Since hardly a day goes by here that we don't talk about jounalism and network and cable TV news, I would be remiss if I didn't open the floor for discussion of Jenna Bush being named a contributing correspondent to NBC's "Today" show.

It has been been announced that she will be reporting on education, but her duties will range beyond that beat as well. As an NBC News spokeswoman said in an answer to an email from me Monday morning, "She will be reporting on education nationally, but she'll also be covering other subjects -- humanitarian reporting, women and children's issues, and features and profiles."

This is a part-time arrangement with no regular schedule of when her reports will run. According to NBC News, she will contrinue her job in the Baltimore City School system as a reading resources teacher. She will work for NBC News out of its Washington bureau.

(AP Photo/Jeff Christensen)

Here's a link that provides more particulars of her new position at NBC News.

What do you think about this 27-year-old teacher joining NBC News?

I am going to hold my thoughts on this for now. I really am interested in seeing what news-savvy readers of this blog think.

Posted by David Zurawik at 10:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (19)
Categories: NBC
        

Peggy smokes pot, Roger sings a song wearing blackface, and Don walks around being enigmatic. I really did not like Sunday's episode of AMC's "Mad Men."

I know I said going into this third season that started on Aug. 16 that this is the best drama on TV. And I will bet it wins the Emmy again as best drama for its second season. But the last two episodes felt like an eternity as I watched. And that is the opposite of the first season when the time used to absolutely fly by with me wanting more, more, more.

The final of shot of Don and Betty embracing in the moonlight on the country club lawn was evocative. But, again, evocative of what?

Maybe there was a little "Great Gatsby" in that moonlit tableau. And Don is a self-made man with a made-up and ever-shifting past like Jay Gatsby. But vague literary references are part of the very problem I am having with the series this year. 

Come on, commenters, talk me out of it. Last week, someone wrote a comment here: "Mad Men is perfect."

Thanks for the comment, but can someone tell me why it's perfect -- or is this the show that one now passionately embraces because it shows you have a "higher" taste in TV viewing than the so-called mass audience? We always have one of those for the people who insist they don't watch TV -- except for one or two such special shows.

I thought the blackface scene was excessive, and I am not sure the writers and producers showed that they understood how careful one should be in replaying such imagery on national TV without lots and lots of context.

Enough. Maybe next week, I will fall back in love with this show. But for now, is anyone willing to defend it?

Posted by David Zurawik at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (42)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

If you want a lovely TV escape from the uncertainty, anxiety and rancor of American life these days, tune in PBS for the debut of "Inspector Lewis, Series II" Sunday night at 9 on Maryland Public Television.

In a radio review I did last week for WYPR-FM, I described  my reaction to the first few minutes of Sunday night's episode as feeling like someone was pouring honey over my brain. It was that relaxing and sweet.

The stress, agitation and madness of dealing with media unpleasantness caused by the likes of cable shouters Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann all that day just melted away as Lewis (Kevin Whately) and his snarky sergeant, DS Hathaway (Laurence Fox), entered the hallowed halls of Oxford to see which crazy member of the academic community was killing people this week.

UPDATE 8:15 p.m Sunday: What a literary bunch we are. Everybody except one gave the right answer. As you can see from the time of the comments, Sherry T. was the first, and so she wins. I'll contact her with some options. But the Z on TV video archive is well stocked, and we will be doing this more often particularly with higher end stuff like these Brit mysteries. Now please go watch "Lewis" and stop back tonight or tomorrow and let me know what you think. And thanks! Z

(Kevin Whately as Inspector Lewis on Masterpiece/Mystery)

"Inspector Lewis" is, of course, the successor of "Inspector Morse," my favorite Brit detective series of all time. I am still not over the death of star John Thaw and the end of the series. Happily, the franchise has continued with Morse's sergeant, Lewis, carrying on the tradition of solving murders in Oxford.

Now in its second season on PBS --with, I am happy to report, seven epsiodes airing the next seven Sundays -- "Lewis" is coming into it's own so strongly that occasionally I forget about "Morse" as I am watching.

Sunday night, there is a body found in the school's famed Bodleian Library. Two professors and a flamboyant art student are at the heart of the story.

Part of the pleasure in this series is the social class aspect of high and mighty, ridiculously self-important professors and administrators looking down their noses at Lewis -- until he makes his case and charges them with murder.

But also there is a great delight in observing these eccentric and often nasty characters who are allowed to roam freely and even run this great school in their natural habitat.

Tonight's epsiode is titled "And The Moonbeams Kiss the Sea." A DVD from the famed Z on TV collection goes to the first commenter who can name the poet who wrote that line -- before the episode airs.

Posted by David Zurawik at 12:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (31)
Categories: PBS
        

Monday morning, one of Baltimore's longest running radio shows turns the page with a new sound and reconfigured lineup at WBAL as "Dave Durian and the WBAL Morning Team" becomes "Maryland's Morning News."

I have a story in the Sunday "Sun" that includes a preview of the new show and interviews with some of the key players. Here is a bit of it, with a link to the online version to follow. Let me know right here what you think after reading the story today or listening to the new version of WBAL's morning drivetime show tomorrow. 

For nearly two decades, tens of thousands of Maryland listeners have been starting their days with "Dave Durian and the WBAL Morning Team" - an easy-to-take mix of news and talk airing on the one of the oldest and most honored local news stations in the country.

Monday at 5 a.m., that Baltimore media institution will be replaced by "Maryland's Morning News" -a clock-driven, harder-news and information-focused program designed for the Internet Age with more and shorter stories, an intensely local orientation, higher production values and much tighter format.

(Bill Vanko and Dave Durian -- Baltimore Sun Photo By Kim Hairston)

Instead of one anchor, there will be three. Among other changes, there will be more reporting and discussion of business and the economy - and it will be formatted so that viewers will know they can hear those segments at 20 and 50 minutes after the hour.

Weather, traffic and sports will continue to be featured, but there will be more weather, with Tony Pann returning to Baltimore and joining the new morning show along with WBAL-TV weathercaster Sandra Shaw.

"Primarily what we're doing is we're really beefing up the immediacy and hard news, and backing off some of the lifestyle features," says Mark Miller, the station's longtime news director. "In terms of style and pacing, 'Maryland's Morning News' is going to be very snappy with a format that keeps the story count up. Technology has changed the news business so dramatically, and we have to respond. But we still employ more news people than all the other stations combined, and we still go out and cover the stories like no one else - there's no rip-and-read here."

Here's a link to the full story.

Posted by David Zurawik at 9:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (18)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

The gray sky, steady rain, a sea of umbrellas, tolling bells and the ancient stones of the Boston basilica. Televised coverage Saturday of the funeral mass for Ted Kennedy was somber, stirring and deeply moving.

I can't explain this except by the weather, perhaps, but the opening images as mourners waited at Our Lady of Perpetual Help Basilica for the coffin of Senator Kennedy to arrive seemed very British somehow. Maybe it involved all the gray and black suits, dresses, coats and umrellas. or all the present-day politicians and former heads of state moving with such solemnity.

But even the rain drops on the lenses of the cameras somehow seemed right. Maybe I'm thinking metaphorically, as in, even the heavens wept.

The Catholic funeral liturgy has its own sort of somber majesty, but the musical performances of Yo-Yo Ma, Placido Domingo and Susan Graham seemed to elevate their moments onstage to the ethereal.

I am not going to make this a long post; I feel emotionally spent from watching the Friday and Saturday services, and I want to watch and post on the burial later. The words Saturday of Ted Kennedy Jr. alone as he described his father helping him up a snow-covered hill shortly after he lost a leg as an adolescent to bone cancer were overwhleming.

But I do want to highlight one aspect of the TV coverage of the funeral mass -- the work of John King on CNN.

I broke my pledge to watch only C-SPAN. As I waited for the mass to begin, I started surfing all the coverage and I came upon King, host of CNN's "State of the Union" show, standing in the rain outside the church reporting on the scene in the old neighborhood at the foot of the basilica. What I saw kept me glued to CNN.

King and the CNN cameras (which appeared to be those of Boston's outstanding news station WCVB-TV) caught the first glimpses of the funeral motorcade as it came up a hill toward the basilica on a street lined by old rowhouses that could have been in almost any working or middle class neighborhood in Baltimore.

It was a powerful tableau that grounded the larger-than-life Washington image of Kennedy in the brickand mortar reality of the people in Boston whom he served.

"As the hearse made it's way up the hill, " King reported that he could hear applause and some cheering from people on the street.

"... There was a woman holding a child out the window to see," he said.

King's words provided a great bit of detail that the cameras didn't. But more important than anything he said was the fact that King was there in the rain reporting a small part of this very large story.

King was the star of CNN's widely-praised and highly-rated election coverage last fall -- in fact, he was the star of all the coverage on all the channels and networks. He is now the host of the most thorough and wide-ranging Sunday morning show on network or cable TV, "State of the Union." He does not have to be standing in the rain outside the church.

But he was, and he was doing the straightforward, just-the-facts, honest work of reporting a piece of history without ego or pretense.

Roland Martin, Ed Rollins, David Gergen -- I didn't need or want more analysts sitting in a studio talking about Kennedy. In fact, that was the last thing I wanted -- studio heads telling me what I was feeling.

I wanted the kind of effort King was providing to modestly help CNN report every aspect of the story of the funeral mass and burial of this towering political figure.

In that moment in the rain, King reminded me of what I felt when I saw ABC anchorman Charles Gibson standing on-camera alongside the road leading to the Kennedy Hyannis Port compound the night after Kennedy's death. They were both doing the core work of journalism, and each in his own way, was also paying tribute to Kennedy his on-the-ground out-of-the-studio efforts.

They made me proud to be part of the working press -- and that is a feeling one rarely has these days.

UPDATE (2:10 p.m. Eastern time Saturday): I am now seeing CNN anchorman Don Lemon on the streets of Washington waiting for the motorcade that will take Kennedy's body to Arlington for its burial at 5:30 p.m. Lemon is interviewing citizens who are already standing in the sun starting to line the motorcade route. Nice work by Lemon. Great choice by CNN to put top talent in the streets.

Posted by David Zurawik at 12:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

I hope the dinosaur networks made lots of money Friday night with their tired sitcoms, tabloid newsmagazines and exhibition football games, because they missed one of the summer's most powerful evenings of music, memory, politics and community by not televising the memorial service of Senator Edward Kennedy.

Set at the John F. Kennedy Library with the flag-draped coffin of Ted Kennedy front and center, politicians, friends, family members and performers came together to remember Kennedy's life by turning 3 hours and 17 minutes of television time into a celebration and elegy.

By the time the event ended with two Irish tenors and the Boston Community Chorus leading the gathering through one of the most soulful renditions of "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" that I ever heard, it felt like mission accomplished on providing a proper sendoff to one of the most towering political figures of the last half century.

I watched on C-SPAN. I am through championing cable news channels with all their crazy agendas. I wanted nothing but a window on the events without narration of anchor intrusion, and once again C-SPAN delivered the goods.

We can quibble about whether Senator Orrin Hatch's remembrance was more about him being amazed at his friendship with Kennedy than about the late senator himself, but I am willing to give every one of politicians the benefit of the doubt -- from John McCain and John Kerry, to Christopher Dodd and Vice President Joe Biden. They showed Kennedy in the "dark night of loss" that he knew too well, and in such moments of triumph as the night last year when he received an honorary degree from Harvard, his alma mater.

"We wanted him to stay there forever," Kerry said, painting a pignant word picture of Kennedy standing on the stage at Harvard basking in the applause after overcoming a faltering start to his speech a result of the brain cancer that would take his life.

Ted Kennedy's niece, Caroline Kennedy, and his nephew, Congressman Joseph Kennedy II, offered touching tributes as well -- the nephew talking about what his uncle taught him about never quitting, and the niece remembering her uncle's "history lessons" and the way he kept reaching out to her when she wanted to retreat.

There was testimonial after testimonial as to how much Ted Kennedy loved music despite his own limitations as a singer, and some of the most elevating moments Friday night were musical: Brian Stokes Mitchell singing "The Impossible Dream" and the Boston Community Chorus singing "Just a Closer Walk With Thee."

I have to say, there was something about the multi-ethinic chorus that suggested the energy, promise and passion of the civil rights movement -- and that seemed ever so right in terms of what Kennedy's political life at least was all about.

I am grateful to television for letting me experience some of the energy, sadness and joy at the John F. Kennedy Library in Boston Friday night.

I am writing Saturday about the funeral mass and burial. I'm sticking with C-SPAN. Check back and let me know what you are experiencing with TV and the services for Ted Kennedy this weekend.

Posted by David Zurawik at 10:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (20)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

CBS News said that one of its radio correspondents, Cami McCormick, was injured Friday in Logar Province, Afghanistan.

"McCormick was traveling with members of the United States Army when the vehicle was hit by an improvised explosive device (IED)," the CBS statement says.

"McCormick was initially treated at a field hospital, where she underwent surgery to stabilize her condition, and was then transported to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan for additional treatment."

Reading the statement, I immediately thought of CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier and her serious injuries from an IED while on assignment in Iraq. Dozier's, who chronicled her injuries and the hard road to recovery in "Breathing the Fire," is now a correspondent in the Washington bureau of CBS News.

McCormick, who is based in New York has been with CBS Radio News since 1998, is the winner of five Edward R. Murrow Awards for brodacst excellence.

She also covered Iraq, as well as Hurricane Katrina for CBS News.

Posted by David Zurawik at 4:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: CBS
        

This is not hard call. Though all the networks and news cable channels will offer some level of coverage of Friday's memorial and Saturday's funeral and burial services for Senator Edward Kennedy, C-SPAN is the place to go for the most complete and least intrusive.

As viewers have known since 1963 with the televised services for John Kennedy, watching such ritual on TV can be a profound and moving experience. C-SPAN with its fly-on-the-wall cameras and lack of commentator interruption is the channel most conducive to that.

C-SPAN will carry the "Celebration of Life Memorial Service" at the John Fitzgerald Presidential Library from 7 to 9 p.m. Friday. None of the networks -- ABC, CBS or NBC -- has announced plans to cover this event, which takes place during the hours of network prime time, in full.

(A mourner stands in line outside the John Fitgerald Kennedy Library - AP Photo)

The funeral mass will be covered on C-SPAN from 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Saturday from Our Lady of Perpetual Help Basilica in Boston.

At 5:30 p.m. Saturday, C-SPAN will air the burial service at Arlington National Cemetery.

On cable, Fox News and CNN have announced full coverage of all three events.

Under the heading "they always keep score," Fox was the most watched cable channel during the first 24 hours following Senator Kennedy's death.

CNN, which is usually the place viewers turn for news and information on major breaking stories, did see a solid increase in viewership, but Fox was the most watched. Among the three, MSNBC was the least viewed.

In general, the TV audiences have not been large for coverage of the senator's death. This isn't about ratings, so for coverage stick with the channel that can afford to be least concerned about them: C-SPAN.

Posted by David Zurawik at 6:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

"The Band That Wouldn't Die," Barry Levinson's documentary on the Baltimore Colts Marching Band, will premiere Oct. 13 on ESPN, the sports cable channel announced Thursday.

It will be the second documentary shown in a "30 on 30" film series designed by ESPN to celebrate its 30th anniversary. Other filmmakers presenting sports-themed dpocumentaries in the series include Peter Berg, Albert Maysles and Mike Tollin.

Kirk Fraser's "Without Bias," a documentary about Len Bias, the late University of Maryland basketball star, will also be part of the series, with a premiere date of Nov. 3.

Berg's film, "King's Ransom," which explores the landmark trade of hockey superstar Wayne Gretzky from Canada's Edmonton Oilers to the Los Angeles Kings, kicks off the series this fall on Oct. 6.

(Barry Levinson by DOUG KAPUSTIN / BALTIMORE SUN STAFF DIGITAL IMAGE# _DSK0154)

Here's the ESPN description of Levinson's film:

In late March of 1984, a moving company secretly packed up the Baltimore Colts’ belongings and its fleet of vans snuck off in the darkness of the early morning. A city of deeply devoted fans was left in shock and disbelief. What caused owner Robert Irsay to turn his back on a town that was as closely linked to its team as any in the NFL?

Academy Award-winning filmmaker Barry Levinson, himself a long-standing Baltimore Colts fanatic, will probe that question in light of the changing relationship of sports to community. Through the eyes of members of the Colts Marching Band, Levinson will illustrate how a fan base copes with losing the team that it loves.

Posted by David Zurawik at 5:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (10)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

On Wednesday, I wrote about Kate Gosselin being interviewed by Larry King, and said that I thought her act was getting old. I also said I thought King did a pretty good job of questioning her.

Here is a nice video clip that shows both a good question from King and Kate Gosselin's not-so-together reply. King asked her if Jon is a good father.

What do you think is going on there with the pause by Kate? What is the internal censor trying to tell her to say with the rest of her sentence. It is a key moment, don't you think?

Posted by David Zurawik at 2:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (17)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

Television has been going all out in its coverage of the death of Senator Ted Kennedy, and some powerful chords of shared memory are being eloquently sounded on many of the networks and cable channels.

One of the most powerful came in a Wednesday CBS News prime time special, "The Last Brother," that included archival footage of Ted Kennedy standing in at Caroline Kennedy's wedding for her slain father, John. 

The images were followed with excerpts of a thank-you letter to Ted Kennedy from Caroline's mother, Jacqueline, in which she called him a "hero." First sounding the narrative that so many on TV would embrace yesterday, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis described Ted Kennedy as the once "carefree younger brother," who had the role of patriarch thrust upon him -- and rose to the challenge. "We are all going to make it because of you," she wrote.

I was most surprised by MSNBC's "The Kennedy Brothers: A Hardball Documentary." Reported by Chris Matthews, this documentary was scheduled before Kennedy's death to premiere Thursday night. But, naturally, the cable channel ran it Wednesday off the news. (It will still air at 7 p.m. Thursday.)

Matthews is clearly plugged into the keepers of the Kennedy flames, and I thought that might be a problem in terms of balance. But Matthews handled it exceptionally well and delivered an illuminating and touching examination of the way John, Robert and Ted Kennedy changed American politics and our lives the last half centruy.

CNN ran the HBO special "Teddy: In His Own Words" that I reviewed here last month when it premiered on the pay cable channel. It was an excellent choice. I decsribed it then as "an elegy and a celebration of a man who has stood so close to the flame of 20^th Century history that the burns will never heal – burns that might have consumed a lesser man." You can read the full review here -- and listen to a podcast I did for radio station WYPR here. 

CNN also had some outstanding political analysis. Representative of that was John King, host of the cable channel's Sunday morning program "State of the Union," talking Wednesday night about the possible impact of Kennedy's death on the current health care debate.

This might sound strange amid all the deeply touching words and pictures, but nothing was more evocative for me than seeing ABC's Charles Gibson Wednesday night standing on a road near the entrance to the Kennedys' Hyannis Port compound to anchor the network's evening newscast. It immediately threw me back to the 1960s and all the triumphs and tragedies that found network newscasters camped out on that road waiting for word from the family at the center of the storm.

What a great choice by ABC News and Gibson to go out there and stand on that road -- and keep it staked out. Chris Cuomo was there Thursday moning for "Good Morning America."

CBS had its "Early Show" co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez at the Kennedy Library Thursday, but it wasn't the same. That little stretch of Hyannis Port road is the way back to shared memory and collective consciousness.

I suspect the TV experience of Ted Kennedys death is most intense for baby boomers like me. Some members of this generation are surely not only remembering a towering political figure through montages of TV images and soundbites of speeches and interviews, but many of us are also seeing how our very sense of political consciousness, a notion of ourselves as citizens, is intertwined with TV pictures and memories of the Kennedy brothers.

Again, television is at the center of a ritualistic process, leading us through a kind of national mourning. TV news not only came of age with the assassination of John Kennedy in 1963, TV itself led us for the first time through public denial, anger, grief and acceptance. More of that is to come Friday and Saturday.

There has been no shortage of eloquent and touching TV moments since early Wednesday morning when the cable channels went into overdrive on news of Kennedy's death. And coverage will continue through Kennedy's burial this weekend.

I hope the networks and cable channels continue to give this story and us all that they can.

Posted by David Zurawik at 8:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (15)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

President Barack Obama has lately taken to depicting the press, especially the cable TV part of it, as a troublesome child. According to him, cable TV never met a "ruckus" it didn't like, and from time to time, the pundits in the press lose control altogether and get all "wee wee'd up."

While the president was vacationing Tuesday night, part of that cable TV realm that he discredits, was hard at work providing exemplary coverage of a Town Hall meeting in Reston, Va., where folks were vigorously debating the health care plan his administration has seemed to be mainly bumbling and fumbling the last few weeks.

I hope someone shows the president at least part of C-SPAN's coverage Tuesday night. Not just for all the insight into the passions, anger and competing interests on health care that the cameras captured. But also for the way in which C-SPAN showed how balanced, informative, contextualized and even-handed cable TV coverage can sometimes be. Maybe the next time the president dons his media critic cap and speaks about the press and cable TV it will be with some wisdom and nuance -- as well as with distinctions made among channels.

(Congressman Jim Moran and Howard Dean at Reston town hall. Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

What a wild and illuminating evening of TV it was on C-SPAN Tuesday.

The cameras arrived before the speakers and showed us the gymnasium as it filled with citizens. And then, came Congressman Jim Moran, a Democrat from the 8th District in Virginia, and Howard Dean, former governor of Vermont and chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

The white-haired Moran wiped sweat from his face as he labored through a takedown of what he called 11 "myths" about the health care plan. As he took on alleged death panels and cuts in Medicare money, he simultaneously had to deal with hecklers and shouters. It was an impressive juggling act by a veteran politician.

And when he got through all that, he introduced Dean, and the place went up for grabs. Talk about a lightning rod. As Dean tried to speak, a group started chanting -- trying to shout him down.

Moran got up and tried to quiet the tumult. He identified the lead shouter to the room as Randall Terry, founder of an anti-abortion group. As security guards eventually escorted the man from the gym, he shouted, "You're a baby killer, Howard Dean."

And it wasn't over yet.

Dean spoke, and questions were taken from the floor. Many were combatative, with several questioners demanding to know what kind of health insurance Moran had and how much he paid. Moran answered. But he got more than a little heated when a woman lied about her identity and succeeded in getting the microphone through her ruse.

But somehow in all of that, in large part thanks to Moran's grit, information was imparted and myriad voices were heard. As ragged and nasty as things got from time to time, it felt like democracy -- in a good way.

And C-SPAN showed it all. I know I got up from the TV set better informed on the health care debate than I was when I sat down.

"Since August 11, C-SPAN has shown in their entirety healthcare townhall meetings conducted by eight individual senators and representatives -- totalling over 45 hours (including repeats)," according to Howard Mortman, a spokesman for C-SPAN.

He said that C-SPAN will continue to show congressional townhall meetings "in their entirety" as the August recess continues.

That's a lot of cable TV devoted to balanced and eye-opening coverage. I hope the president finds the time to see some of it before he criticizes cable TV again -- and blames its coverage for the resistance his White House initiatives are finding out in the land.

Posted by David Zurawik at 6:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (21)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

I have heard Kate Gosselin say some screwy things in interviews, but Tuesday night with Larry King, she set a new standard for denial.

"Do you think the show affected the marriage?" King asked the most discussed mom on American television.

"No," Kate said. And she sounded like she really believed it.

No? Having cameras follow you and your husband and eight kids around for five season didn't have an effect? No? Having thousands of fans and dozens of bloggers writing about how you treat your husband like a servant or an unruly child on the show, didn't have an effect -- especially after he said it did when the two of you announced your divorce on TV in June?

Kate, you really are something. Maybe you really do believe being on this show isn't going to have a profound effect on your kids for the rest of their lives either.

King, who I think of as one TV's schmooziest interviewers, really was very focused and fairly tough on Kate Tuesday night. But she has an act that she's been working on a lot lately on such shows as "Today" and "Live with Regis and Kelly." And she sticks to that script.

Whenever Kate doesn't want to answer something, she says she can't answer it because answering it would not be good for her kids. And she is all about being "positive" and good for her kids. She is also all about "peace" -- she said that again, too, on King's show.

King pressed her about statements she made at the time of her divorce saying that Jon did things that left her no choice but to break up the marriage.

"What were you talking about?" King asked.

"I am not at liberty to discuss that," Kate said. "For the sake of the children, I only speak positive." Right, saying Jon did things that forced a divorce is so positive.

King asked another great question when he pressed her on the phony marriage renewal ceremony that took place only a year ago onscreen in Hawaii.

"What happened?" he asked. "How do you go from that to divorce?"

"I don't know...I don't find it's something I have to discuss... My main concern is my kids."

And so it went.

Looking back over my notes, King really was quite good. He asked if maybe Jon would be ditched, and the show would go on as "Kate Plus 8."

When Kate said for the second time, "that would be a question for the network [meaning the cable channel TLC]," King said, "So why are you letting the network run you?"

Kate insisted TLC wasn't running her. In fact, she said the experience of making the show with TLC has been "healthy, safe and fun" for her and the kids. Jon has been quoted in several places saying he hates it.

Kate tried to play the role of brave single mom moving on and caring for the kids, saying she's "lonely...but busy." She said how "hard" it was to look at the tape of the show in June when they announced their divorce. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

None of this is to defend Jon. He's a slacker's slacker and loser's loser with the emotional maturity of a middle schooler. But I have to say, Kate's act is getting old. And it's time for her and TLC to start making some shows people want to watch again -- or put this series out of its misery.

UPDATE WEDNESDAY MORNING: Had enough of Kate? Wish she would go away? Not likely for the moment. This just in from "The View" on ABC: Gosselin will a celebrity guest host subbing for Elisabeth Hasselbeck on Sept. 14 and 15. I am sure she is doing it for her kids -- and to be "positive" and for "peace."

Posted by David Zurawik at 9:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (74)
Categories: CNN
        

In the wake of her departure from "American Idol," Paula Abdul's first job will be as host of "VH1 Divas," a live concert event scheduled for Sept. 17.

Hoping to change the conversation away from the scandal and death of a contestant on one of its low-rent reality shows, VH1 made the announcement Tuesday in a press release that described the former "American Idol" judge as "the legendary Paula Abdul."

I like Abdul, but I think "legendary" is going just a little too far, don't you?

Here is more from VH1 on the announcement:

A superstar diva in her own right with sales of over 50 million records and six number one hits, multiple Emmy and Grammy awards winner Paula Abdul is set to host the “VH1 Divas” live concert event. 

Joining the star-studded list of “Divas” performers is one of America’s favorite pop idols – the platinum selling artist, Jordin Sparks.  Previously announced “Divas” include Adele, Kelly Clarkson, Leona Lewis and Miley Cyrus.  The “VH1 Divas” concert will be televised live on VH1 on Thursday, September 17 at 9:00pm.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (13)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

Only three weeks into the return of "Jon & Kate Plus 8," and TLC did not give viewers a new episode of the series Monday night -- only reruns.

Instead of a fresh episode that reflects the "reality" of this divorced mother and father that is chronicled throughout the rest of the media on a minute by minute basis, what fans get this week is another appearance of Kate doing an interview solo. That's Tonight on "Larry King Live" on CNN at 9 p.m.

Is it starting to look like cable channel TLC has Kate, but it might not have a viable show that viewers can count on anymore? Instead of fresh episodes, what we have is Kate all over the place -- "Today" show, "Live with Regis and Kelly" and "Larry King Live" -- talking about the show.

We have had three episodes since the "hiatus" that followed the divorce announcement, and outside of Kate-lets-the-kids-sleep-out-in-tents episode, they haven't been much. Jon was barely a presence. And when he was there onscreen, he didn't seem to really be there mentally or emotionally.

Even reality TV show cameras don't lie if they are left running long enough. Or maybe, especially reality TV cameras don't lie if they are left running long enough.

TLC knows that airing reruns is never a good way to hold or re-build an audience. Once you commit to a weekly TV ritual, it makes you unhappy when it is disrupted. But with "Jon & Kate" it is even worse, because the pre and post-separation realities are so jarringly different -- and the press reminds us of the new reality of this family's life every day.

Maybe TLC has no other choice except to try and rubber-bands-and-glue its way week to week -- and keep Kate out there on the talk show circuit acting like the show is going on.

After the camping episode, I thought the show could and would go on. Now, I'm not so sure.

How about you?

Posted by David Zurawik at 7:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (72)
Categories: Reality TV
        

MTV is going to make an American version of the hit British teen series "Skins," and it is going to be set in Baltimore, the cable channel announced Monday.

Here's how MTV is describing the project and its connection to Baltimore:

Created by father and son team, Bryan Elsley and Jamie Brittain, the E4 and Channel 4 series is about a group of British teenagers who are trying to grow up and find love and happiness. Brian Elsley will be writing and executive producing the U.S. version.

In an effort to maintain the original production's successful model wherein all the stories were written by a group of British teenagers, MTV will similarly join together unknown teenagers to write and star in the series. The producers intend to set the show in Baltimore, Maryland.

"'Skins' is one of those rare shows that cuts through to its core audience with unusually authentic stories due to the unique writing and casting process that Bryan pioneered. Having personally pursued the U.K. project for almost two years, I am beyond thrilled to bring it to MTV in the U.S. We intend to preserve the authenticity of the British version and are excited to collaborate with the original team to develop stories that will speak to American youth," said Liz Gateley, Senior Vice President, MTV Series Development.

More from MTV's announcement:

“We are delighted to be making ‘Skins’ for the U.S. and in particular, for MTV who have embraced the show and its ambitions and unusual production process. We are looking forward to talking to teenagers across the U.S. and making a show that reflects their lives in every aspect,” said Charlie Pattinson, CEO, Company Pictures. 

“Skins” instantly became a critical and commercial hit in the U.K. especially among young adults as it was the third highest-rated show of the year on E4 reaching 1.2 million P2+ viewers and achieved a massive 61% of 16-34 year olds. The series won a 2009 BAFTA Audience Award, which was voted on by the public, and Best Drama Series at the 2008 Broadcast Awards.

The British-made version that airs on BBC America is censored for language and nudity. It will be interesting to see how sanitized the MTV version might be.

Frankly, I am more worried about the way U.S. versions of edgy Brit series invariably tend to soften the edge and excise the darkness. I don't think teens will watch a version of this frank series that does not have a dangerous and hard edge to it.

UPDATE TUESDAY MORNING: You can read more about the planned series here in a "Sun" story by Mary McCauley from Tuesday's paper. It includes Gateley saying Baltimore was chosen for its socio-cultural diversity. No decision yet on if the show will be filmed here, but Gateley expects some filming will be done in Baltimore even if the show is not totally produced out of the city.

Posted by David Zurawik at 10:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (16)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

OK, help me out. If you saw the second episode of "Mad Men" Sunday night, what do you think of it?

I have to admit I had mixed feelings as I watched. And they became focused on the final image of the Maypole dance that Don and Betty Draper attended at their daughter's school. As the dance first started, I thought, "Oh no, this show really is taking itself way too seriously and getting too literary in its symbolism. At one level, it's a soap opera. Who will Don cheat with next? Don't lose sight of that."

And then, as the young teacher started to dance barefoot through the grass in leading her students, the camera shifted so as to have us see her through Draper's eyes -- through what became his gaze of longing. The moment when Draper reached down to rub the back of his hand against the grass next to his chair as he watched her move through the grass was one of the most perfect distillations of male desire that I have ever seen on TV.

And so, I left episode two back in love with "Mad Men" -- and almost willing to forgive all sins.

I say "almost" because I was irritated throughout  the whole episode by the producers acting like the year in which this season was set was a big secret.

In an interview with me for a season-opener piece that appeared in the Sun Aug. 16, Robin Veith, the Baltimore native who serves at executive story editor for "Mad Men," told me she could not possibly reveal what year it was -- that creator Matt Weiner wanted viewers to tease it out from "clues" in the first two episodes.

So, I did not write that it was 1963, though, I later saw it in other publications. Some big secret. And it isn't exactly heavy sleuthing through tricky clues to do a two second Google search for "Bye Bye Birdie" or the demolition of Penn Station -- two recurring aspects of Sunday's show.

Also, while "Mad Men" seems to have male desire down cold, I am not sure it has a very good sense of female desire. I wonder what women who watch the show think. Does the show look at women rather than ever giving us life through their eyes. And if so, who and how?

Maybe it is all a matter of gendered viewer response, and not a limitation of the writing -- in short, my fault, rather than that of Weiner & Company. But I am not so sure.

To keep myself from getting too carried away by stunning moments like the Maypole dance and becoming one of the critics who says everything is perfect with "Mad Men" and anyone who says otherwise should be burned at a stake, I remind myself of the ending of season one and Peggy's "surprise" birth.

This is a great show, but not a perfect one. And I am still not sure about this season.

Posted by David Zurawik at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (20)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

The paperwork might be a mess and the White House might have seemed as if it was making things up as it went along, buy the "cash for clunkers" program that ends Monday has been good news for Baltimore's top-rated TV stations, according to general managers at WJZ and WBAL.

"It has definitely helped," Jordan Wertlieb, general manager at WBAL (Channel 11), said when asked this weekend if the government program that provides rebates for customers who trade in gas guzzlers for more fuel efficient new vehicles meant more auto advertising for his station during the last month.

Jay Newman, general manager of WJZ (Channel 13), also answered "yes" to the question of whether or not the program helped perk up auto advertising, a category that has suffered for all local media during this deep recession.

"Automotive advertising was improved in August and some other categories were also somewhat better," Newman said in an email response. "Overall, August was our best paced month of the year as compared to last August."

Posted by David Zurawik at 7:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

The mission of this blog is to report on the business, culture and craziness of television. I don't get nearly enough time for the craziness part.

Here's my pop-culture-crazy-but-I-love-it fact of the week: Max Baer Jr. is trying to buy a vacant hotel in Nevada so he can transform it into Jethro's Beverly Hillbillies Hotel and Casino. If I need to explain that Baer played Jethro Bodine on the CBS sitcom" The Beverly Hillbillies" (1962 -1091), you should probably stop reading.

But before you dismiss the series altogether, you should know "The Beverly Hillbilles" was the Number One show on TV in the 1962 and '63 seasons, and stayed in the Top 10 until 1966. We didn't have iPods then -- we had shows like this, which might explain why Boomers are such a warped generation.

Baer played Jethro Bodine, a cousin of the Jed Clampett clan. Jed was, in the words of the title tune, "the poor mountaineer who barely kept his family fed." But, as the title song continues, "Then one day as he was shooting at some food, up through the ground, come a bubblin' crude -- oil that is."

Translation: Jed shot his blunderbuss of a gun at a varmint and missed. But when the bullet went into the ground, it struck oil, and the Clampetts were millionaires who moved to Beverly Hills where they upset the status quo. In American Studies graduate seminars, this narrative is studied under the heading, "Fables of abundance -- America as the richest land in the world." Don't get me started on the social class implications of the series -- or the gender and power dynamics.

Sometimes when I'm out running, the only thing going through my head is the theme song to this crazy show. I still know every single word without even pressing my memory bank -- which might help explain why I am so warped.

This is not something I am proud of. But it's OK, I think Syracuse University pop culture guru Bob Thompson knows every word to this song as well as those from the other two shows that make up what's known as "The Hooterville Trilogy" -- "Green Acres" and "Petticoat Junction."

Never mind, back to Baer's hotel.

According to AP, the actor and director who lives in Lake Tahoe, has already gained approval to build his casino.

Just let me know when you start booking reservations, Jethro. I'll be there. And don't give Thompson the Hooterville Suite.

And say hi to Granny and the rest of the gang.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (28)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

"Project Runway" got off to strong start Thursday at its new home on Lifetime with an audience of 4.2 million viewers. That was up 32 percent from the Season 5 premiere on Bravo.

That audience also made it the highest rated competition reality series premiere on cable this year.

The series was also up in the key demographic of women 18 to 49 years of age -- by 28 percent over last year's premiere on Bravo.

Posted by David Zurawik at 2:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Reality TV
        

But there is tabloid TV and then there is tabloid morning TV, and today "The Early Show" on CBS hit a low that should make the producers step back and take a look at where the show is headed. Friday's show featured Maggie Rodriguez interviewing Kate Major, a former reporter for the tabloid Star magazine, who says she had a "12-day affair" with Jon Gosselin. He is the "Jon" to Kate Gosselin's "Kate" in "Jon & Kate Plus 8."

As the two women spoke on camera, the caption at the bottom of the screen said: "Jon's 'other' Kate feels dumped and dismayed." Welcome to the low road of morning TV.

Consider for a moment what warranted this screen time: A former reporter for a tabloid magazine says she had a 12-day affair with a low-life, reality-TV slacker. And she is the second woman who is not the man's wife to make the claim of having an intimate relationship with him. Stop the presses.

I know this Friday in late August wasn't the biggest news day in the world. But, really, "The Early Show" can do better than this. Trust me, I'm one of the guys who defends pop culture coverage, and even I think "The Early Show" needs to do a journalistic gut check on interviews like this.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (14)
Categories: CBS
        

So Shaquille O'Neal is coming to Baltimore this weekend to take on Michael Phelps in his new sports reality show, "Shaq Vs.," and that's pretty big.

But what are the ratings like for the new series that pits the basketball star against other top athletes on their turf?

So far, those are not so big.

Tuesday's episode that pitted O'Neal against Pittsburgh Steelers' quarterback Ben Roethlisberger finished third in its time period -- losing out to "America's Got Talent" (NBC) and "Big Brother" (CBS), while barely beating "More to Love" (Fox)

"America's Got Talent" had 11.6 million viewers, "Big Brother" 8.1 million, while "Shaq Vs." had an audience of 4.3 million. "More to Love" (Fox) had 4 million.

"Shaq Vs." tied for third with "More to Love" in the 18 to 49 year old demographic. That's better than other ABC series have been doing this summer, but that is not saying much.

So, maybe, Phelps can help the big guy out in the ratings where the Olympic swimmer has been known to do pretty well in such high-powered venues as "Saturday Night Live."

The swimming showdown between Shaq and Phelps tapes Sunday.

Posted by David Zurawik at 9:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

Thursday in a review, I called Fox's wretched Octomom special the official low point of summer viewing. Before making that call, I went back through the summer schedules and my posts to make sure I wasn't slighting some equally dreadful TV production. I wasn't.

In the process, though, I realized it's been a weird summer of TV. So, I started writing down my highs and lows. Here are my seven highs and three lows -- for a summertime Top 10 list. Notice the decided lack of dramas and sitcoms on my list of bests. The highs came from places that surprised even me. 

Agree, disagee? What did I miss? What were your favorite and most reviled TV shows and moments this summer?

Best TV shows of the summer:

1. Paul McCartney visits David Letterman. McCartney was a delight. The marquee performance fabulous. Read it here.

2. Jay Leno's last "Tonight" show. I wasn't expecting much, but Leno blew me away with his class. Read it here.

3. The Michael Jackson memorial service. Again, I was surprised -- this time by the emotion it evoked. Read it here.

4. MTV's coverage the day after Jackson's death. Brilliant remembrance through music videos. Read it here.

5. Golfer Tom Watson's near-miss at the British Open. I am not a golfer, but I was glued to the set for two days, and exhausted at the end. I know it's sports, but this heroic effort by the 59-year-old golfer was also about generation, aging and defying the gods. Whatever, it was one of the most intense viewing experiences all summer for me.

6. Return of the AMC drama "Mad Men" last Sunday. I know a lot of viewers had mixed feelings about the episode. But I think part of the problem is that we hype ourselves into expecting perfection from dramas like these, and then we are either disappointed or lie to ourselves that each epsiode really is perfect. Relax, and just enjoy the series. Read it here.

7. "Jon & Kate Plus 8" -- The TV breakup. OK, this could also be a low. And I am sure for some viewers it will be. But the sociology of this show fascinates me, and seeing this marriage played out this way on TV is part of it.

And here are my three lows:

1. Octomom. You can read yesterday's review here. I can't bear to think of it again.

2. Anthony Bourdain visits Baltimore for his Travel Channel show, and instead of exploring the city's food, tries to show what a street-savvy character he is. You can read one of several posts here.

3. NBC News and anchorman Brian Williams go "Inside the Obama White House." I respect Williams and the top-rated NBC Nightly News broadcast he leads. But this two-night production came to represent the way the press at the time was letting itself be used by the Obama White House. Read it here.

Posted by David Zurawik at 6:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

The reality TV special was two hours of film of Nadya Suleman, her 14 children, her parents and the birth of her octuplets -- all of it in search of a story line or a reason for being on TV.

I love cinema verite documentaries, the formula to which this production seemed to aspire. But this was not cinema verite filmmaking, this was cinema slop sleazeball exploitation.

I suppose in, say, a graduate seminar in film theory, one could argue that because Suleman's life appears to be chaos, any documentary about it might well adopt a chaotic structure as well. OK, but then why not have a team of monkeys with handheld digital cameras follow Suleman around, and make a film?

You know what, a team of monkeys could not have done worse than the producers from Radar Online, which made this film. And Fox could have probably gotten this tainted footage for even less from the monkeys -- a few bananas. Hey, there's a new business model for Rupert Murdoch to ponder.

I say tainted, because the State of California found the producers in violation on four counts in the way the children were filmed. That should have been enough to keep it off the air. But Fox bought it through a second party, and acted like that made a difference. Say what you will about Jon and Kate Gosselin, they have not been cited for any violations in the filming of their TLC show.

Beyond that little problem of violating child labor rules, what a mess this film is. There is absolutely no narrative or story line that I could discern. It opens with Suleman in a van with someone (I presumed the producers) and some of her infants as a horde of photographers snap pictures. I think they arrive at her mother's home where another horde is waiting.

Along the way, we hear Suleman saying things like, "How is this possible? This is unbelievable. What am I the president? Nooooo. I'm just a mother."

Answering her own questions aloud this way is only one of several things that makes you think Suleman talks to herself a lot. And after having to listen to her for two hours to write this review, I am not surprised: Who would want to hear what she has to say?

I thought I was going mad trying to follow the twists and turns of her mind. I think at one point, she said she saw spirits in the backyard of her home, but I could have imagined that. It came near the end of the film and by then, I think I was hallucinating and seeing spirits in my backyard. And then, they were hovering over the TV screen -- trying to change the channel back to the Orioles baseball game.

And all through this hot mess, Fox kept hyping the "jaw dropping" delivery room images of the births of the octuplets. Of course, they came in the final moments, and mainly consisted of jerky, handheld footage of the backs of doctors' and nurses' gowns -- and the front of a piece of cardboard or something one of the nurses kept putting in front of the camera.

There were fleeting shots of the infants, but you could see very little -- and, I have to tell you, I didn't want to see anything at all. What a hustle.

But at least I know it wasn't a monkey shooting the delivery room video, because you kept hearing the obnoxious voice of the photographer hired by Suleman to videotape the births as she argued with the medical personnel about her right to get in their way. And in case you couldn't follow the back and forth, there were subtitles. I only wish they had been in a language other than English -- one I didn't understand.

Do I want to see more Octomom on American TV? Nooooooooo. Do I think Fox and Radar Online should be ashamed of such programming? Yesssssssss.

Posted by David Zurawik at 8:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (25)
Categories: Reality TV
        

If the only thing that Don Hewitt had done in his six decades starting at the birth of TV News was to invent the phenomenally successful "60 Minutes," he would still have been one of the most influential producers in the history of the medium.

But Hewitt's legacy extends well beyond "60 Minutes." To a large extent, each time viewers tune into a newscast, they are experiencing a Hewitt invention.

No one else in television has played a larger role in shaping the face of television news -- from nightly newscasts and prime-time newsmagazines to special events and election coverage. Hewitt's list of credits reads like the index of a television news history book. 

He began in 1948 as producer-director on the network's first 15-minute-long attempt at a nightly newscast, "Douglas Edwards with the News." He was also the director for "See It Now," Edward R. Murrow's landmark documentary series that ran from 1951 to 1958. When Edwards was replaced at the CBS nightly news anchor desk in 1963, Hewitt became executive producer of the "CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite."

Under his direction, CBS became in 1948 the first television network to cover the national political conventions. Hewitt oversaw convention coverage every four years through 1980. In 1960, he directed the television debate between presidential candidates John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon -- an event that, for better or worse, changed the way campaigns are conducted. He directed CBS' around-the-clock coverage of the Kennedy assassination in 1963, and produced coverage of the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968.

And that list only takes his story up to 1968, when he invented "60 Minutes," television's most honored (75 Emmys) and most popular program (higher ratings than "Lucy," "Gunsmoke," "Cosby," "M*A*S*H" or "All in the Family").

"Don Hewitt can't be replaced," Morley Safer, a longtime "60 Minutes" correspondent, told me in an interview for a profile I wrote of Hewitt when he stepped down from the newsmagazine in 2004. "No one is going to have those kinds of instincts and that frenzied enthusiasm. The trick has been controlling him. If we didn't control him, we'd all be as crazy as he is."

There was no such thing as a television newsmagazine before Hewitt came up with "60 Minutes." "Dateline," "20 / 20," "48 Hours" are all made in its image. Beyond its award-winning-brand of watchdog journalism, "60 Minutes" has earned more than $2 billion in profit for CBS, annually contributing $100 million a year to the network's bottom line through the 1980s and 1990s.

"I don't think there is any disputing that he and Roone Arledge [the late president of ABC News] are the two most influential producers in the history of television news," said Andrew Heyward, then the president of CBS News. "Don doesn't like the "L" word, legend, and he doesn't like the "G" word, giant, but he is both. Having Don here is like being in the aircraft industry and coming into the plant every day and having one of the Wright Brothers on the assembly line."

This is one of my favorite Hewitt stories.

One morning in 1952, Hewitt was eating breakfast in a Chicago diner. In town to direct coverage of the Republican National Convention, he was puzzling over how to identify speakers at the podium without interrupting their remarks with a voiceover. Then he noticed a menu board with "little white letters stuck on a black background" on the wall.

"Bingo! It suddenly hit me: white letters superimposed on a black background is the way you superimpose names on the screen because the camera will not pick up the black, and you can superimpose that shot over anything you want to and show the letters and the picture simultaneously," Hewitt said. 

When the waitress came to take his order, he said: "I'll have the board."

He bought it for $45 and within hours, the menu board -- and the concept of television subtitles -- made their national debut on CBS.

Part showman, pure storyteller, the irascible and iconoclastic Hewitt peppered his conversations with four-letter words, vivid imagery and allusions to Hollywood formulas -- many of the same elements that have come together to form the look and feel of 60 Minutes.

"I feel like I'm living a sort of movie life," he said to me in 2004 trying to explain his worldview. "I've always seen my life through the movies. I mean, I grew up with the movies. To this day, I'm not sure that you're here, and I'm here, and this isn't a movie. I mean that really -- I'm just such a child of the movies."

Hewitt's rise at the network was meteoric, but not without bumps. In 1965, at the age of 32, he was fired as executive producer of Cronkite's nightly newscast by Fred Friendly, another legendary figure who was then president of CBS News.

"Friendly called me one day and he said, 'Don, the Cronkite news is not big enough for you -- you're so much bigger than that. I'm going to take you off the nightly news and have a special unit.'" One of his new tasks was to rethink how the network presented documentaries.

"Now, I'm stupid enough to believe all that," Hewitt continues, "So, I leave Friendly feeling great, and I walk into the office of Bill Leonard, who's the vice president of CBS News and also my pal, and I say, 'Bill, guess what? Friendly just told me the evening news is not big enough for me, and he wants me to have a special unit all my own. Isn't that great?'"

"And Leonard looks up from his desk and says, 'Kid, you just got fired.'"

In his CBS memoirs, "In the Eye of the Storm," Leonard says Friendly felt Hewitt's "talent lacked depth and intellectual commitment." But true to form, Hewitt attacked his new assignment with his usual enthusiasm -- and invented "60 Minutes."

Until 1968, most television documentaries were long, evenly paced and often dull. "As I studied the ratings," Hewitt says, "I saw that no matter what network a documentary was on and what it was about, each and every one -- good, bad or indifferent -- got the same share of the audience: 8 percent. So I thought, what if we made a program that was multi-subject and packaged reality as attractively as Hollywood packages fiction?"

To create his new show, Hewitt looked beyond television. He patterned "60 Minutes" after "Life" magazine, which packaged sociology and pop culture as successfully as it's ever been done.

"You can look in Marilyn Monroe's closet, if you're also willing to look in Robert Oppenheimer's laboratory," Hewitt says. "The secret is to put them together -- but with Marilyn Monroe on the cover. Do heads of state, but put them together with George Burns or Lena Horne or Jackie Gleason," he adds, naming some of "60 Minutes" most celebrated celebrity profiles.

He looked to films for inspiration when choosing correspondents. "At the start, I had two guys, Harry Reasoner and Mike Wallace, the white hat and the black hat," Hewitt says. "Harry was the guy who came from the heartland and brought Iowa to New York, and Mike was the tough guy in the trench coat. ... People tuned in each week to see the adventures of these correspondents."

More important than anything else, according to Hewitt, is storytelling -- creating a narrative that brings information to life and allows the viewer to fit it into a model of the world that makes sense. Hewitt titled his 2001 autobiography, "Tell Me a Story." It is, he said, the mantra that made "60 Minutes."

"There are four words that every child knows: Tell me a story. That's the secret.

"Even today, I will sit in our screening room looking at tape, and I'll say, 'This tape is pretty fantastic,' " Hewitt said during our 2004 conversation in his office and around the "60 Minutes" shop. "'But what is the story we're trying to tell here? Tell me a story. Tell me the story.'"

The ticking stopwatch. Hidden cameras. Ambush journalism. In 36 years, "60 Minutes" has reflected and shaped popular pop culture. Its correspondents, from Mike Wallace to Ed Bradley, are instantly recognizable. It inspired a Saturday Night Live parody starring Jane Curtin and Dan Aykroyd. In the late '90s, two PBS documentaries, "Smoke in the Eye" (1996) and "Inside the Tobacco Deal" (1998), were made about a "60 Minutes" episode that was delayed and ultimately aired in a watered-down way that left no one happy except perhaps the lawyers who were involved. A 1999 feature film called "The Insider" and starring Russell Crowe further popularized the same episode.

That segment, which has become the show's most infamous, got its start in 1994 when Wallace and producer Lowell Bergman proposed featuring a biochemist named Jeffrey Wigand, a former executive at the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company. Wigand was willing to say on air that his former employers had deceived the public by ignoring evidence of the health hazards of their cigarettes.

Ultimately, Laurence Tisch, then the chairman of the network, and his lawyers did not allow Wigand's segment to be aired. That decision was made as Tisch was attempting to sell CBS to Westinghouse, and it was feared that an expensive lawsuit brought by the tobacco companies would decrease his company's value. The debate over the decision and Hewitt's role in accepting it will probably never end.


As Hewitt described it to me in 2004, he had no choice. "The only way I could have got that broadcast on the air would have been to go out and hire a bunch of guerrillas and take the transmitter at gunpoint," he says. "It's their transmitter. I can't get the story on the air if they don't want it on the air. They own the transmitter to transmit the stories to the public. You can't get past that."

Like I said, the debate on that will probably never end.

Most of the material in this appreciation appeared in my 2004 profile. The morning after it ran in the "Sun," Hewitt was on the phone bright and early.

"Hey kid, nice piece," he said. "Really, I hope I can get you to write my obit with all this great stuff in it." 

I promised I would try.

UPDATE: CBS News announced Wednesday afternoon that it will devote all of Sunday's broadcast of "60 Minutes" to Hewitt. I can't wait to see it.

Posted by David Zurawik at 1:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (15)
Categories: CBS
        

WBAL-TV weathercaster Sandra Shaw got a shot on the national TV stage Wednesday as co-host for a day on "Live with Regis and Kelly," and she delivered a strong performance.

As reported on this blog, Shaw was one of 10 broadcasters who work for stations that carry the show to win a chance to co-host based on votes from viewers. The competition was sponsored by Disney-ABC, which syndicates the show nationally.

Wednesday was Shaw's day in the chair next to Regis Philbin, and it only took the veteran broadcaster a few minutes on stage with the high-energy Shaw to realize he wasn't going to have to be doing any hand holding with this guest host.

 "I am ready to go," she said when she hit the stage.

 "You look like it," Philbin said with emphasis in reaction to her intensity.

Wednesday's show was a terrific showcase for Shaw. After an introduction and a bit of banter between her and Philbin, the producers showed an impressive mini-biography of Shaw.

 It included the fact that she attended the University of Mississippi on a track and crosscountry scholarship. The biography also quickly chronicled in video the three or four local markets she in which she worked before Baltimore.

Typical of her of her ability to hold her own with Philbin, was an exchange after the biography piece finished. The tape had included some poorly-lit video from her first job in TV news in Oxford, Mississippi, where the University is located.

Philbin joked that the folks in Oxford might want to try using a little more light on the news set next time.

"Well, it's a student run station," she said nicely. And as impossible as this might seem for Philbin, he almost seemed chastined for a second. But she did it in a nice smiley-face way, and he laughed at himself.

Shaw also corrected Philbin when he suggested that Baltimore was known for having good lobster.

 "Crabs! Crabs!" she said. That's what the female co-host does on Live with Regis and Kelly, she corrects Philbin in a friendly way. Shaw had the act down cold.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

A new ABC sports reality series starring NBA center Shaquille O'Neal will be filming a segment in Baltimore Sunday at the North Baltimore Aquatic Club. Called "Shaq Vs.," the show pits O'Neal against other top athletes. Sunday's taping will find the wide-bodied O'Neal competing against Baltimore's Olympic champ Michael Phelps in the pool.

Members of Meadowbrook, where the pool is housed, were told in an e-mail this week that they would be able to watch the competition -- with only the area where the ABC crew is filming closed off. In addition to Phelps, other competitors in the series will include tennis star Serena Williams, baseball slugger Albert Pujols and retired boxer Oscar De La Hoya.

The series is limited run with taping scheduled to be completed by Sept. 15 when O'Neal reports to the Cleveland Cavaliers. Lat night's episode pitted O'Neal against Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. No date has yet been set for the swimming segment with Phelps.

Shaq is not the first celebrity to take Phelps on in the pool. CNN anchorman Anderson Cooper went against Phelps as part of a "60 Minutes" profile Cooper did as a contributing correspondent for the CBS newsmagazine. We can only hope Shaq is a little more competitive than Cooper.

Posted by David Zurawik at 10:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (17)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

I will leave it to his colleagues in Washington to place Robert Novak, who died Tuesday at age 78, on the political and journalistic map.

But it is my job to talk about his TV presence over some 25 years -- most of it on CNN.

Novak titled his 2007 memoir, "The Prince of Darkness," and he was indeed a very dark force in cable TV news contributing mightily to the toxic culture of confrontation, belligerence and polarization that so defines cable TV and American political discourse today. There is no way to be nice about his impact on cable TV during its formative years -- and his contributions for the worse to the tone and style of what passes for political conversation today.

(AP Photo of Robert Novak from 1958)

There are some things we shouldn't forget, like the ugly way Novak's career ended at CNN when he used vulgar language on-air and then stormed off the set. The backstory was that he knew a question was coming from host Ed Henry about his role as the first journalist to disclose the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame. That was in August of 2005.

Novak was suspended by CNN and left the cable channel in December of 2005 when his contract was not renewed.

The backstory here: In January of 2005, shortly after taking over as president of CNN/US, Jonathan Klein cancelled "Crossfire," which Novak once co-hosted, and set out on a mission to do what he could to move CNN away from a toxic cable talk show formula defined by confrontation and insult rather than information and discussion. TV and the nation are in Klein's debt for that effort, which included moving away from the likes of Novak.

In his memoir, Novak said he believed that his disclosure of Plame "undermined" his relationship with CNN. I am sure it did, but there was more to the break with the cable news network than just that act -- as huge as it was.

I am sure Novak's colleagues from the cable TV shows on which he appeared over the years -- "Crossfire," "Capital Gang," "Evans and Novak," "The Novak Zone," and "Novak, Hunt and Shields"  -- will have warmer recollections of the man.

But I am talking about Novak's sneering TV persona and the role it played in reaching back to the dark political style of the 1950's Richard Nixon -- and leading us to the polarized, angry space that cable TV and the conversation of American politics now inhabits. 

Posted by David Zurawik at 1:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (161)
Categories: Cable and Network News
        

Even after the break-up, Jon and Kate remains one of the most fascinating shows on TV. Here's the fascination for me, and it was on display again Monday night: It's the way the TLC on-screen and the tabloid off-screen versions of the show intersect and collide. I keep wondering whether the whole screwy thing is going to crash and burn --or whether the off-screen, scandal story will keep the on-screen family drama in profit and on the air for years to come.

It is a fabulous, weird, loopy, post-modern TV story to follow. Last week, the non-TLC Kate was all over the place: from an appearance on NBC's "Today" show crying about her marriage, to standing outside her home in Pennsylvania and causing such a tearful ruckus (thank you, President Obama) that the police were called. Jon had visitation that day, and Kate didn't approve of the babysitter he had on hand.

And then, there she was Monday night on TLC, visiting a battleship with her three 5-year-old boys and talking a lot about being a mom. She asked them if they would take care of her when they were bigger, and she told them she cried when she saw them in their sailor hats. The kids seemed to get none of it -- but that's OK.

The show has become so weird these days that I am not sure any longer even how I feel about Kate. The moment that crystallized it for me came near the end of the half hour show that featured Kate taking the three boys to visit a battleship in Wilmington, N.C., and then get haircuts and ice cream cones in the town

(Jon took the two older girls to go-carting and wall climbing, but he was lifeless, and they didn't seem all that into it. And could Jon be more of a low life -- wearing promotional T-shirts so that the logos have to be blurred? Are Jon and his new "friends" really that stupid to think TLC is going to give away product placement money that way? He really is a loser's loser.)

So, Kate and the boys are sitting dockside with their ice cream cones at the end of the day, and Kate says to one of the boys who is pressing against her, "Can you sit down and not keep climbing on me?" There's a bit of the Kate edge in her voice when she says it.

And the boy says, shyly in a small voice, "I like you."

OK, it stopped me cold, and I'm ready to go off on Kate. I'm ready to sit down at the blog and start hammering away about these kids being rattled by what's going on between her and Jon, and this little boy needing a little intimate reassurance from mommy... You get the idea how fast I'm headed down the Kate-is-a-monster track.

But I put the notes away, and decide to sleep on it. The blog can wait until the morning.

And now I'm thinking, "OK, Kate could have handled it better. But it's the end of a long day, and they have been crawling all over a big, nasty looking battleship for hours with cameras and other shipgoers staring at them. She's probably tired, hot and on edge. So, maybe being a little snappish isn't the worst thing in the world. She has been trying all day in a bunch of different ways to tell these kids she loves them -- I think."

What do you think? Good Kate, bad Kate, OK Kate -- in this moment of telling the kid to get off of her? And can this show go on? Is the tension between the two discourses giving you a headcahe or adding to your enjoyment of the show?

Posted by David Zurawik at 8:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (42)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

Sunday's night's Season Three premiere of "Mad Men" made a strong showing in the ratings with an audience 34 percent larger than the one for last season's premiere.

An audience of 2.8 million viewers tuned in for the 10 p.m. telecast up from the 2.1 million who watched the Season Two premiere.

The three showings of the AMC drama at 10 and 11 p.m. Sunday and 1 a.m. Monday drew just under 4 million viewers cumulatively. That's up 25 percent from last season's cumulative audience for the opener.

The best numbers for the slick series about life on Madison Avenue in the 1960s were online where the season opener generated more than 1.5 million page views Sunday, a 273% increase over the Season Two premiere.

Posted by David Zurawik at 5:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Ratings
        

Sunday night's broadcast of "60 Minutes" featuring James Brown's interview with Michael Vick won its time period drawing 3 million viewers more than the newsmagazine did the week before. But it did so against weak competition on the other channels and the help of a powerful lead-in from PGA golf coverage that included an upset of Tiger Woods.

An audience of 12.1 million tuned into "60 Minutes" Sunday night more than doubling the 5.8 million that watched ABC, the nearest compeition with a rerun of "America's Funniest Home Video" -- not exactly must-see TV. Fox had reruns of "'Til Death," a series that was DOA in the ratings on its first run, and "The Simpsons."

Read my analysis of James Brown, as the stern but forgiving father-confessor providing absolution for Vick in the prime-time confessional provided by "60 Minutes"  here.

I thought Brown and producers pulled several journalistic punches on Vick's behalf.

Posted by David Zurawik at 5:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: CBS
        

Michael Vick came to the prime-time confessional on "60 Minutes" Sunday night, sat down with the stern but understanding father-confesser James Brown and acted contrite. And in this TV and sports saturated culture, I am sure for many football fans, all will be forgiven.

Are you ready for some football? Then let the games begin. And let's forget about those poor animals and the horrible tortured deaths some of them suffered at the hands of Vick himself -- the of-so-contrite young man who says he cried in his cell some nights thinking about what he "did to the image." By that he means his image. That's not exactly remorse for his victims, is it?

Here's the bottom line on the TV interview: The "60 Minutes" producers are the best in the TV news business, and they were not going to totally ignore the facts of Vick's convictions. You had to listen carefully, but if you did, most of the facts were there. But Brown and the producers also pulled a few very big punches.

(Screen grab of James Brown courtesy of CBS News)

The biggest pulled punch involved the images they chose to show -- and not to show -- of the victims of Vick's sadism. They showed what I counted as five or six living dogs who were being rehabbed. We saw none of the horrific images of the victims of Vicks' torture that I saw when authorities moved in to rescue the animals and remove mangled corpses.

I don't know if most of us could have handled that kind of truth on the tube, but I think CBS News owed it to the truth of what Vick did to include some of the most shocking images if they were going to construct the narrative of contrition, forgiveness and redemption that CBS Sports anchor James Brown developed in his questions and follow-ups.

(By the way, Kevin Tedesco, spokesman for CBS News, said in a telephone conversation with me Friday that it was "unusual" for someone who was not a "60 Minutes" correspondent, contributing correspondent or staffer of CBS News -- as is the case with Brown -- to do an interview for the newsmagazine. But he said it was not unprecedented.)

The other punch involved Brown letting Vick get away with saying that his big sin was that he didn't "step up" to stop the dog fighting -- that he "wasn't a leader."

Brown should have stopped him right there and said something like, "No, Michael, let's be clear. This isn't about you not being a leader or not stopping other people from doing things. You were the one electrocuting, strangling and drowning dogs with your hands. Please respond to that."

Brown didn't. And Brown was at his very worst in feeding Vick the set-up line that allowed him to talk about once seeing police officers in his hometown turn their backs on a dogfight. Seeing that, Vick said, made him think, "This isn't as bad as it might seem."

What an outrageous suggestion that the actions of a couple of bad or lazy cops are responsible for Vick as an adult thinking it is OK to systematically torture animals. If feeding such lines doesn't amount to being an apologist, it's closer than any journalist should want to get to the line.

To the credit of "60 Minutes" and Brown, the CBS Sports anchor did bring up the team of lawyers and image makers coaching Vick, and, man, did his answers sound coached to me.

Brown also did say early on that Vick "participated" in the killing of animals. I wish he had been more specific, but that fact is one that supporters of Vick have successfully obscured.

Read back through the more than 100 comments on this blog to posts about Vick last week, and I bet you will find at least 20 percent of the commenters saying Vick only gambled or bankrolled a dogfighting ring, he wasn't really hands-on involved. Yes, he was involved hands-on, and his hands were and are covered in the blood of innocent animals.

In the end, I think "60 Minutes" cut it both ways. They did enough not to embarrass the brand, but they also pulled some punches that I am sure some of the outstanding journalists at CBS News and "60 Minutes" know should not have been pulled.

Or maybe, it's just that Vick's actions strike such deep reactions in viewers that no interview is going to change their minds one way or the other. And this was just another part of the spectacle of Vick's grand return to the NFL.

Posted by David Zurawik at 7:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (86)
Categories: CBS
        

There he goes again, President Barack Obama, sounding like Spiro Agnew or Richard Nixon complaining about the media. They also criticized TV for showing images of conflict, protest and confrontation. They too would have liked only to see the happy pictures of the staged town halls where the White House staff stacked the deck with tickets given only to supporters.

"TV loves a ruckus," Obama said Friday at one of his town hall meetings. "What you haven't seen on TV and what makes me proud are the many constructive meetings going on all over the country."

You know what, I have seen plenty of images of constructive meetings on cable, network and even local TV in Baltimore the past two weeks. And one of the reasons there have been a lot of images of conflict on TV is because there has been one heckuva of a lot of conflict by people unhappy with the way the White House in the view of some citizens has tried to ram through massive change in health care without enough deliberation and national debate.

UPDATE SUNDAY MORNING: CNN's "State of the Union" featured exactly the kind of segment President Obama says you can't see on cable. Anchor John King offered video bites from town hall meetings showing citizens asking questions, and then he had a Democratic legislator and a GOP legislator respond point by point to concerns and issues in the questions. It would be hard to imagine a piece more constructive and illuminating than this. No "ruckus" here, Mr. President.

(AP Photo of Obama at town hall meeting in Colorado)
 

Remember back in June when Team Obama started hitting some bumps in the road, and the president lashed out at Fox as "one television station entirely devoted to attacking" his administration?

His words sounded whiny and petulant. At the time, Fox was the only channel providing what little watchdog coverage of the White House we had. Coverage has gotten tougher since at CNN, ABC and CBS, thank goodness.

Cable TV is committing plenty of sins when it comes to important debates like healthcare -- there is no doubt about that. You can read one of my posts here about the angry, confrontational tone at the meetings being driven in part by imitators of reckless and belligerent cable TV show hosts.

But criticizing TV for showing images of conflict is outrageous. The images Agnew and Nixon didn't want us to see were part of the anti-war, womens, gay and civil rights movements. I wonder what would have happened if TV had NOT shown them. As a nation, we are forever in the medium's debt for showing them.

The administration is now spending tens of millions of dollars on TV ads, "grass roots" organizers in more than 40 states, and an office in the White House set up to try and control media on the health care debate. That is a pretty formidable operation, with seemingly unlimited resources. Bully pulpit doesn't start to describe it.

Among the few tools the people have to cut through the spin of that massive operation are those media outlets dedicated to publishing facts and showing images without regard as to whether or not the president likes them.

Posted by David Zurawik at 6:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (40)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

It is going to be a busy weekend for Z on TV.

First of all, if you have not yet read it online, please check out the piece I have running in Sunday's "Sun" on the season opener of AMC's "Mad Men" Sunday night. The opening episode of the third season visits a version of Baltimore in the 1960s with stops at Haussner's, the Belvedere and the London Fog factory in Hampden. I talk to some of the Baltimore people who were there in the 1960s and ask them to rate the scenes for historical detail. You might be surpised by what they say. Read it here.

Then on Sunday, I will be on CNN's media review show "Reliable Sources" with host Howard Kurtz. One of the topics: Kate Gosselin and the TLC show "Jon & Kate Plus 8." "Reliable Sources" airs at 10 a.m. in the East.

Sunday night, I'll be reviewing the CBS News "60 Minutes" interview of Michael Vick, convicted dog killer and new member of the Philadelphia Eagles. This has been a controversial topic all week on this blog. So, check back in for my review Sunday night.

Plus, I am going to get a post up later today on President Barack Obama criticizing the media for its coverage of the health care debate. I am not judging him as president, but he is one unreliable media critic.

So, please check back in here this weekend -- and check out CNN's "Reliable Sources" at 10 a.m. Sunday.

Posted by David Zurawik at 9:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

WBAL-TV weathercaster Sandra Shaw will be joining Regis Philbin as co-host of "Live with Regis and Kelly" on Wednesday, a spokesperson for the syndicated show said Friday.

As reported on this blog, Shaw was one of 10 broadcasters who work for stations that carry the show to win a chance to co-host based on votes from viewers.

Guests on the show Wednesday will be Tim Gunn from "Project Runway" and Dr. Doris Day discussing skin cancer.

Posted by David Zurawik at 1:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Baltimore Television
        

The preview aired during the "CBS Evening News with Katie Couric." According to the network's press release, Vick terms his systematic torture and killing of dogs as "wrong" and says he cried in his cell at night while in prison.

But from the portion of the interview that was shown, he also makes it sound as if he was not the one in charge of the torture and killing -- as if he committed a sin of omission by not stopping it, rather than a sin of commission by torturing and killing the animals himself as a judge said he did.

See below to read the transcript. You be the judge and tell me what you think. Does he sound sincere, or is it the start of what one blogger called termed The Michael Vick Redemption Tour? Is he taking responsibility?

JAMES BROWN: And the operation, Michael, that you pleaded guilty to bankrolling, to being a part of, engaged in barbarous treatment of the animals-- beating them, shooting them, electrocuting them, drowning them-- horrific things, Michael-- what about the dogs?  What about the dogs?

MICHAEL VICK: It was wrong, JB…I feel, you know, some tremendous hurt behind what happened.  And, you know, I should have took the initiative to stop it all…I didn't-- I didn't step up.  I wasn't a leader.

JAMES BROWN: So for the cynics who will say, "You know what?  I don't know.  Michael Vick might be more concerned about the fact that his career was hurt than dogs were hurt."

MICHAEL VICK: I mean, football don't even matter.

Posted by David Zurawik at 6:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (56)
Categories: CBS
        

And what day would be complete at Z on TV without a Kate Gosselin post?

But this one from Kate's appearance today on the syndicated show "Live with Regis and Kelly" has an interesting cultural edge. Regis, no one's idea of a great interviewer, cleverly gave voice to a wish that I think a lot of old-time fans of the show have for Jon and Kate Gosselin, the divorcing mom and dad of the TLC reality show Jon & Kate Plus 8.

Philbin, expressing a hope the marriage could be saved, asked Kate if that was a possibility from her point of view.

But what if, Philbin asked, continuing down the path of happily ever after, Jon came to her and said: “Let’s put the past behind us. I want to spend the rest of my life with you and the kids … what would you say to that?”

“I don’t think I can answer that,” she said. "A lot of our lives is public, but a lot is private, as well.”

Translation: It's not going happen. No happy ending here.

But nice try, Regis.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

One of the huge puzzlements to me as I watch the rising tide of angry town hall meetings on healthcare is why the clear link between the rancor in meeting halls across the country to what passes for political conversation on so-called all-news cable TV isn't being more discussed.

The mock-your-opponent, shout-'em-down, insist-lies-are-truths style of discourse seen in the rancorous exchanges in town halls this week from Maryland to California is on display every night five nights a week on our shiny new flat screens. It has been for years, and not just on the Fox News Channels with Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.

Now we have Lou Dobbs trying to drag the muck of his radio show into the CNN newsroom on some nights, while Keith Olbermann at MSNBC has become one of the ugliest, nastiest, most dishonest character assassins in American political life since Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s. And NBC News lets him get away in violation of almost everything that once proud brand stood for.

And these all-news cable TV mainstays are rewarded for their bad behavior with contracts worth millions of dollars a year. Why wouldn't some folks think this is the "smart" way to talk about politics?

We look back in horror today at the polarizing political discourse of the 1950s when careers were ruined, lives were shattered and suicides committed because of the angry rhetoric and reckless personal attacks delivered by the likes of McCarthy and some of his acolytes both in politics and the Hearst-owned press.

I immersed myself in 1950s and '60s TV and media as part of my Ph.D. dissertation, and I can tell you that prime-time cable TV hosts like Olbermann and Hannity are playing the very same dark and dangerous chords as McCarthy's lot.

Only today, thanks to cable TV and the Web, they have bigger amplifiers and the ability to spread their poisonous messages instantly with virtually no gatekeepers to get in the way -- particularly when entities like NBC News, which knows better, look the other way.

And the poison of attack and hateful speech spreads through the body politic until we can no longer have civil town hall discussions in this country between elected officials and their consituents on matters that are vital to the future well being of this nation and its citizens. 

Yeah, yeah, I know about the charges of Astroturfing by organized political groups and the "punching back" by the White House -- contributing to the ugly yin and yang of these meetings and the protesters.

But you couldn't get people to act out with the anger and belligerence seen at these town hall meetings if these people thought it would bring them shame to behave that way in public.

But the lesson of cable news taught night after night in prime time is that such ugly and nasty behavior won't bring you shame, it will bring you favor. You're acting just like Olbermann, O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck and Dobbs. You're acting just the way cable TV teaches you to act in the political arena.

And now we reap the whirlwind of an angry, polarized, confused and frightened populace.

Posted by David Zurawik at 8:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (34)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

CBS News says there were no conditions placed on the interview with ex-NFL star and convicted dog killer Michael Vick that will air Sunday. A spokesman also said that even though CBS Sports host James Brown has never done a report for "60 Minutes," he earned the right to do the Vick piece by getting the interview on his own.

In my first post about the interview, I raised questions about the choice of Brown rather than one of the CBS News correspondents who are regulars on the show, such as Scott Pelley or Steve Kroft -- or Byron Pitts, who was named a contributing correspondent to the show this year.  Brown is not a part of CBS News, which produces "60 Minutes."

"So, James Brown has never been on 60, but this was his beat, he worked it for a long time and got the interview, and so, Jeff was pleased to put him on 60 MINUTES with it," Kevin Tedesco, a spokesman for CBS News, said in an email response to questions from me. "The interview had no conditions." 

The "Jeff" to whom Tedesco refers if Jeff Fager, the executive producer of "60 Minutes."

Just as I acknowledged in the name of transparency that I'm an animal lover in my first post, let me also reiterate the tremendous respect I have for "60 Minutes." This blog includes several examples of that respect posted during the last year.

In my first post, I said I did not think I could watch as "60 Minutes" provided Vick with this prestigious prime-time platform on the eve of his return to the playing field. But as a media critic, I do have to watch and write about it Sunday night. There are serious journalistic and cultural implications to the choices CBS news is making with Vick.

Should CBS, which has a huge interest in boosting the NFL by nature of its contract to televise games, be the network doing this interview? Should Fager have erred on the side of journalism and not let a sports show host do the piece even if he did get the interview on his own? How do viewers know that Brown didn't get the interview because Vick (or Vick's handlers) thought Brown would be the most sympathetic? In fact, that's the very way many publicists for celebrities play the media game -- using access to try and control who will do the interview.

To what extent will "60 Minutes" include the gruesome and horrific nature of Vick's crimes in its piece Sunday night? Will "60 Minutes" think "balance" simply means having a spokesperson from the Humane Society of the United States on as a talking head?

I have no doubt as pro football fever starts to build that "60 Minutes" will have a huge audience. I hope many media critics will be in that audience with me trying to assess what price 60 Minutes did or didn't pay in credibility to get it.

Posted by David Zurawik at 7:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (53)
Categories: CBS
        

Usually I am intrigued by the latest razzle-dazzle of Fox reality TV executive Mike Darnell. But his latest, "Octomom: The Incredible Unseen Footage," scheduled for 8 p.m. Aug. 19, troubles me a lot.

It troubles because the footage of Nadya Suleman and her children was shot by by a production company that received four citations from the state of California for violating rules on filming children. according to AP.

Given that fact, you you tell me how these kids are not being exploited by every dollar that changes hands on this TV special -- whether it is Fox, the broker who made the deal, the production company that violated California labor lawa of Suleman herself. Say what you will about the Gosselins, they haven't been cited for breaking any child labor laws yet.

Here's the hype from Fox in the press release sent out Monday:

Known to the world as “Octomom,” Nadya Suleman made headlines and history in January 2009 when she gave birth to octuplets conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF). Already a mother of six, much about Suleman has been shrouded in secrecy and subject to speculation.

For the first time, television viewers will get an intimate look inside Suleman’s life in OCTOMOM: THE INCREDIBLE UNSEEN FOOTAGE, a two-hour special airing Wednesday, Aug. 19 (8:00-10:00 PM ET/PT) on FOX Through this never-before-seen footage, viewers will be able to witness the emotional struggles, physical complications and financial burdens of this single mother of 14.

From the day the octuplets were born, cameras had unprecedented access to every area of Suleman’s life. For more than seven months, cameras documented Suleman, capturing incredible footage, including the private moments and reactions of Suleman’s family, as well as Suleman’s own feelings, doubts and fears

Now, again, here's an accounting from AP of how the two hours of film came about and the parties involved.

Posted by David Zurawik at 10:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (11)
Categories: Fox
        

Monday night's first half of "Jon & Kate Plus 8" looked and felt very much like a continuation of last week's "Renovations & Vacations" episode, with more of Kate at the beach with the kids while Jon "supervises" the kitchen renovation.

I guess we are going to have to wait at least another week to see what the "new" version of "Jon & Kate" really looks like. Monday night's two-episode package also included a rerun with the divorcing couple sitting side by side on the couch talking to the camera, which was surely a little confusing to some given all the "news" last week about TLC saying the couch was history.

While Kate got mixed review for her interview with Meredith Vieira on the "Today" show Monday, including one from me, I really did not like the Kate I saw Monday night very much at all. The faster TLC moves this show forward, the better for her image.

The new kitchen Kate came home to is just too-too much in this economy when many people in the very audience for this show go to bed each night and wake up every morning worrying about whether they will still have an income coming into their household by the end of the  week.

Last week, I said the renovation of an almost new kitchen in a mini-mansion is just this side of "Let them eat cake." Last night, when I saw all the marble, it is "Let them eat cake." If TLC wants folks to identify with Kate, this is not the way to do it. Her utter lack of financial worry sure makes it hard for me to  empathize with this "reality" TV mom.

And then, came the second half hour, a rerun with Jon and Kate putting on their yard sale. Maybe I shouldn't complain about a rerun, but what the heck. I have never written about it before.

The fact that the proceeds went to charity was nice, but all Kate did was kvetch. In fact, she took kvetching to a new level even for her as she, Jon and a helper stood in a church parking lot waiting for a truck from a company that was providing tables for their yard sale to show up.

"I'm irritated," she said about 10,000 times. "Already, I'm irritated," she added when Jon tried to ignore her constant complaining about the truck not being there.

She complained about being cold, yet she was dressed for the beach. It's not Jon's fault she didn't dress for the weather. And didn't she look like a nice person when she mocked Jon because he forgot to brings the kids' lunches. (He took the kids back to the house where they ate, and all was well.)

I understand the impulse of having video in the can from "Renovations & Vacations" and having to make an episode out of it or lose money. But given all the madness connected with the show and the money the show has already made, maybe TLC should have just ditched this one if they want us to start liking Kate more these days.

Posted by David Zurawik at 7:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (80)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

The CBS newsmagazine "60 Minutes" will feature an interview Sunday with former NFL player Michael Vick. It is the one-time quarterback's first TV interview since he confessed two years ago to running a brutal dog fighting ring. Vick confessed that he himself tortured and killed dogs.

James Brown, a host for the NFL show that appears on CBS Sports, conducted the interview that was taped Monday.

Vick has been conditionally re-instated by the NFL as of July 27, according to CBS. Under the terms laid out by the league, Vick could be back in uniform by the sixth week of the season.

Will you watch Vick on 60 Minutes? Do you think CBS should be giving him this showcase? 

Some will surely see this as the beginning of an effort to rehabilitate the image of Vick, who spent 18 months in federal prison.

The network says a representative of the Humane Society of the United States will also be interviewed on "60 Minutes" Sunday.

I am an animal lover. And I have to be honest, I do not think I can watch. I have a real problem with the kind of suffering he caused for those poor animals. You make Vick a sports star again, and I think you teach young kids in places like Baltimore that it is okay to abuse animals. (I won't describe some of the horrific things done to animals in this city lately.)

TV is the highway to hero status in our culture, and I suspect the "60 Minutes" prime-time showcase is Vick's first major step back on that road.

There are also a number of journalistic questions connected to this story by "60 Minutes."

One, why was James Brown, a sportscaster, and not one of the CBS News journalists like Scott Pelley designated to do the interview? Did the NFL or Vick have some control over who would do it?

 And what about the relationship CBS had with the NFL and the tens of millions of dollars it makes off that relationship, which gives them the "rights" to show NFL games? Should CBS be the network doing ths interview given that relationship?

Posted by David Zurawik at 5:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (91)
Categories: CBS
        

It was a Kate Gosselin kind of day on NBC's top-rated "Today" show as Meredith Vieira's interview with TV's most-talked about mom was relentlessly promoted from the minute the show started -- and broken into two segments to keep viewers through most of the show's two hours. For a minute there, I thought they might name her a third co-host.

Oh, I'm sorry, I just said "interview." It's Meredith Vieira's "exclusive one-on-one interview with Kate Gosselin" to use the language of the show. My favorite tease from Viera, "Coming up, Kate Gosselin... she is breaking her silence in just a moment."

In fairness, Vieira did not give Kate, the mother on the TLC reality series "Jon and Kate Plus 8,"  a free ride. Vieira kept a journalistic distance and professional edge throughout the interview, asking solid questions.Though it is hard to know with Kate, she did seem a little thrown off the script in her head when Vieira asked why she still wore her wedding ring if she and Jon were done.

(AP Photo of Kate Gosselin on "Today" by Richard Drew)

There were tears during the interview with Kate saying she wears the ring "for them" -- meaning her eight children. Her thinking, as she explained it to Vieira, is that she doesn't want any of the big changes in their lives right now to be sudden. She is trying to introduce the changes in a gradual manner: "I don't want to upset them." Kate said she wants to be able to "walk them slowly through it."

When Vieira asked about rumors of romance between Kate and a bodyguard for the Gosselin family, Kate denied it. She also denied buying a condo in Maryland.

But when Vieira followed-up by asking her where she lives when she is not with the children in the Pennsylvania mini-mansion, Kate declined to answer.

"To be very honest," she said using a phrase that often makes people think you are not being honest at all, "I'm in hiding." She says she has to "hide" from the tabloid repoprters and photographers. Vieira, who knows a little bit about fame in her own right, didn't seem very convinced by that answer, but she professionally moved on.

Vieira asked about Jon's 22-year-old grilfriend, of course. Asked if she was shocked, Kate said, "It is very hurtful when his decisions affect the children."

Are you getting the picture? Kate seemed to want to paint herself as a brave and determined mom who was wronged by Jon, but Vieira was not playing that game.

Vieira brought up Jon's claims that she broke up the marriage way back in October -- not him with his summertime flings. Kate denied that without being specific. She was also a little vague about what was going on behind the scenes when Vieira last interviewed her.

The toughest part of the interview came with Vieira questioning Kate's core onscreen identity as a mother. Of course, Vieira did it in the form of citing others who say such things about Kate. But nevertheless, Vieira got it out there on the table. She cited Kate's brother and sister-in-law as critics of Kate as mom.

Kate said criticizing her had become a "business" for her brother and his wife, paying them "tens of thousands of dollars." She said it really hurts "when even your own family turns on you."

As to charges of exploiting her children for profit, Kate said, "My kids brighten peoples' lives." Thanks to being on the TLC show, her children have "opportunities they otherwise wouldn't have had." She said all the children have college funds set up with money from the show.

Asked if in light of her marriage falling apart, she has any regrets about doing the show, Kate said, "I don't live my life in regret."

The most curious answer came when Vieira asked about regrets in connection with Jon "moving on."

"Those decision don't affect me," she said. It probably would have happened anyway, she added, "camera on, camera off."

Spoken like a long-tilme reality TV pro. But what do you think? Did Kate hurt or help her case with this interview?

And now comes Jon tonight on the E! cable channel, which should have an audience about one-tenth as large -- if he is lucky. Still, talk about using she-said/he-said as a promotional tool for tonight's episode of "Jon & Kate Plus 8."

Posted by David Zurawik at 7:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (51)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

Since the day I launched this blog last September, I have been writing repeatedly about the way in which I believe the harsh, reckless, irresponsible and dangerous rhetoric of cable TV talk show host like MNBC's Keith Olbermann and Fox' Bill O'Reilly is hurting America.

Click here to read one of the very first posts last September headlined: "MSNBC paying for its Olbermann sins."

Now comes much discussion the last two weeks about the so-called deal brokered between General Electric, the parent company of NBC News that runs MSNBC, and News Corporation, the firm that owns the Fox News Channel. The purpose of the deal: to keep Olbermann and O'Reilly from attacking executives and on-air personnel of their corporate opponents.

The deal has reportedly been in the works since last spring, and is now either or or off, depending on who you read and the mood on any particular night of either mercurial host. But there is one slice of this story that has been ignored, and I think it speaks legions about what is so very wrong with media today.

According to Howard Kurtz, one of the core reasons that senior excutives from Fox and GE met to try and broker a truce in namecalling was that relatives of Jeffrey R. Immelt, CEO of GE, were reportedly upset by the things O'Reilly said on-air about Immelt, while O'Reilly's family members were hurt by things Olbermann said about O'Reilly. Others have reported similar accounts involving discussions at a meeting between Immelt and Roger Ailes, who runs Fox News, to broker the deal.

Here is what is what I find so troubling about all of it. Executives at NBC News and Fox News didn't care about O'Reilly and Olbermann recklessly attacking others sometimes with flatout lies and, in the case of Olbermann, slander -- that was okay. It was only when the family members of a CEO at GE and an on-air performer for Fox were reportedly unhappy that it was time to cool things down and rein in the out-of-control cable TV hosts.

Where are the basic broadcast and journalistic standards of responsible speech applied uniformy to all persons on whom these two so-called all-news cable channels report or comment? There are none, that's where they are -- until one of their own people in power is made to feel some discomfort. And then, the zone of protection applies only to friends and family of the two corporate entities.

Does not the very fact that Immelt and Ailes wanted this rancorous on-air back-and-forth to stop once it was directed against their own camps acknowledge that such rhetoric and name calling are unacceptable? So why is Olbermann especially allowed to continute to behave this way toward others?

The good news about the reporting that has been done on this story by Brian Stelter at the New York Times and others is that it is contributing to a consensus as to what a unreliable, dangerous and out of control force Olbermann has become.

I made the mistake of calling characters like Olbermann cable clowns last year, but I was wrong. There is absolutely nothing funny about them any more.

We look back in horror today at the political discourse of the 1950s when careers were ruined, lives were shattered and suicides committed because of the reckless words and groundless accusations hurled by the likes of Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy and some of his acolytes both in politics and the Hearst-owned press.

I immersed myself in 1950's TV and media as part of my Ph.D. dissertation, and I can tell you that prime-time cable TV hosts like Olbermann are playing the very same dark and dangerous chords as McCarthy's lot. Only today, thanks to cable TV and the Web, they have bigger amplifiers and the ability to spread their poisonous messages instantly with virtually no gatekeepers to get in the way -- particularly when entities like NBC News, which knows better, look the other way.

And the poison of attack and hateful speech spreads through the body politic until we can no longer have civil town hall discussions in this country between elected officials and their consituents. Yeah, yeah, I know about the charges of Astoturfing and the "punching back" by the White House. But you couldn't get people to act with the anger and belligerence seen at these town hall meetings last week if those people thought it would bring them shame to behave that way in public.

But the lesson of of cable news is that such ugly and nasty behavior won't bring you shame, it will bring you favor. You're acting just like Olbermann, O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck and Dobbs. You're acting just the way cable TV teaches you to act in the political arena.

And now we reap the whirlwind of an angry, polarized, confused and frightened populace.

Posted by David Zurawik at 12:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (25)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

While I admit to having serious concerns about advertiser boycotts, I am starting to think that things have gotten so far out of control with some of the cable hosts on the so-called all-news cable channels that maybe sponsor pullout is one of the only actions that can make a difference.

I'm talking about TV Newser's report that three advertisers have distanced themselves from Glenn Beck's show on the Fox News Channel in response to Beck calling President Barack Obama a "racist" who holds a "deep-seated hatred for white people."

Beck is only one of several out-of-control hosts who traffick in innuendo, slander, smears and outrageous comments like the ones about Obama.

(Los Angeles Times Photo by Carolyn Cole)

It would be preferable if the major media corporations that own the channels had their own standards of responsible speech -- or if they could be shamed by critics into demanding responsible speech from their prime-time cable hosts.

But that clearly is not happening. In fact, the contagion seems to be spreading to CNN with Lou Dobbs carrying the virus. Let's hope this version of swine flu doesn't infect the whole channel.

So, maybe in these harsh economic times, the loss of advertisers will make a difference.

Something has to. The level of prime-time discourse on all-news cable TV is absolutely toxic.

We look back in horror today at the political discourse of the 1950s when careers were ruined, lives were shattered and suicides committed because of the reckless words and groundless accusations hurled by the likes of Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy and some of his acolytes both in politics and the Hearst press.

I immersed myself in 1950's TV and media as part of my Ph.D. dissertation, and I can tell you that some of the prime-time cable TV hosts are playing the very same dark and dangerous chords as McCarthy's lot. Only today, thanks to cable TV and the Web, they have bigger amplifiers and the ability to spread their poisonous messages instantly with virtually no gatekeepers to get in the way.

A spokesperson for Fox told TV Newser that the advertisers have not abandoned the news channel altogether -- only removed their ads from his show. It's a start.

Colorofchange.org is organizing the boycott of Beck. Click here for more on the campaign.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (98)
Categories: Cable and Network News
        

It's official, I am past the stage of denial and finally starting to accept the fact that Paula Abdul will not be coming back to "American Idol."

Fox Entertainment Chairman Peter Rice said Thursday that the network is done negotiating with Abdul and two guest judges will be brought in during the auditions for the ninth season that starts Friday.

The two are Victorian Beckham and Katy Perry. They will join Simon Cowell, Randy Jackson and Kara DioGuardi.

The tryouts will run for seven weeks.

Here's a link to the AP story.

How long do you think it will be before Abdul is doing "I'm a Celebrity...Get me Out of Here"?

Posted by David Zurawik at 1:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (9)
Categories: Fox
        

The "Kate Plus 8, Let's Hate Jon" story line I saw taking shape on the show's return to TLC this week looks like it will be taking another step forward Monday morning when Kate Gosselin is interviewed live on NBC's "Today" show by Meredith Vieira.

This will be her first interview since the break-up, and even though TLC stresses that she and Jon are still equal partners in the show, the interview will be Kate only.

As I said, TLC looks to be urging viewers to take sides just as friends are often led to do in a real-life divorce, and there is no secret about whose side the channel wants us to take. Hint: It's the side of the parent who isn't on the Riviera with a 22-year-old "friend."

Assuming Kate doesn't say something really foolish, this could be brilliant image-making -- or better yet, in the case of Team Kate, image re-making.

No morning show stresses family as relentlessly or successfully as the top-rated "Today" show. And Vieira can recount all of Jon's bad bahavior and all Kate has to do is looked pained and decline comment to win huge sympathy.

And, oh yeah, It's Monday morning -- just in time to give the maximum bump to the next episode airing Monday night.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (23)
Categories: NBC
        

After years of the judges on "American Idol" and Fox playing the game of they-will-return/they-won't-return/they-will-return, it looks like one of them might actually not be back. Tuesday night while some of us slept tight thinking the world was safe for "Idol" lovers everywhere, Paula Abdul sent out a tweet saying she wasn't coming back for the new season -- and the blogosphere is freaking out.

I say don't freak out just yet. There is still a lot of wiggle room on both sides for Abdul to take back her resignation. Try this scenario: Abdul gets a big  outpouring of affection, Fox bumps up its offer, and everybody is everybody's new best friends again. Would you be shocked?

You can never say never with someone as mercurial as Abdul, but these players have been doing this dance too long to stop now. (In fact, on the mercurial scale, Abdul makes former Green Bay Packers' quarterback Brett Favre seem like the Prudential Rock, and how many times has he re-tired and un-retired now?)

Here is Abdul's message: "With sadness in my heart, I've decided not to return to 'Idol.' I'll miss nurturing all the new talent, but most of all being a part of a show that I helped from day 1 become an international phenomenon."

She went on to say, "What I want to say most, is how much I appreciate the undying support and enormous love that you have showered upon me."

Do you think she'll be back?

And for my Baltimore readers, do you remember the sports talk radio and local media freakout a few weeks ago when a certain wide receiver from the Baltimore Ravens retired? And if I am not mistaken, he is back in camp, running routes and everybody is acting like it never happened.

Still, Abdul did take a slow summer's eve and make it more lively with her message of departure. And I have to say that I do not think this show will be the same without Abdul. Whatever heart "American Idol" had she provided.

More on Paula Abdul:

• Reality Check: In defense of Paula Abdul
• Paula Abdul through the years photo gallery
• Weigh in on Paula's exit
  

Posted by David Zurawik at 8:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Fox
        

The return of "Jon & Kate Plus 8" Monday drew less than half the audience of the season opener in May -- 4.1 million viewers vs. 9.8 million.

But by the standards of basic cable TV, 4.1 million viewers is still a very large audience. And analysts say anything over 2 million viewers with solid female demographics will keep the show in profit.

At more than 4 million viewers per half hour, "Jon & Kate" is still a moneymaker for TLC.

Monday's two episodes averaged about 1.8 million women 18 to 49 and 25 to 54 years-of-age. Again, for cable that is an audience advertisers are sure to find attractive.

Here's how TLC is characterizing the performance:

• ... "Jon & Kate Plus 8's" return ranked strongly for the night, with the 9:30p airing coming in as the #1 telecast in ratings and delivery beating all of broadcast and ad-supported cable among W18-49, W18-34 and P18-34.

• "Jon & Kate" Plus 8's  9:30p ranked #1 telecast for ad-supported cable for ratings and delivery among P18-49, P18-34, W18-49, W18-34...

Posted by David Zurawik at 3:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (13)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

After the first half hour Monday night of "Jon & Kate Plus 8," I thought I had officially had it with the show -- again.

I thought it was just this side of "let them eat" for Kate to get a new kitchen. What was wrong with the new kitchen she already had in her new mini-mansion? And then, when she went to the beach to escape the mess, I wondered if there was anyone at TLC who understood how bad most Americans are hurting financially these days -- and what a bad idea it is to have Kate flaunting her utter lack of financial worries.

But then, came the second half hour with no Jon in sight and Kate leading a camp-out for the kids in the backyard. And I saw the future of this show -- and I think it might just be a fairly bright one.

Laurie Goldberg, senior vice president of TLC, told me last week that we are going to see the kids with Jon part of the time, and then with Kate part of the time -- and rarely or never will we see the kids with both of them. And I believe her.

But within that overarching stucture, here is the dominant storyline that I predict will develop: Kate will emerge as the responsible parent holding the home together for the kids and providing them with whatever fun and sense of joy we see them having.

Jon, meanwhile, will appear distracted and self-absorbed even while he tells the cameras how much he cares about the kids.

Just as friends are often asked to do in real-life, viewers are going to be pushed by the editing and images to take sides, and TLC is going to try and get us to side with Kate.

Some will say that's a tall order, given her abrasive personality and sense of self-importance. But she already has a huge headstart. Jon has become an poster boy for adolescent bad behavior with his girlfriends and flings on the French Riveria, while Kate is with the kids. So, there is already a major image problem for Jon, which the tabloids will be only too happy to advance the more foolish his actions become.

But there was also a more subtle movement afoot in the camp-out episode Monday -- one steeped in gender. Kate takes on the task of putting up tents for the kids, all the while telling viewers that she has no idea how to do so.

As she struggles, her little girls tell her this is something boys can do, and then one them says, "Daddy knows everything about tents."

And Kate without looking up from the aluminum and rayon says in a pleasant voice, "Well, daddy's not here now."

Daggers, daggers, daggers. And where is daddy, dear viewer? Oh, he's on a yacht on the Riviera with a 22-year-old woman. I saw it on the cover of one of those magazines at the supermarket checkout counter.

And Kate bravely soldiers on. She reads the instructions, figures them out, and gets the tents up. And guess what, for the first time in weeks, it looks like the kids actually have some fun toasting marshmallows and sleeping outside for a night.

And where was dad, again? On the Riviera with his girlfriend....

I think this is the future. And by the end of the season now that he has his own publicist, Jon might only be doing guest appearances every fourth week or so while Kate carries the load.

Kate Plus 8 -- and we hate Jon -- that's the future I think TLC is betting on.

Look out, Jon. I think you're about to become reality TV roadkill.

Posted by David Zurawik at 10:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (89)
Categories: TV and Pop Culture
        

Here is the Media Matters ad criticizing CNN anchorman Lou Dobbs for his on-air efforts in continuing to lend credence to the "birthers" movement that says President Barack Obama is not an American citizen.

 And you had better watch it here if you want to see it, because it won't be showing in Baltimore on any cable channel.

Media Matters did not extend its original buy to Baltimore. And now, cable operators in the cities like New York where the liberal media watchdog group did buy are saying they won't carry the ad when it debuts Tuesday night.

Media Matters did buy in Washington, but viewers there will only be able to see the ad Tuesday night on MSNBC or Fox.

The initial intent by Media Matters was to have the ad air during Dobbs' show on CNN. That didn't happen, but the strategy has certainly resulted in a major media discussion.

So view it here, and you won't have to worry about cable operators carrying it or -- more likely, not carrying it.

Posted by David Zurawik at 6:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (16)
Categories: CNN
        

Let me say upfront that I appreciate what a terrific marketing concept and huge cable TV success Shark Week has been for the Discovery Channel over the years.

And this year's week of the shark, which started Sunday, is as strong as ever with new productions and a most engaging host in Baltimore native Andy Dehart, director of biological programs at the National Aquarium in Washington.

That said, I am sincere in asking if there is somebody out there who can explain to me what it is about Shark Week that makes it such a big deal to some people. I am not being disingenuous or trying to spark a phony discussion. I have my hands full on the discussion front, believe me, with the 100 or so folks commenting on the Lou Dobbs "birthers" post that precedes this one. And some of them are quite agitated.

But I really don't get Shark Week. Honest.

I get part of the fascination with sharks. It reaches way back to the first campfires and Primative Man wondering, worrying and mythologizing about what is out there in the vast darkness beyond the tribe and the circle of flickering light known as civilization.

Sharks are one of the things out there even today, and so, it is fascinating in a voyeuristic way to see them in their own element. There is also, perhaps, a grisly fascination in seeing those who journey out beyond the territory defined by taboos and encounter sharks in their realm.

But there are 10,000 scary things that I worry about every day and have no control over. They range from a drunk driver plowing into me while I am at a stop sign to a terrorist flying an airplane into a building while I am going about my downtown business. Nothing I can do about stuff like that -- even to lower the odds.

But a shark, that's easy. Don't go in the ocean. Stay out of the ocean. How hard is that? And even if I go in the ocean, what are the odds that a shark is going to attack me near the shore? Even the Discovery Channel documentaries acknowledge the slim odds.

So, why do you watch? What is the pleasure? That's the question I am asking. I watch shark docs and all they do is make me anxious. And, believe me, I have all the anxiety I need these days.

Posted by David Zurawik at 5:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (24)
        

Just when you thought 24/7 cable news TV couldn't get stranger, starting Tuesday night, viewers are likely to see advertisements on CNN "attacking" Lou Dobbs during his prime-time show on the same cable channel.

And if that simply seems to be one more instance of the polarizing rhetoric and toxic nastiness of cable news TV, it's not. Dobbs has become a real problem for CNN, and a liberal media watchdog organization has found a way to highlight what it sees as reckless behavior by Dobbs.

Dobbs has consistently been lending credence to the "birthers" movement, which claims President Barack Obama is not a U. S. citizen, and thus, not eligible to be president because he was not allegedly born in the United States.

The view has been widely and thoroughly discounted -- most notably by Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate. But despite such facts, Dobbs has persisted.

(AP Photo)

The Media Matters ads on CNN, MSNBC and Fox News will take Dobbs to task for his on-air actions in relation to that issue. It is a clever and sound strategy in the world of corporate TV.

CNN can't really afford to ditch any ads that don't violate standards and practices. And if they refuse this one, which can still be seen on their competitors, they have a credibility problem.

Credibility is the real issue here, and loss of it is the great danger for CNN.

While CNN generally has lower prime-time ratings than its angry, opinionated competitors on the right and the left, it does have credibility and a kind of journalistic highground by "playing it down the middle." And that pays off on big news events when viewers want verified facts and information provided without partisan spin. The ratings during the election -- and even on events like Michael Jackson's death -- are consistently big for CNN.

But Dobbs' behavior is threatening the very trust on which that success is based. Worse, Jon Klein, the president of CNN/US, now seems to be backing Dobbs after initially sending out what I read as warning signals that he wanted a more responsible approach to any "birthers" stories.

If Klein continues to back Dobbs, he risks losing that credibility -- and in this case, credibility is at the very heart of the CNN brand. 

This is going to be an interesting showdown to watch this week.

Read the first report from Greg Sargent on the ads here. It includes some of the language reportedly in the ads.

Posted by David Zurawik at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (128)
Categories: TV and Politics
        

Jon & Kate Plus 8 returns to prime time Monday night on the TLC cable channel after a six-week time-out called in the wake of the divorce of mom and dad.

With it come a host of questions. How will the show change? Will it be able to go on with dad living in a condo in Manhattan with his girlfriend, and mom reported to be moving to a condo in Maryland near her bodyguard and alleged boyfriend? And what about the kids?

Laurie Goldberg, senior vice president at TLC, offered some answers to those questions in an interview with me this week. And based on what she said, I think this tabloid-ravaged series might actually have a chance to re-invent itself and carry on.

"Instead of seeing Jon and Kate together with the kids, you're going to see Kate with the kids, Jon with the kids -- and as they go through a transition, you'll see glimpses of that transition," Goldberg said.

"Instead of Jon and Kate and the kids take a trip and, 'Look how hard it is to get them all in that mini-van.' now it's going to be, 'Oh my God, how is Kate going to get them all in the mini-van by herself.' Half of all American marriages, unfortunately, do end up in divorce, so it makes sense to show the family as they continue to navigate the changes in their lives."

Bottom line, even after the explosion of the marriage right before our eyes, I think TLC has a shot at making this new version work. And here is the way I think that can happen: The audience will be smaller, but it will be a hardcore group of fans (mostly women) who come to root for Kate to keep the family going after Jon's adolescent bad behavior (Think: French Riviera) and seeming disregard for the feelings of his children.

I Know Kate as heroine is a stretch, but I sense that undercurrent in some of the comments to this blog.

The full interview will run in the Sun's Sunday Arts section as my Z on TV column. So, read it in the Sun, or you can read it on this website. I'll add a link here as soon as the column is up, so stop back to check for that.

Click here to see the full interview and column.

Posted by David Zurawik at 11:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)
Categories: Reality TV