gonorrhoea from a former long term relationship, but they seemed to take inordinate glee from pointing out that it was Gay people having unprotected sex.

The PTC finishes their comments on Big Brother with the almost ritual condemnation of the TV ratings system. According to the PTC "With a TV rating PG-L, no parent could rely on the V-Chip to protect young viewers from such content. Both episodes were unconscionably aired promoting promiscuous and crude behavior in the homes of unsuspecting families." According to Wikipedia, PG-L refers to "mild coarse language." The other "descriptors" at this level are V-moderate violence, S-sexual situations, D-suggestive dialog. The PTC has acknowledged that the strongest language used by the "houseguests" was bleeped, even if it wasn't up to the PTC's standards (they also omit the fact that CBS "fuzzed" the mouths of houseguests when necessary to protect lip-readers). And given the reaction of people both inside the house and outside to Joe's repeated comments about the STD that he claimed Dustin gave to him, it can hardly be seen as "promoting promiscuous behaviour." I would be interested in knowing exactly the PTC would rate any episode of Big Brother using the V-Chip. But of course they will not say what they think would be acceptable, because of course the V-Chip and the ratings system doesn't work.

Short Takes – July 5, 2007

Summertime, and the livin' is easy. Well not noticeably so but you know how it is. My mother got back from Vancouver (bringing my nephew back to his mother) after spending a week with my brother, his fiancé and her son and parents. She said that Greg sent something back for me with her – it turned out to be my tax information (he did them for me because I didn't have a printer until after the income tax season ended). The weird thing was that not only wasn't I disappointed, it was way more than I expected.

A belated Happy Fourth of July to my American readers – well USAian, since Canadians and Mexicans and everyone else south of the Rio Grande are also "Americans" but you get my drift. As usual, I watched 1776 rather than the totally botched presentation of the Boston Pops 4^th of July concert that CBS will be putting on. I loved it on A&E but when they moved it to CBS the quality of all three went way down. I had planned to get this out sooner but stuff kept getting in the way. Not that there's much to report beyond the usual PTC stuff but let's try.

Washington week in review: Isaiah Washington continues to try to apportion blame for his no longer being on Grey's Anatomy. You may recall that he first blamed ABC for firing him after he had done everything (and more) that the network told him he needed to do to stay on the show. The words "law suit" were even uttered. Then he blamed the media – always a favourite for actors and embattled politicians. Next he blamed T.R. Knight, or at least said that Knight should have been fired instead of him. Apparently (and no I don't get this line of reasoning) Knight should have been let go because he was offended by Washington's use of the derogatory term, and because he was angling for a raise. Most recently Washington has decided to blame Grey's Anatomy star Patrick Dempsey. He told Larry King that he got into the infamous fight with Dempsey after Dempsey wanted to delay shooting a scene until Ellen Pompeo arrived on set. Washington told Dempsey that he didn't need Pompeo and "I can act," which supposedly sent Dempsey into another zone. "He became unhinged, sprayed spittle in my face. I'm asking him why is he screaming at me. ... He just becomes irate." He says he used "the word" not as a homophobic slur but that it "implied 'somebody who is being weak.'" – presumably Dempsey. So far Washington hasn't blamed any of the female members of the Grey's Anatomy cast. Nor has he put the blame on the person who really deserves it – the man in the mirror. The whole matter would have blown over if Washington hadn't made the incredibly stupid decision to deny using "the word" by actually using "the word". Isaiah Washington needs to "ferment son bouche" stop digging a deeper hole for himself before he ends up doing dinner theatre in Arkansas.

Casting news: Dana Delaney will apparently be cast as Bree's "long lost sister," a passive-aggressive conservative Republican woman who used to live in the neighbourhood and is married to a much younger man. Reportedly the producers are looking at Nathan Fillion, the 36 year-old Canadian actor who starred in Firefly and Miss Match to play the 51 year-old Delaney's husband. Fillion most recently starred in Drive and may be getting a reputation as the new Ted McGinley for the number of series he's been in that died quick unnoticed deaths but remember, Firefly and Drive were on FOX while Miss Match was produced by 20^th Century Fox. Maybe Fillion just has to keep away from projects associated in any way with Rupert Murdoch.

Recasting news: Also known as "the pilot was sold, now let's get rid of the cast who were in it." I'm not sure how much of this is a result of Newtork weasels sticking their snouts into projects that have been already sold but it seems that after pilots are sold there comes a sudden spate of recasting which leads to people who worked well in the pilot being replaced for no apparent reason. Just consider the following:

• Marrin Dungey, who played Dr. Naomi Barrett in the backdoor pilot of Private Practice is out; Broadway actress Audra McDonald in.
  
• Brett Cullen (Governor Ray Sullivan in The West Wing), who played the father in the pilot of The CW's Life Is Wild is out; D.W. Moffett from Hidden Palms and For Your Love in, playing the father.
  
• Mae Whitman (Ann Veal on Arrested Development) out as Becca Sommers on Bionic Woman out; no replacement announced but the character will no longer be deaf.
  
• Amber Valetta out as Coraline in Moonlight; Shannyn Sossamon (Kira on Dirt) in.
  
• Shannon Lucio (Lindsay in The O.C.) out as Beth in Moonlight; Sophia Myles in.
  
• Rade Serbedzija (Dmitri Gredenko on 24 this season) out as Josef, Jason Dohring (Logan from Veronica Mars) in.
  

At least two of the cast changes on Moonlight relate to the arrival of former Buffy The Vampire Slayer and Angel producer David Greenwalt as Executive Producer/Showrunner. The replacement of Serbedzija with Dohring is particularly jarring since Serbedzija is an older Eastern European type guy and Dohring is – you know – neither of those things. I suppose that making Josef a "young, mischievous hedge-fund trader" rather than an old-school vampire who is mentoring the lead character in an uneasy alliance is meant to attract a hip young audience as well as being in keeping with the notion that vampires don't age, but for me there's something to the notion of having someone who looks and sounds as if he could have been best buds with Vlad the Impaler acting as the lead character's mentor rather than some guy who looks like he should be going to Grad School regardless of how long ago he went through the change. I also don't get what the reasoning could be behind changing the Becca character on Bionic Woman from deaf to hearing, since none is given. Is it because deaf people aren't supposed to be attractive, or audiences can't relate to the deaf? Which is obviously why I am neither a Network Executive or a Showrunner

Who does the PTC hate this week?: Well obviously they hate TV violence, so it's no surprise that PTC President Tim Winter was at the Senate Commerce Committee hearings on Violence on Television talking up the organization's position on the badness of violence on TV. He cited the PTC's study which claimed that e TV season which concluded last year was the "most violent that the PTC has ever recorded – averaging 4.41 instances of violence per hour, every hour, during prime time, or one instance every 13½ minutes – an increase of 75% since the 1998 television season." A little later we'll see just how restrictive the PTC's definition of violence is, but first let's look at the trends that the PTC is seeing. Winter told the Committee, "In addition to the marked increase in the quantity of violence, we are seeing several other disturbing trends. First, the depictions of violence have become far more graphic and more realistic than ever before, thanks in part to enhanced computer graphics employed in television production today. Second, there is an alarming trend for violent scenes to include a sexual element. Rapists, sexual predators and fetishists appear with increasing frequency on prime time programs. Third, we are now seeing the main character – the protagonist the audience is supposed to identify with – as the perpetrator of the most violent acts. And lastly we are seeing more children being depicted as the victims of violence." Which is worrying if taken entirely at face value but I'm not entirely convinced that you can. The appearance of "rapists, sexual predators and fetishists" does not necessarily mean the actual depiction of their activities, and certainly not in graphic detail. The PTC cited a number of examples including episodes of NCIS and CSI. They also cited two FX cable shows – The Shield and Nip/Tuck – for special recognition, even though both shows are scheduled for times later than those when the PTC's supposed concern – children – would normally be watching. But of course the PTC has long ago ceased to be truly concerned with protecting the children and is actually focussed on deciding what everyone should be allowed to watch regardless of age or the time that the show appears.

Of course what would a Winter appearance before any governmental hearing (and TV camera) be without touching on certain favourite topics that are not directly related to TV violence. These include the Second Circuit Court decision and the Janet Jackson incident – "After the Janet Jackson incident, television executives were quick to come before the Congress to pledge zero-tolerance for indecency. Subsequently they filed a federal lawsuit which would allow them to use the F-word at any time of the day, even in front of millions of children. Sadly they managed to find two judges in New York City who agreed with them. And now the networks are in Court again, this time saying that the Janet Jackson incident was not indecent." – the V-Chip – "recall that when the V-Chip was introduced the television industry denounced it as censorial heresy. That is, they denounced it until they found a way to manipulate what was supposed to be a simple solution for parents. Instead the industry turned the V-Chip into a means for even more graphic content while using it as an excuse to violate the broadcast decency law." – and the industry's efforts to educate people on the V-Chip – "Through efforts like the 'TV Boss' campaign, the industry promised you hundreds of millions of dollars to educate parents on content-blocking technologies, yet all objective data shows that parents still have no constructive grasp over the TV ratings system or the technologies that are reliant upon them." – and cable choice - "And Senators, if you subscribe to a cable or satellite service, you are forced to pay almost $9.00 every year to the FX network so they can produce and air this kind of material. And with tens of millions of Americans forced into the industry's bundling scheme, FX reaps hundreds of millions of dollars each year to produce this material, and that is before they sell even one TV commercial." All of these – with the possible exception of the cable choice issue, although I do wonder how much of the $9 subscription fee for F/X the network actually gets – are examples of the PTC manipulating facts to fit their thesis and using dubious surveying techniques as with their survey "proving" that efforts to educate parents on the V-Chip don't work which was included in a general survey not specifically aimed at parents.

Still what I find most amazing is that the PTC wants this to be a one way street where they can complain without contradiction but any effort by the TV industry to defend themselves either must be barred or is regarded as an act of evil-doers: "As troubling as those content examples are, Mr. Chairman, I am equally dismayed by the seeming contempt the industry has for anyone who would suggest reasonable self-restraint. Recently the CEO of Time-Warner decried this hearing, likening your concerns to Nazi Germany." This is interesting since surely any action that the Senate Committee would require of the networks would not be "self-restraint" but rather legislatively imposed restraint in the form of increased regulation of content. And then there's this: "Every time the public – and our public servants – call for more responsible behavior, the industry refuses to have a meaningful dialog or offer real solutions. Rather than coming before you to address the negative impact their products have on children, they turn the conversation into a lecture on broadcast standards and the Constitution. Rather than acknowledging the scientific evidence manifested in over a thousand medical and clinical studies, they underwrite their own research and point to its differing conclusion. And rather than focusing on their statutory public interest requirements for using the public airwaves, they shift the conversation to entertainment in general and invoke the always-sobering term, 'chilling effect.' But I wonder how 'chilling' things really are if, as we've read in the press, the Fox broadcast network airs a program this fall where an amorous monkey joins a man and woman in a sexual encounter." Because of course the PTC doesn't seem to believe that the protections of the Constitution of the United States extends to Television industry – their attitude on the appeal of the "fleeting obscenity" case came perilously close to saying that the industry should not be allowed to appeal the FCC decision and that the networks were not eligible for the constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.

In fact although many members of the committee supported increased regulation there are genuine concerns with regards to First Amendment rights. Broadcast and Cable stated that the concerns were bipartisan. Both Ted Stevens (R – AK) and John Sununu (R – NH) raised the issue According to Broadcast & Cable Sununu "said that as 'bothered or disappointed' as he and his colleagues might be by what they see on TV, 'it is very difficult to solve or address with a rule, regulation or law....' Anytime you address the quality, form or content [of programming], he said, 'you run into genuine, important First Amendment questions.'" Broadcast & Cable also reported that Senator Frank Lautenberg (D – NJ) "was concerned about violence, but placed it in a wider context. While he said that TV programming was often vulgar and discouraging and opined of the 'depravity' ruling our behavior, he said regulating that behavior didn't work. 'We tried it once,' he said. 'It was called prohibition.' The key, he said, is finding out how to curb the appetite for such programming--check with the hotels and see what kind of movies people most download, he said – while not violating speech freedoms."

Which brings us to the PTC's Cable Worst of the Week which directly ties into what exactly the PTC counts as "violent content". The show is The Closer which the organization actually praises in the first paragraph of their review. However after that it turns into an attack on the content of the premiere episode. "Unfortunately The Closer's June 18^th season premiere injected unneeded and disturbing graphic violence into a mystery about a murdered family. In the episode's opening, the camera focuses on the dead body of Jenny Anne Wallace, a murdered twelve-year-old. Bloodied stab wounds cover the girl's body. And, to eliminate any doubt about the brutality of the crime, Brenda crouches down and points out: 'There are three visible wounds: one in the back, one in the chest, and one in the throat.'" But of course we aren't seeing "graphic violence," we are seeing the aftermath of violence which isn't shown on screen. The PTC adds "Scenes and descriptions of murder on a show about homicide detectives are to be expected. But there is nothing to be gained in airing the grisly details of a child's murder." In fact there is and it is shown in the clip that the PTC uses to illustrate the "graphic violence" because the characters' reactions reveal something of them. Lt. Provenza (played by Anthony Dennison) is visibly disgusted by the scene and attempts to block the documentary camera shooting the scene. In previous episodes, Provenza has been seen as a callous hard-ass and showing his reaction humanizes him a bit. Brenda's clinical detachment as she examines the body is likewise in keeping with her character. She is reacting on a professional level even though that she will be passionate in her efforts to bring the killer to justice no matter what.

By way of contrast, the show that the PTC labels as the Best of the Week was, amazingly, the finale of ABC's Fast Cars and Superstars, a show in which "celebrities" drive stock cars in a series of racing challenges. I won't go through the description of what the PTC loved about the show – it was more in the way of an episode recap done as breathlessly as is possible on a computer screen or printed page. What was particularly laughable however was the final paragraph: "Fast Cars and Superstars was a huge success. It provided high-intensity, entertaining television that people of any age could appreciate and enjoy." Which of course is why it garnered huge ratings during its run and the admiration of all the TV critics. Oh wait. The critics who bothered to review the show loathed it and the viewers who are supposedly craving this sort of "high-intensity, entertaining television that people of any age could appreciate and enjoy" stayed away in droves. After the series debut, which drew 5.5 million viewers, subsequent episodes lost viewers with the finale drawing 2.15 million viewers and finishing fifth, behind reruns of Reba. This goes to show how out of touch the PTC is with the tastes of the American public. They don't want to see drek like Fast Cars and Superstars and do want quality programming like The Closer or entertaining programming like Hell's Kitchen.

Short Takes – May 7, 2007

I'm kind of bummed out because the team that I wanted to win The Amazing Race did not win The Amazing Race. I confess it – I was cheering for Dustin & Kandice the Beauty Queens mostly because they had a killer competitive spirit. Not that they were my favourite team to start the Race – that would be a toss-up between Rob & Amber and Terri & Ian, with Uchenna & Joyce and Danny & Oswald also on the list – but I liked Dustin & Kandice a heck of a lot more than I like Mirna (Charla's okay – quite daring really) and Eric & Danielle's breasts (she was showing the girls off a lot this season). So naturally Eric & Danielle (and her breasts) won. Oh well, hopefully there's always next year. The show has already started recruiting contestants for The Amazing Race 12 and although the show has not been officially renewed – we'll have to wait for next week's upfront announcements for that – it has been a solid if not spectacular ratings performer on Sunday nights and doing particularly well after a sports overrun.

Coinkidink: Speaking of Rob & Amber, I was doing a little research for something I'll hopefully finish writing in the next couple of days and I found a really strange connect the dots sort of thing linking them. It seems that Rob Mariano attended Xavierian Brothers High School in Westbrook Massachusetts. If I did my math right, one of his classmates was Matt Hasselbeck who is now the starting quarterback for the Seattle Seahawks. Hasselbeck's brother Tim (who also attended Xavierian Brothers is married to Elizabeth Hasselbeck, who is now one of the hosts of The View on ABC. Before they were married, Elizabeth Hasselbeck – then Elizabeth Filarski – was one of the contestants on Survivor: Outback where one of her competitors was Amber Brkich, who is now married to Rob Mariano.

Gilmore Girls going: The CW and Warner Brothers TV announced that this will be the last season for The Gilmore Girls. According to the press announcement "This series helped define a network and created a fantastic, storybook world featuring some of television's most memorable, lovable characters. We thank Amy Sherman-Palladino, Dan Palladino, Dave Rosenthal, the amazing cast led by Lauren Graham and Alexis Bledel as well as the producers, writers and crew for giving us this delightful gem for the past seven years. We would also like to thank the critics and 'Gilmore' fans for their passionate support and promise to give this series the send off it deserves." A variety of reasons have been cited for ending the series including the reluctance of Alexis Bledel to continue in the role of Rory Gilmore once her contract ends and the sense (at least among fans of the show) that last year's decision by Amy Sherman-Paladino to leave the series resulted in a reduction in the quality of the series. Although I rarely watched a complete episode of The Gilmore Girls, as someone who was a huge fan of The West Wing I feel the pain of Gilmore Girls fans, even though The West Wing had far more time to prepare a final sequence of episodes than Gilmore Girls did. On the other hand the final episode of the series was reportedly written to work as either a season or a series finale.

Lost Ending: Not right away mind you but we now have a definitive ending date for Lost: 2009 – or maybe not. Series producers Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindlehof had been pressuring ABC to decide on a definitive ending date for the series and apparently ABC gave a date of two years. At least that was what was originally reported by E! Online's Planet Gossip. However a few hours after that report, E! Online's Watch With Kristin, while confirming that a date has been set and will be announced stated that the story was more complex than originally reported and "ABC will be making an announcement declaring an end date for Lost very soon. However, the exact number of remaining episodes and seasons is still muddy—and might not be exactly two seasons." Kristin also reports that next season will run continuously from January to May 2008 – avoiding the disaster that occurred this season when six episodes aired at the start of the year after which there was a gap that was supposed to be filled by the Taye Diggs series Day Break until that show was rather unceremoniously pulled from the line-up after six episodes – and will be moved back to its original time in the second hour of primetime. I'm reasonably cheered by most of the aspects of this announcement, even though I've basically given up watching Lost this year in part because of the time and in part because the six episodes followed by an extended break made me feel as if the fans were being taken for granted. The decision to run the series in a continuous run is one that I think more shows, particularly shows which are continuity heavy and as a result "don't repeat well" should look at as an alternative to pulling the show part way through the season and then returning it to the line-up.

Bellisario walks: Not far, but Donald P. Bellisario has apparently decided to step down as showrunner of NCIS after series star Mark Harmon threatened to leave the series because of Bellisario's "chaotic management style." Bellisario was reportedly in the habit of faxing in script pages to the set at the last minute which frustrated and angered Harmon according to TV Guide's Michael Ausiello. Bellisario will stay with CBS; as part of his deal with the network he will be developing two new series for the network. It is an excellent resolution for most of the people involved but particularly for the network. Not only does CBS retain one of its top drawing series, but they get two more shows from the creator of Magnum P.I., Airwolf, Quantum Leap, and JAG.

Why hold those pesky primaries and elections: TVNewser had item from FoxNews among its quotes and criticism about the first Republican presidential debate, hosted by Chris Matthews. The quote is from an article by former Clinton staffer Dick Morris and Eileen McGann: ""MSNBC and Politico deliberately marginalized Giuliani and steered far too many of the important questions to anybody not named Rudy. In doing so, they paid homage to their Democratic Party masters by diminishing the candidate most likely to win in November." While other commentaries also criticized Matthews's handling of the questioning, Fox was the only one to actually name the next president of the United States.

Who does the PTC hate this week?: No one.

I know, it's pretty surprising but the only new addition to the PTC's home page is a note praising Sears as one of the organization's ten best advertisers: "Sears Holdings consistently avoids advertising on programming that contains graphic violence, excessive sexual content and foul language, and we want to congratulate your organization." The cite sponsorship of specific shows including Reba, 7^th Heaven and Extreme Makeover: Home Edition (which at times seems like and extended Sear commercial – my opinion, not the PTC's) and states that "Sears clearly understands what it means to be a good corporate citizen and the importance of adhering to a set of media guidelines for their advertising messages."

Short Takes – April 30, 2007

Last week I had planned on writing one of these Short Takes pieces, in part because the PTC's "Worst show of the week" article on 24 last week tossed in a reference to the Virginia Tech shootings that was at once so self-serving, and so incidental to the piece that it was almost a non sequitur that I was livid. Then I remembered the old advice to newsgroup writers about posting when you're angry and decided not to write about it. The problem is that this is so typical of the PTC's behaviour that expecting them not to mention it would have been like expecting the scorpion not to sting the frog. The problem for me was that they didn't address the issue head on with facts and figures or even anecdotal evidence. Instead they just tacked a sentence – "In light of the tragic events at Virginia Tech, it is deplorable that young people with impressionable minds could view such programming and fantasize about the use of weaponry in such a violent manner" – onto a piece that had been written before the events at Virginia Tech occurred about something that had absolutely no connection with those events.

Now let's go on to current events.

Another Tim Minear series bites the dust: I swear I don't know why Tim Minear or any of the Buffy/Angel team keeps working for Fox. Or at least keeps doing shows for the FOX Television Network. Consider his record. The first series he did as a producer was the syndicated High Tide: it ran three years. Next was Strange World which ran 13 episodes on Sci-Fi. Then came Angel, which was on The WB for five seasons. Then came the series that he did for FOX: Firefly (14 episodes aired – eventually), Wonderfalls (14 episodes shot, 4 aired), The Inside (14 episodes shot, 7 aired), Standoff (consulting producer on 4 episodes). To that you can add Drive – 6 episodes shot, 4 aired.

I haven't seen Drive. I swear I was going to review it but forgot to turn on the VCR for the two hour premiere, did tape the third episode (on my bowling night so I couldn't see it live). I wasn't sure I could get into the show without having seen the first two episodes (the premiere) and after I saw the ratings for Monday's show on the Programming Insider section of the Media Week website I pretty much knew that this series was drawing dead as we say in Poker. I still have what turned out to be the last two episodes on tape and I may actually watch them to see if the show was worth saving. It seems at times as though Miner creates shows just so Fox can cancel them. I didn't see Wonderfalls and I wasn't impressed with a non-Miner episode of Standoff but I was a big fan of Firefly (it's one of the few series I own on DVD) and was quite impressed with the interplay of characters on The Inside – a series that Fox brought Miner in to salvage.

The cancellation of Drive seems to be symptomatic of this entire television season on all networks, not just FOX. According to Ed Bark, Drive is the ninth series this season to be cancelled after five episodes or less (he counts Celebrity Duets as a tenth show but it was meant to only go five episodes). In addition he lists eight other shows that got at least six episodes before being pulled. Of the 17 shows he mentions in his article five were on Fox – six if you count Celebrity Duets – and five on ABC. NBC had three, CBS had two and The CW one. Eight of the 17 could be described as serials or shows with a heavy reliance on continuity. The whole thing has reached a certain level of self fulfilling prophecy from a viewer's standpoint. Some people are taping or TiVoing shows for fear of getting involved in something that will get cancelled – they'll catch up with the show if it stays in the line-up – but even with the new Nielsen ratings system which counts recorded shows if they are watched within a week of being recorded, the fact that they are waiting to see if the show becomes successful enough to stay on the schedule for as long as 13 weeks means reduced viewership (lower ratings) which means that cancellation is more likely. In other words "I won't watch it now in case it gets cancelled, but it gets cancelled because people aren't watching it." It seems to be a vicious circle.

Alec Baldwin wants to leave 30 Rock: Baldwin announced that he wanted to get out of his contract on NBC's 30 Rock shortly after the infamous voicemail message to his daughter. His stated reason is that "he does not want to bring bad press to the show." NBC has rejected the request, which is probably best for all involved. My feeling is that after a certain amount of time for the controversy to cool off he would have regretted taking this sort of action at the spur of the moment. His comments in the voicemail to his daughter were harsh but everyone has had moments like this caused by anger and frustration; his just "happened" to be made public. My real anger isn't with him it is with whoever leaked this to the media. Given the bitterness of his custody battle with ex-wife Kim Bassinger it isn't hard to think of who that might have been.

Rosie O'Donnell is leaving The View: Rosie is one of those people who polarize opinion. Some people love her, other people loath her. Last week Rosie announced that she would not be returning to The View once her current contract ends. Donald Trump immediately told everyone who could be bothered to listen – which was surprisingly more people than just his four children and his Melanija – that Barbara Walters had finally wised up and fired the "fat slob" (Trump had called her that when their original feud broke out). Apparently the truth was far more business related, and concerned the length of her contract with the show's producers ABC. Rosie wanted a one year contract, which would give her greater flexibility, while ABC wanted her to sign a three year contract. In other words, contrary to what "The Donald" believed, ABC (and presumably Barbara Walters) wanted her to stay on the show and for a longer period of time than Rosie herself was willing to commit to. It's no secret why ABC wanted Rosie to stay on the show – ratings for The View have increased significantly since O'Donnell replaced Meredith Viera.

Who does the PTC hate this week?: Oh it's a long and distinguished list of both likes and dislikes. Let's start with the likes.

First there's the National Religious Broadcasters for coming around to support the concept of cable choice "the only way to enable them to be truly in control of the television content coming into their homes." They also cite support from something called the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation. I had to look that one up but it's about what you think it is. According to their own description the Foundation is a Conservative think tank but a socially conservative think tank: "Most think tanks talk about tax rates or the environment or welfare policy and occasionally we do also. But our main focus is on the Culture War. Will America return to the culture that made it great, our traditional, Judeo-Christian, Western culture? Or will we continue the long slide into the cultural and moral decay of political correctness? If we do, America, once the greatest nation on earth, will become no less than a third world country." As for the NRB, Chris Hedges, writing in Harper's Magazine on May 30, 2005, described it as one of the leading groups of the Dominionist movement (defined by Wikipedia as "the notion that Christians owe it to God to exercise God's dominion in secular society is asserted, by means of '[taking] control of a sinful secular society.'") I'll leave those two except to say that "by their friends shall ye know them" (which is an overused quote but it fits). The PTC adds "Families should not be forced to subsidize cable networks that air indecent, profane or graphically violent material. Families are counting on religious broadcasters and other pro-family organizations to continue to lend support for cable choice." Somehow it seems more likely to me that many of the first cable channels cut will be the religious channels.

The PTC is also very happy about the FCC report on TV violence – although not enough to provide a link to the FCC report or even to quote from it. Mostly the PTC is too busy quoting itself:

• The PTC found that violence on prime time broadcast television has increased 75% since 1998. The television season that began in the fall of 2005 was also one of the most violent ever recorded by the PTC.
  
• Upon review of prime time broadcast programming from 1995 to 2001, the PTC found 110 scenes of torture. From 2002 to 2005, the number increased to 624 scenes of torture.
  
• The TV ratings system is still not accurate, and thus grossly unreliable, due to the fact that content descriptors are being arbitrarily and inconsistently applied by the broadcast networks during prime time viewing hours. This means that parents cannot rely on blocking technology to protect their children from inappropriate content.
  

"We desperately hope that this report will achieve what has heretofore been fruitless: To motivate the industry to step up to the plate, take responsibility for its product, and fix a problem that it has not only created but perpetuated. And make no mistake about it: the industry has the ability to fix it. The question is whether it will do so." They then go off on a tangent on every issue that the PTC disagrees with the networks about from the "arbitrary, inaccurate, and entirely self-serving" rating system to the decision by the networks to file suit (actually I believe it's an appeal) in the Federal Court "to use the F-word in front of children."

On the other hand the PTC hates General Electric. It's ironic that the organization that wants to censor television programming itself is complaining about censorship. The PTC was engaged in one of its usual diatribes at the GE shareholder's meeting. PTC Director of Corporate and Government Affairs Don Isett was calling on GE, parent company of NBC, to "stop producing, promoting and broadcasting programs that contain some of the most graphic violence, excessive sexual content and foul language on television." A transcript of Isett's statement is found at the site linked. It began "I am here today because NBC consistently promotes and produces programming that contains graphic violence, excessive sexual content and foul language and we think this needs to stop – now." It includes references to the increase in violence (by 635% in the 10 p.m. hour between 1998 to 2005-06 – 2 incidents per hour in 1998, 15 in 2005-06), profanity (he cited the "dick in a box" sketch on SNL; the PTC applauds the bleeping of 16 uses of "a vulgar slang term for penis" but decries the decision of NBC to put the uncensored version onto its website), and NBC's assertion of its legal right to sue in federal court "demanding the right to air the F-word in front of children watching broadcast television." His statement was cut off after he delivered what reads to me like a concluding statement: "Chairman Immelt, GE can and should deliver the scale of a great company to solve big needs around the world and can act as a good citizen by making sure that its impact transcends the bottom line. Those words should sound familiar to you as they are the GE corporate policy on community. Please, now more than ever, NBC needs your help; the proud history of NBC demands no less."

Finally, the PTC's worst show of the week is the episode of Thank God You're Here featuring actress (and first rate Poker player) Shannon Elizabeth. The PTC starts by taking a shot at Shannon's career: "This week featured Shannon Elizabeth, best known for her role in the sex charged teen comedy movie American Pie. It can be argued that Ms. Elizabeth's career has been driven by her nude scene in American Pie and by her reputation for playing promiscuous women." Only then do they go onto the actual content of the show. She participated in two sketches, one solo and one with the other people on the episode, Tom Green, George Takei, and Chelsea Handler. The PTC seems most upset about her individual sketch in which she plays an advertising copywriter. "Traveling quickly down an improvisational road to indecency, Elizabeth pitches an idea for vodka for children. At the conclusion of her skit she is given a bottle of vodka, pepper, and a banana to show the client her new concept for how to drink the beverage. Elizabeth inserts the banana into the male client's mouth and proceeds to insert the other end in her mouth, blatantly mimicking oral sex." Let's start by mentioning that the idea of vodka for children was actually suggested by actors in the scene who are working from a script. The excerpt on the PTC's site (which is not available on Firefox) doesn't actually show the "infamous" banana scene (which "climaxes" – so to speak – when she bites the tip off the banana), but again it is the scripted actors who provide the banana prop. As for Shannon Elizabeth's other scene, the group scene features a Viking leader trying to select his successor. The PTC objects to the way that Shannon "proves" why she should replace the king. "Shannon Elizabeth wastes no time and simply begins kissing the king deeply as the crowd cheers. This sparks a kissing spree as Ms. Elizabeth proceeds to kiss the judge and other cast members. A kissing orgy erupts and the cast all begin kissing each other. The display clearly crossed the line of friendly affection and was absolutely a sexual spectacle. " They finish up with this claim "It should also be noted that the rating for his episode was a mere TV-PG, proving once again that the ratings system is a sham in its efforts to protect our children. For its irresponsible depiction of sexual promiscuity and heavy sexual innuendo, Thank God You're Here is our pick for Worst of the Week." Sexual innuendo I get based on the banana scene, but surely there have been worse depictions of sexual promiscuity. And remember the "PG" in TV-PG stands for "Parental Guidance." The blocking software allows parents to keep their kids from seeing any TV-PG show the rating of which implies that there is material that parents might not want their younger children seeing and which they should be diligent in watching with their children. If you object to something that you see in a show like this, change the channel or turn the damned TV off.

And just to give you a sense of what we're talking about, here in its entirety is the Viking Sketch from the April 18^th episode of Thank God You're Here. I think it's funny.

Short Takes - April 15, 2007

Short Takes is back after a week that I took off because I really wanted to write the Amazing Race piece, plus I had more running about to do than normal. I have little bit of a surprise coming for you in the next few days but I'll explain it when I finish it.

Don Imus: Okay, everyone has been talking about this one since it broke so I might as well include my one cent's worth – the proverbial penny for my thoughts. I've never seen Don Imus; his show is on one of those cable channels that I can get but couldn't be bothered to pay for because it just doesn't interest me. I've never heard his radio program because morning AM radio from the US doesn't penetrate this far into Canada and we have enough of our own morning bloviators that we don't need to import any from the Great Republic to the south. That said I do have an opinion (of course). I have seen a clip of what he said and taken by itself it's not that bad. In fact he doesn't start the sequence of events, it is the guy sitting with him (as I said I've never seen the show so I don't know if he's a sidekick or what) who uses the word "hos"; Imus only adds "nappy headed" to what the other guy said. And if it were just that incident he might have gotten away with it either with a reprimand or the suspension that he was initially given. The problem is that it wasn't an isolated incident, it was part of a pattern of statements and behaviour that show him to be bigoted and a mysoginist in both his public and private life. My blogging buddy Sam Johnson cites some examples of Imus's behaviour in one of his blog posts on the matter (Sam, If you'd title these things it would make it so much easier to pick out the one post I need – but no matter): "I've been in radio now for twenty three years and I've bumped into folks in the business who've told me stories about Imus and they way he treats folks off the air. No races in whole, but individuals. Allegedy, his treatment of fellow employees is horrible." But it's not just Sam and hearsay reports. Consider Keith Olbermann's reaction to a statement by Imus calling the MSNBC coverage of his firing "hypocritical and unethical":

This from a man who believed he and his on-air staff were entitled to make sexual, racial, ethnic, or homophobic jokes about anybody and everybody...

A man who reduced women staffers at MSNBC to tears, and conned one into coming on the air and saying embarrassing things about her co-workers, which led to her dismissal by the company.

A man whose ethics were so high, that, in the NBC case at least, the traditionally distant nature of corporate America had to listen to the better angels of its nature, when virtually all the employees of a network and an entire news division said 'we have understood that you haven't fired him the last 10,000 times, but you have to do it now.'

I don't know that "corporate America had to listen to the better angels of its nature." Apparently there was participation from about thirty NBC News employees (including Al Roker and Ron Allen) in a meeting with News President Steve Capus about how to resolve the situation. On the other hand I suspect that NBC was worried about advertisers pulling their business and advertisers were in turn worried about action from a really big constituency.

Some people approach this action as a blow to Freedom of Speech. Sorry, but I'm not buying it. No one is abridging Imus's freedom to speak. He can say whatever he wants but NBC and CBS aren't going to pay him to do it. In general terms you have the right to say whatever you want and I have the right not to pay you to say it or allow you to say it on my property. And while the airwaves are "owned" by the public, which is what gives the FCC the right to license broadcasters and to regulate what is said on them, it is broadcasting companies like CBS Radio and NBC that control the means of using those airways. I seem to recall a saying to the effect that "the press is only truly free to the man who owns the press" (certainly Henry Ford and the Dearborn Independent were proof of that). Substitute radio station or cable TV network for press and you sum the Imus situation up entirely.

Nancy Grace and the Duke Rape Case: Just so you don't think I'm ganging up on Don Imus because he's a white male who made a racist and misogynistic remark about Black women, I'm going call for the firing of a woman for things that she has said about white men. I'd love to see Nancy Grace fired for things that she's said about the Duke Rape Case other court cases. In some ways she is more dangerous than Don Imus with her attitude that being charged with a crime – or even suspected of committing one – is tantamount to being guilty. In the Duke Rape Case she reversed her position on the importance of DNA evidence when the evidence didn't suit her position that the lacrosse players were guilty of rape. The kind of statements that Grace makes have the very real potential to taint the jury pool in cases that go to trial. In fact this is one reason why Canadian courts enforce a publication ban on evidence in court cases before evidence is presented to the jury in the criminal case and the other side has a chance to refute that evidence. I'm not really a fan of John Stewart as a news source but here's his take on Grace and the rape case.

Guess Who!?: That's right, it's your old pal Woody Woodpecker. According to animation expert Jerry Beck, Universal will be releasing a package of Woody Woodpecker cartoons that has my inner animation geek absolutely drooling in anticipation. It's not just Woody Woodpecker either. The package contains Andy Panda, Chilly Willy, some of the Lantz Oswald the Lucky Rabbit cartoons (the character originated at Disney and the deal last year between ABC and NBC for Al Michaels returned the rights to the Disney Oswalds to the company but the ones don by Lantz remained at Universal), and a host of others including cartoons that the network wouldn't allow to be aired on the Woody Woodpecker TV show because they contained caricatures of black musicians which were deemed in 1957 to be racist stereotypes. There will also be six Behind the Scenes segments from the old Woody Woodpecker Show featuring Walter Lantz.

As a kid I was a huge fan of The Woody Woodpecker Show. In part it was the interaction between Woody and Walter and in part because there seemed to be an intimacy between Lantz and his viewers. Not to take anything away from Walt Disney's intros to the various incarnations of his shows, but he always seemed to be unapproachable, almost as if he were having you in for an interview; I suppose it was the office and the desk. Lantz always seemed more open and genial.

Who does the PTC hate this week?: Last week – when I didn't do this article – the PTC's worst show of the week was Family Guy for being generally insensitive and for making doing double entendre jokes – in short the usual sort of stuff that Family Guy does. They were also having a sort of pre-emptive strike at Morgan Stanley since the statement from Connecticut Chapter Director Mary Simon Streep mentions no specific programming that the company sponsors.

This week the PTC decided to use the Don Imus incident as a springboard for their call for "cable choice" (a la carte cable to the rest of us). In a statement released on April 11 – ironically the day that Imus's show on MSNBC was cancelled – PTC Chairman Tim Winter stated "One of the most tragic ironies of this whole Imus incident is that those who have been most harmed by his insensitive remarks will be forced to underwrite his salary as soon as his two-week suspension is over. Outraged consumers should have the ability to 'unsubscribe' to MSNBC or other offensive cable networks without having to lose their cable subscription entirely. The Imus comments are only the latest symptom of a larger and more concerning problem. There has been a shocking volume of racist and anti-Semitic material guised as 'comedy' on advertiser-supported basic cable television. African-Americans, Mexican-Americans and Jews have been specific targets in recent months. The PTC has noted the use of the 'n-word' over 140 times in the last two years, including 42 utterances of the n-word in one recent episode of South Park alone." Winter also called on civil rights groups to change their attitudes on "cable choice": "A number of civil rights groups have recently expressed opposition to cable choice. We hope that the Imus incident and these other instances of racially insensitive fare on basic cable will encourage a reconsideration of their position." Now I don't pretend to be an expert on such things but it seems to me that among the cable networks that would be hard hit by a move to "cable choice" would be stations like BET, Univision, and Telemundo; stations that direct their programming to minority communities but which benefit from being sold as part of a package rather than individually. After all, consumer outrage at programming isn't the only reason – or even the most popular reason – why consumers would consider unsubscribing from stations.

This time around the PTC's "Worst Show of the Week" is ABC's In Case Of Emergency. "ABC's new sitcom In Case of Emergency infected primetime television this week with crude sexual content and innuendo. Between Sherman dreaming of a threesome with himself, Joanna visiting a prostitute for a massage, and Jason being blackmailed into having sex with his secretary, the April 4^th episode filled nearly every minute of its time slot with inappropriate content." Then they go into details:

• In Sherman's fantasy, he sees two identical versions of himself preparing to engage him in a threesome.
  
• Joanna seeks treatment for her stiff neck from an unfamiliar massage parlor. Although it is blindingly obvious to the viewer, Joanna is naïve to the fact that the massage parlor is actually a front for a prostitution business. The owner of the venue makes it clear to Joanna's "masseuse" that girl-on-girl "massage" cost $50 more because it takes more time.
  
• Jason learns that he will be indicted by a grand jury unless someone can testify on his behalf. He realizes that the only person with whom he has a good reputation is his old secretary, who is also the only woman he knows with whom he hasn't had sex. The secretary agrees to testify, but only if he "rides her like a racehorse all night long."
  

The PTC statement sums up, saying: "This episode represents some of the worst content that prime-time television has to offer. Lacking any real creativity, pointless and promiscuous sexual content is dumped into American homes in the 9 o'clock hour. Furthermore, this particular episode once again exposes the ineffectiveness of the television ratings system to protect viewers from such content, as the show was only given a "TV-PG" rating." I am torn between wondering why the PTC hasn't noticed this show sooner – the first scene of the first episode features Harry (Jonathon Kellerman) going to a Korean massage parlor for a "hand job" only to discover that his "masseuse" was the valedictorian of his graduating class (Kelly Hu) – and wondering what exactly the PTC considers "real creativity" considering that most of the shows that it has featured as its "Best Show of the Week" have been reality shows, with American Idol being the current preferred choice. While I haven't been watching In Case Of Emergency regularly when I have I found it entertaining and a more enjoyable show than the somewhat similar The Class

Short Takes – March 25, 2007

Okay, I made the transition to the New Blogger and for the most part it was painless. All I had to do was create a new Google account and even that wasn't overly painful. Who knew? Apparently not the people who set up this transition process in the first place but that, of course, is a whole other story. Changes are coming; you may have noticed the addition of labels below the posts – and because I'm an anal sort I'll eventually get every post (over 500 of them) appropriately labelled – and then there's the long desired (by me) redefinition of my template. But that's for the future.

ABC renews shows for next year: I think this makes them the first network to do so. Among the shows renewed are new series Men in Trees, Ugly Betty, and Brothers & Sisters, and returning series Lost, Desperate Housewives, Grey's Anatomy, Dancing With The Stars, The Bachelor, Boston Legal, Extreme Makeover Home Edition, and Jimmy Kimmel Live. Significantly there is no word about Six Degrees (one of those rare shows that has returned from an early relegation to the status of "indefinite hiatus", but which has had a significant retooling by the network), nor is there any mention of the network's conventional comedy series including According to Jim and George Lopez as well as new shows Knights of Prosperity and In Case of Emergency.

Ratings show Canadians love US shows: In my last post I mentioned that of the Canadian broadcast networks CBC was the one I was most likely to watch because I chose to watch the other networks' offerings on the original American network. Here are the top 10 shows on Canadian TV courtesy of the BBM – essentially Canada's answer to the Nielsen Ratings:

1. American Idol (Tuesday) - CTV
   
2. Grey's Anatomy - CTV
   
3. American Idol (Wednesday) - CTV
   
4. Corner Gas - CTV
   
5. CSI: Miami - CTV
   
6. Amazing Race All Stars - CTV
   
7. Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader? - Global
   
8. Criminal Minds - CTV
   
9. Hockey Night In Canada – Game 1 - CBC
   
10. CTV Evening News - CTV
    

Of the ten shows, only three are made in Canada – Corner Gas, Hockey Night In Canada, and CTV Evening News – and only Corner Gas is a scripted, non-news program. And we can see which network bought the most popular American programming.

Guidance and common sense: Patricia Harrison, the Republican appointed president of the Corporation For Public Broadcasting, recently made some wide ranging statements about the organization she heads. The principal thrust of her speech at a Media Institute lunch was primarily about seeking guidance from journalism schools to "define journalistic objectivity and balance on public broadcasting." According to Harrison, "public media consumers already believe noncommercial TV is nonpartisan and unbiased."

Harrison had opinions about other aspects of public broadcasting. She stated that she was shocked when the FCC fined a non-commercial station for airing profanities when it showed the Martin Scorsese Blues documentary. According to Harrison, "common sense could dictate that there is a world of difference between the casual, gratuitous profanity in a run-of-the-mill sitcom as opposed to its contextual use in a documentary like The Blues." She also worried about the effect that this sort of "censorship before the fact" will have a chilling effect on other stations and producers. She's a bit behind the times on this one. We know from the private sector that is has exactly that sort of effect. The decision by a large number of commercial stations not to air the movie because of profanity despite the fact that it had aired previously and had not been subject to FCC action is exactly the sort of chilling effect that Harrison is talking about. It is an action that says that it is better to be safe than sorry and it has become more pervasive in these days of increased FCC fines and advocacy groups mounting massive mailing campaigns with pre-printed form letters of complaint for people who are "outraged" even if they never saw the show in question.

Who does the PTC hate this week?: Well they're still hating on the same episode of The Black Donellys as they were last week. And they are continuing their assault on the V-Chip. In an address to the Association of National Advertisers' Forum on March 20, as reported in Advertising Age, PTC President Tim Winter alleged that 80% of the V-Chip ratings assigned to shows were wrong as determined by a study undertaken by the PTC. According to Winter, this represented "fraud by many of the broadcasters and the networks. ... They rate [the programs] inaccurately and that way the V-chip doesn't block the programming. You're duped. Families are duped. And if the rating system is wrong, the V-chip can't work." However, it seems to me that a study by the PTC on the V-Chip is on the lines of a self-fulfilling prophecy; the ratings are determined to be wrong by the PTC but it is in the interest of the PTC for the ratings to be wrong. If all you see a statement that "80% of the V-Chip ratings assigned to shows are wrong" aren't you being duped if you aren't told that the organization that is making that statement is vehemently opposed to the very idea of the V-Chip?

Who hates the PTC this week?: As a matter of fact it's the very organization that Tim Winter was addressing, the Association of National Advertisers. Winter repeated the usual PTC line; the V-Chip doesn't work, that there needs to be a la carte pricing for cable so people aren't forced to subsidise shows that have graphic content, and that the PTC wants to work with advertisers so that they don't fund "evil" shows. Among Winter's statements: "I believe there is a cartel … a fraud that the cable industry … has perpetrated on consumers," and "Our goal is to have collaborative efforts to help you reach your demographic market. We want you to win. We want to do it a way that hopefully does not encourage or sponsor graphic anti-family programming."

Winter was in enemy territory on this one though as reported by Variety's Multi Channel News. Dan Jaffe, the ANA's executive vice president of government relations stated that "What we have always said is that we don't want to have censorship in this society, where some group becomes a surrogate parent, for a surrogate person to decide what should come into the home. Parents should have that power." At least one delegate suggested that companies who are targeted by PTC letter and email campaigns should be able to sue for restraint of trade. One attendee wanted his money back because he felt that the forum was a waste of time: "This conversation is ridiculous as an advertiser. You have a television. You have a remote control. Turn it off tell your daughter to leave the room." In a poll taken during the ANA panel, a significant minority – 41% – felt threatened by advocacy groups like the PTC, but not one felt that advocacy groups like the PTC should be given the responsibility of shielding children from what they watch on TV.

Winters reportedly appreciated the difference in opinion but "I think it's unfortunate that it has to be so venomous." Perhaps he should ask himself and his group who made it so venomous - I don't think it was the advertisers. Certainly through its Family Friendly Programming Forum and the Forum's Script Development Fund, the ANA has done more that is positive in terms of getting family friendly programming on the air than anyone at the PTC ever has.