That’s why it was such a jarring experience to watch her Wednesday night on ABC’s “In the Spotlight with Robin Roberts.” Ms. Jackson was classy, revealing, charming, honest — even as Roberts lobbed cringe-worthy questions like, “What’s your favorite body part?” and more probing ones on her current romantic status.
The timing of the big-time get was no accident. Jackson’s new album was released the day before, she’s kicking off the American Music Awards Sunday night on ABC, and a “sneak peek” at her new video closed out the show.
The program offered viewers a tantalizing view of Jackson’s Malibu home, and was non-linear at best, flying around from topics like Jackson’s early days as a television actress in shows like “Good Times” to her secret marriage to Rene Elizondo to whether she’d ever met Dr. Conrad Murray. Segments were punctuated by a smarmy announcer — better suited to a show like “True Hollywood Stories” reading inane copy like “Next: losing her brother, but finding herself.”
After showing Roberts a display of family photographs -- including one of Michael and his children shortly before he died -- Jackson admitted almost off the top that she often smiles as a protective mechanism. And despite the serious nature of most of the interview, she was true to her word, flashing a mesmerizing grin throughout the show.
Jackson herself — dressed in a conservative cream-colored dress and glittering geometric gold earrings, was riveting, mainly because she’s purposefully and wisely kept herself scarce. Yet there was little new information. She was in New York when she got the fateful call about Michael collapsing. She didn't leave town right away, not knowing how serious it was. He used to call her "Dunk." She called him Mike.
But just when things were starting to get insightful, as when she revealed that her father ordered her not to call him Daddy when she was a very young girl, that he forced her to drop acting for singing or that she didn't celebrate a birthday until she was 23 years old, Roberts’ (or the editor’s) apparent ADD would kick in and the subject would be changed.
Maybe this wasn't really an ABC News production, as it was long on assumptions and short on facts — and there was heavy emphasis on Jackson’s weight issues that she seems to have struggled with since childhood, yet no discussion of how she’s managed to always get back in center-stage shape.
Roberts inquired about her “booty,” and Jackson revealed that former long-time record producer boyfriend Jermaine Dupri made her feel very comfortable in her own skin, leaving viewers to draw their own conclusions after Roberts elicited they were actually no longer together — even after Jackson admitted that she adored him and “loved him to death.”
There was a mention made of Jackson’s quickie first marriage at age 18 to singer James DeBarge in order to escape her family and that it ended because of his drug abuse, which was rather defamatorily equated with Michael’s — without any other information.
Quick sound bites, but no details, on how the family tried to stage interventions with Michael increased the amorphous haze around that part of Jackson’s legacy, in contrast to his on-point performances in “This Is It,” which his sister said is too painful for her to see.
MJ fans were no doubt disappointed not to hear more substantive discussion about Janet’s relationship with her older brother — although there were many adorable old photos and video clips of the two together. Still, her grief was palpable, as was her anger at Murray and her reaction to the fact that her brother died from an overdose of Propofol. “Serious, heavy. None of us knew,” she said of his usage of the intravenous hospital anesthetic.
Take her grief out of the equation and despite her strict upbringing, the rocky love life, the struggles with body image, the interview proved there’s no reason to pity Janet Jackson. To paraphrase a notorious Joe Jackson comment about Michael, she’s smiling all the way to the bank.
It’s quickly become Hollywood’s favorite parlor game and please, you’re invited to play. It’s all about Oprah.
Furthermore, it’s all about the ABC owned-and-operated TV stations in places like New York, Los Angeles and Chicago that air her show and have made millions and millions off of it over the years. Of course they’ve paid millions as well, enriching the coffers of King World and then CBS Television Distribution and helping to make Oprah one of the richest people in the world.
What do YOU think she’s gonna do? What do you think she SHOULD do?
And what are those ABC stations going to do?
We’ve spoken to lots of folks in recent weeks and here are some interesting scenarios….
First, let’s assume that she will indeed not renew with CBS Television Distribution. Yes, she might renew with them, but we doubt it, and if she does we’d have nothing to talk about for the rest of this blog. Furthermore, clearly since the death of Roger King, Oprah’s not been as warm and cuddly with the company as she had been previously.
And few doubt that if Roger had not died that Oprah would have gone with Sony to launch the Dr. Oz show. So if Oprah is warm and cuddly with any syndicator right now, it’s with Steve Mosko and his Sony team.
Thus if Oprah is going to continue with any syndicator, a lot of the smart money is on Sony. The only way she continues with CBS would be through the charms and smarts of CBS topper Les Moonves, which are considerable. No one has ever gotten anywhere in the TV world in Hollywood by underestimating Moonves. Remember, he and his team were able to keep Letterman when most Hollywood wags thought for sure that Letterman would move to ABC.
Nikki Finke broke the story this week that Oprah will not renew with CBS and will move her talk shop to OWN, the Oprah Winfrey Network she is starting with Discovery Communications.
In that report she says David Zaslav, who runs Discovery, gave Oprah an ultimatum. Now, we know David and I’m sure he’s not foolish enough to give Oprah ultimatums. Yes, clearly he must be somewhat frustrated about the delay of the launch of OWN, so let’s say it’s likely they’ve had earnest discussions.
Does Oprah just move her show lock, stock and barrel over to OWN? That sounds doubtful to us. If she’s done with it in its present form, she’s probably done with it. If not, we still see at least some syndication component. If she does a program for OWN, look for it to be somewhat different than the syndicated show she's been doing for the past two and a half decades.
Now, what do the ABC stations do? On the first-run syndication front, Disney-ABC has not been very active of late in trying to launch any talk shows.
Interestingly, as a number of executives have mentioned to us, ABC has “The View.” What show would be better as a late afternoon lead-in to the local news on those ABC stations? We like that scenario a lot.
Or perhaps Oprah makes some deal, with her partner Sony, to eventually move Dr. Oz, which Oprah’s Harpo Productions has a stake of, into those ABC station time slots.
Of course other syndicators are also salivating at the prospect of those slots opening up. CBS would certainly love them for their new Nancy Grace show. Or that other queen of daytime, Judge Judy. Debmar-Mercury has Wendy Williams and other ideas as well, we’re sure.
And if Oprah does leave the syndicated airwaves, the ascension of Ellen Degeneres as syndication’s premier talk queen is almost assured. You just know Warner Bros. would love those ABC slots as well.
Well that’s some of what we hear and what we think. Let us know what YOU think is going to happen.#
Just one year ago, Jay Leno was cruising along as the undisputed king of late night. Five million faithful watched the “Tonight” show host, as reliable as his restored Model T, night after night delivering A-list guests, John McCain jokes and wacky headlines.
A million viewers behind him was the urbane David Letterman, still considered the best in show by many, and everyone else followed in the wake of these two old pros. Conan O’Brien, Craig Ferguson, Jon Stewart and Jimmy Kimmel all had their multitudes, but the pecking order in late night was clear and it was unalterable.
Then it all came undone. Leno left NBC’s “Tonight” to prepare for his new 9 p.m. show. Conan moved to L.A. to take his place and promptly lost half of Leno’s audience. Back in New York, Jimmy Fallon took over Conan’s spot and lost a third of his audience.
That cleared the path for Letterman to reclaim the top spot in the ratings after surrendering his crown to Leno 14 years ago.
But how long will Dave be around to enjoy it? He has gotten himself into an unflattering, highly publicized romantic drama that might cost him support among the 58 percent of his audience that is female. And now we learn, courtesy of Newsday, that the “Late Show” host has yet to sign an extension to his CBS contract, which runs through 2010.
It no longer seems implausible that Dave might actually hang it up, settle down with his wife and raise their child out of the limelight. That would make Ferguson the most likely candidate to take over “Late Show” just about a year from now, not bad for a guy who until recently wasn’t even a U.S. citizen. (His memoir, “American on Purpose,” debuted recently at No. 4 on the New York Times best-seller list.)
The most stable part of late night has been the lowlands, where Kimmel, Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Charlie Rose and Chelsea Handler (look, a woman!) continue to draw smaller but still lucrative audiences.
Hoping to join their ranks are Wanda Sykes, whose weekly show airs at 10 p.m. Saturdays on Fox starting Nov. 7, and George Lopez, whose “Lopez Tonight” launches at 10 p.m. Nov. 9 and will air weeknights on TBS.
Indeed, the more you look at the growing menu of late-night options, the more clear it becomes that there are no more kings in late night. There are only senators, each with a well-heeled constituency.
That said, there always seems to be a sentimental desire among many TV critics to declare Letterman the leader again. He has by far the most viewers, averaging about 4.7 million a night, or nearly twice O’Brien’s audience. However, as far as advertisers are concerned — and they are the ones who actually determine a show’s success — Conan is king.
Why? Because even with half the audience, he still outdraws Dave among people in their 20s, 30s and 40s. Advertisers pay dearly to reach those viewers.
Letterman, of all people, can appreciate this. In the 1980s NBC discovered that beer companies and movie studios preferred to advertise on his “Late Night” show, which was watched by college kids, instead of “The Tonight Show,” which was watched by their parents.
As for Leno, he’s still hosting a late-night show, no matter what NBC calls it. And he’s still more popular than Letterman, though with “The Jay Leno Show” airing five nights a week in prime time, it had better be.
The audience that really counts is made up of 200 local NBC station managers who nervously agreed to the network’s scheme to blow out the 10 o’clock hour (ET/PT) for a comedy program.
So far, according to Craig Allison of Kansas City’s KSHB, Leno is doing OK. Some nights the ratings have been disappointing, he says, but other nights Leno is doing much better than whatever NBC had in that time period a year ago. And Allison appreciates having a prime spot in the show to promote the station’s 10 p.m. newscast.
He does have one criticism. “The two chairs aren’t working for me,” Allison says, referring to the deskless area where Leno conducts his interviews. “They look uncomfortable. It was an immediate thing for me. I’m just used to a desk.”
________________________________________
■ OVERALL
Best show: “The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson” on CBS. He hasn’t learned to talk in an Indiana accent, but that’s about the only thing the Scotsman has yet to accomplish since emerging as the dark-horse candidate for Craig Kilborn’s job five years ago. Versatile, literate, spontaneous, a man who has seen the world, Ferguson is a latter-day Jack Paar, but built for the long haul. He has taken “Late Late Show” where it has never been — first place — so if you still think Jon Stewart is the front-runner for David Letterman’s job, you don’t know Scot.
Worst show: “Last Call With Carson Daly.” NBC has been screwing around with “Last Call” for years, and it just seems to get worse. Currently it’s a low-budget, heavily edited interview show mostly shot at soundstages and hotels. Anyone could host it.
________________________________________
MONOLOGUE
Best: Tie between “The Jay Leno Show,” left, and “The Colbert Report,” right. Colbert can take a single idea and carry it for five minutes — and all the while he’s channeling that character of his. Leno serves up jokes like a tennis-ball machine, but who does it better? No one, that’s who.
Worst: Dave’s. Actually, Jimmy Fallon’s standup routine is probably weaker, but I am soooooooo sick of jokes about New York City weather, Bernie Madoff and the horny celebrity of the month (even if it is him).
________________________________________
INTERVIEWS
Best: Ferguson. Craig lets his life story — growing up near Glasgow, emigrating to L.A., getting sober, dealing with anger — inform and enlighten conversations. He shifts easily from laughter to intimacy with his guests and avoids scripted gags or other gimmicks.
Worst: “Late Night With Jimmy Fallon.” Good news for Jimmy: Conan wasn’t any better with guests six months in.
________________________________________
BEST STUNTS
“The Tonight Show With Conan O’Brien.” From the host’s fantastic “feud” with Newark Mayor Cory Booker to the portable drum set that rode Max Weinberg out of the studio, Conan and his writers are earning their promotion.
________________________________________
BEST USE OF TAPE
“Jimmy Kimmel Live.” Video has become an essential part of late-night comedy, but “JKL” does the most and gets the most out of it, whether mocking local TV, using animation to make a news clip funnier or bleeping random words so a clip sounds dirtier than it is.
________________________________________
BEST RATINGS SPIN
ABC’s “Nightline” often declares victory over Dave and Conan by comparing its half-hour rating to their hour number. But if you use Dave’s rating from 10:30 to 11 p.m. (before his audience starts going to bed), he wins handily.
________________________________________
BEST NEW-SHOW PROMO
The one where George Lopez is getting advice from President Barack Obama, who spurns Lopez’s entreaties to become his sidekick.
________________________________________
BEST GUESTS
A tie — they all have the same guests. Or so it seems.#
No, neither do I.
Welcome to television’s new wasteland of local digital multicasting. Now there are seven zillion more channels and still the same complaint, “all these channels and nothing to watch.” More accurately, there’s little worth watching on these new digital channels.
In June, local stations finally made the long talked about - more like ballyhooed - transition from analog to digital. Along with the transition, stations were allocated several digital channels where they could - I emphasize could - multicast different programs using the same spectrum space it takes for one analog channel. Simply explained, a local station, say one broadcasting on Channel 4, can also program channels 4.1., 4.2., 4.3. and 4.4. Suffice it to say, whatever digital magic makes it happen, it’s pretty cool. But pretty cool to a point.
Like the current real estate crisis of our “great recession,” there’s a lot of digital real estate available, and few buyers. No one group – or local broadcaster – has figured out how to program these channels and generate revenue, draw viewers and yes, make money. One broadcast consultant put it to me, “there’s a lot of talkin’ and not much doin’ with these channels.”
You’ll find some new options on the local tiers, including Estrella, the 24-hour Spanish-language network. There’s always RetroTV and THIStv, if you’re interested in going to nostalgia heaven or rerun hell. But some stations are using the channels to simply repurpose newscasts, regurgitating them into different life-forms of softball feature and lifestyle programs, e.g. WNBC’s gushy feature and lifestyle effort: “New York Nonstop.”
The television editor at the New York Daily News dubbed its launch this way, “New York Nonstop…feels a heck of a lot more like a channel for people staying in hotel than something for city regulars.” Ouch! In fairness to the station, at least they’re trying. Since its softball debut, the NBC station folks have been tinkering and changing. But some other stations are taking the easy way out, loading up their digital tier with the likes of AccuWeather. Just what we need, more local weathercasts.
Commissioner Michael Copps told NPR’s “All Things Considered” the new offerings are a far cry from what broadcasters could be doing with the new channels, "If this spectrum is going to be used just for home shopping and Doppler radar, it's falling far short of the purpose that it could be serving." Copps went on to say, "It has the capacity to represent local issues, local politics, local music, local religious and cultural diversity."
Flashback to 1999. I recall a group meeting in West Palm of the newly reconstituted Hearst-Pulitzer broadcast group. The buzz and discussion throughout the meetings was about the brave new digital world, horizontal integration of this, and vertical integration of that. It was a vision for the new media real estate to come and how digital integration would work. It was big dreams and high hopes for the digital future.
Flash forward 10 years, and much of what was discussed at those Hearst meetings has come to pass. Station websites, wireless and mobile applications have changed the “how” and “when” of delivering content. But stations are still struggling to figure out the “what” to offer on the digital real estate. A few groups like Hearst, Raycom, and the ABC O&O stations (I hear they’re working on programming health & wellness content) - and some stations are working on programming options for these new channels. But to date the majority of digital offerings across the country are pretty thin.
Some local stations are sticking to where they have the biggest investment, local news - using their digital tier for extended coverage. KOLD-TV in Tucson got high marks recently when the station decided to use its digital channel in a breaking news situation. Jim Arnold, Vice President and General Manager at KOLD, told me about his news department’s coverage of a multi-alarm fire at a local recycling plant, and management’s decision to go “wall-to-wall” on the station’s 13.2 Channel.
“I don’t assume thousands were watching, but it was the first time that we could show people what we could do in a breaking news situation,” said Arnold. So what’s the next step? “Now, we’re constantly thinking about other things to do. When Obama comes on the air at 8 p.m. on the east coast, and wipes-out our 5 p.m. newscast, why can’t we do out 5 p.m. newscast on 13.2 that night.”
But Arnold says there are two big problems for stations in getting traction for their digital channel programming, audience awareness and penetration. In short, no one is motivated to check them out.
One station getting some traction with its digital tier audience is Media General’s WSAV in Savannah, Georgia. Part of WSAV’s market takes in three counties in South Carolina, so the station launched something called “My Lowcountry 3” on its 3.2 channel. You might consider it a hyper-local newscast targeted to those South Carolina counties. The station produces a full hour using existing technology, a newspaper partnership in the Hilton Head area, and taps into content from other area Media General stations. As you might guess in this tight economy, no, WSAV hasn’t added staff. They shuffle around existing personnel to produce it.
“The feedback has been good. Our anchor is always on Facebook and Twitter during the show incorporating all sorts of feedback elements we’re getting from the area,” says Gabe Travers, Executive Producer at WSAV. “Advertisers seem to be interested. They’re placing orders specifically for that newscast, trying to reach people and target the area.”
If you think advertising is pretty soft generally, it’s an even tougher sell for local stations trying to pick up additional digital dollars with these channels.
But KOLD’s Jim Arnold is hopeful, “It may give smaller advertisers, a mom-and-pop shop, a chance to get on TV, and if they gain some traction, we can convert them to the bigger TV station, so to speak. I think the key is just getting people to finding all the dot-twos.”
One group executive - asking-to-remain-anonymous - explained the problem to me this way. “You can’t really measure the audience. It’s just not big enough. So the sales people don’t want to sell it, because there are no big commissions involved. Sales people don’t make money, and the station doesn’t make money off the channels. So there’s no motivation. If you put paid programming on one of the digital channels, the producers balk because no one is watching. They can’t sell their products. It comes down to a concept sell, supported ‘on the come’ by an advertiser. If you’re lucky, your approach is sorta’ like the old radio dollar-a-holler sell,” a few bucks for each mention.
Flashback several weeks. I drove down the New Jersey Turnpike to meet “the guys” for a dinner and our little Algonquin Round Table of television know-it-alls.
I asked the know-it-alls their take on the local digital tier. No surprise. No one there had the answer to the digital conundrum, but one longtime television pal and know-it-all, Jon Petrovich, shared an anecdote from his time as EVP with Sony Pictures International. He heard that one of the most successful channels was one just outside Guadalajara, Mexico. They simply mounted a camera in the town square where people could watch the comings and goings of town folks. It was a smash hit. Go figure. I suppose that’s about as hyper-local as it gets.
Maybe the answer to cracking the digital programming code is: keep it simple - keep it hyper-local. As Petrovich reminded me, WGN used to have Jack Brickhouse go outside the Tribune building every night and ask people questions, thus the MOS was born. CNN does it every day with Jack Cafferty’s email interaction with viewers.
I doubt mounting cameras in the town square or pure viewer interaction is the answer. But whatever it is, it’s time for television stations and groups to step up and do something soon, or those channels will simply rot on the spectrum.
As FCC Commissioner told NPR, "now that we put American consumers through this trauma of getting right with the technology…now what are we going to do with it?"#
But our TVWeek sources say that that’s exactly where the idea was hatched. They even provided us with a transcript of the meeting between writer-director Robert Towne, Oprah Winfrey, "24" showrunner Howard Gordon and Arnold Schwarzenegger, plus some talent including Stewie Griffin, Cosmo Kramer and Ricky Ricardo. (Or maybe they didn't. I might have dreamt this … )
Winfrey: Let me get this right: Barack and I go all the way to Denmark and get all this publicity and make a big splash, and then the IOC screws us?
Towne: That’s right. And then when Obama finds out he’s been screwed, Rahm grabs his shoulder and says, “Forget it, Barack. It’s Copenhagen.”
Winfrey: No, forget it. Doesn’t work for me.
Gordon: OK. Two ways to get out of this. One, Bauer takes out the entire IOC for the insult. Or two, unbeknownst to everyone, Oprah and Obama sneak over to Norway and, and , and ….
Towne: Why would they do that?
Winfrey (ignoring him): Hmm. Keep talking.
Schwarzenegger: Ya. I should be in the party too. I harassed a woman from Scandanavia once. I like them. We go over there to talk to the Nobel guys about maybe giving me an award.
Winfrey: Maybe not.
Stewie: Please. And I thought the dog was stupid. No Ahnold, we tell the Nobel folks Obama’s got to get the Nobel Peace Prize.
Winfrey: Obama?
Kramer: I like this. I think it can work.
Stewie: I was kidding, you morons.
Schwarzenegger: No, I’m the Governator. You wanna give this to the Presidentator?
Winfrey: The who?
Stewie (to Schwarzenegger): Imbecile! If I may borrow a line from my own show, if you don’t shut up I'll put you on diaper detail and I promise I won't make it easy for you!
So the plot was hatched. Obama would get shafted on the Olympics decision, but the happy Hollywood ending would be preserved by his getting the Nobel Peace Prize. Yes, not really logical, but neither was “Forrest Gump,” and that won the best screenplay and picture Oscars.
Oh, yes; after all the details were finalized at the meeting, there was one last vestige of protest:
Ricky Ricardo: Nobel committee, you've got some splainin' to do!
As a female viewer of your show and an admirer of your comedic talents, yes, you owe me an apology and yes, you gave me—and all your viewers, your staff and most importantly, your wife—one on the air Monday night.
But Dave, I expected so much more from you. I consider you highly intelligent—if a bit curmudgeonly, extremely cynical and the type who definitely holds a grudge—but you seem to think my IQ level is in the low double digits. How else to explain that you "had no idea.” that the "women" (hmmm, how many is that?) that you bragged, yes, bragged, that you had sex with would not come under intense scrutiny?
You, yourself, in a successful attempt at humor, called out some famous philanderers that have provided you (and every other comic) with tons of material: Bill Clinton, Elliot Spitzer and Mr. Appalachian Trail South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford.
Let's think back for a moment. No, no one wondered what Monica Lewinsky looked like, much less of what she had to say, right? I vaguely recall a HUGELY rated Barbara Walters special that starred Ms. Lewinsky in all of her post-presidential, post-intern glory. Ring a bell?
Ashley Dupree? Was that her name? Whatever. No, no one was really interested in the Governor of New York's interstate booty call. While she didn’t have a long shelf life, you must have a really short memory, Dave, being up on the news and newsmakers as you have to be to get fodder for your show every night.
So, you just couldn't imagine that these women who worked on your show and slept with you might be violated by your actions. Much less your wife, who was before your holy matrimony and as the mother of your child, your ultra-longtime girlfriend—whom you cheated on.
Let's go back to your original announcement of this scandal that—I'm sorry, Dave—is really not going away anytime soon. It's just too juicy of a story. You're an older, powerful, very rich, successful, now-married man and father of a young child who was sleeping with young women in your employ. People are interested.
You masterfully told a story in which you deflected nearly the entire focus onto your blackmailer without taking any responsibility for your actions whatsoever—much less issuing any sort of apology. Again, you bragged about having sex with the women, in an arrogant way, actually, like it was your right. And then capping it off by saying that you weren't going to say anything more. Period, end of story.
My, how quickly that changed. Let’s not even mention your $30 million salary and/or when your contract is up, or all the ad revenue you bring to CBS. Yes, Dave, you are a very valuable personage. And although you, most of your viewers, me, and most of the people reading this would most likely be classified as liberal, America is still a Puritanical country and it flies in the face of most people’s values to boast about your extra-curricular sexual escapades when you’re in a committed relationship. Recent case in point: that goofball California legislator who told sex stories over an open mike. Most people still don’t cotton to it. And that guy had to give up his job. I’m sorry, Dave. That’s just the way it is in these United States.
Dave, I'm not minimizing how scary it must have been to find that threatening packet in your car, with what, the former fling’s diary, some steamy e-mails, some photos? But maybe you're also pretty scary to the women who work for you. Even if they're secretly thrilled at your attentions, physically and otherwise.
You said in reference to hurting your wife that you have your work cut out for you in saving your marriage. And that is certainly true. But I'd say you have a pretty good chance of keeping her, since the odds show that most women stay with their rich, powerful husbands who cheat on them. Think Mrs. Clinton. Think Mrs. Spitzer. Think that new CBS show with Chris Noth and Julianna Margulies.
But maybe you can start a new chapter and your Midwestern guilt will actually kick in. Maybe you can keep your Worldwide Pants zipped at the office. Just because your production company doesn't have a clause stating that it's not cool to have sex with subordinates … well, Dave, it's really just not kosher.
But if it ever comes out that Jon Stewart is cheating on his wife and sleeping with his staff — I’ll absolutely have a heart attack.
]]>
I don't know where to begin with David Letterman's bizarro, play-it-for-laughs on-air admission that he had sex with staff members.
On the one hand, good for him for telling a fairly unvarnished account of being blackmailed by a Connecticut man for $2 million and admitting to the "creepy things," as Dave kept putting it, the blackmailer was threatening to take public.
On the other hand: Couldn't somebody have gone out between the first and second act and said, "Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Letterman is about to talk about something very difficult and though you might be tempted to laugh, please don't."
Instead, Letterman (whether by accident or design) wound up playing the story for laughs, and even drew applause with his admission that he'd had affairs with employees. Here are the highlights...
After a monologue that included more than one Roman Polanski joke -- which I found odd given my knowledge of what was coming -- act two began with Dave, who was clearly enjoying his audience, saying "I'm glad you folks are here tonight and in such a good mood ..... Do you feel like a story?" (Crowd: Yeahh!!)
So he starts talking about finding the package in the back of his car at 6 a.m. and the note, which read, "I know that you do some terrible, terrible things." Laughter. "A guy is going to write a screenplay about me ... unless I give him some money. ... That's a little hinky!" More laughter.
You can tell Letterman is trying to ratchet up the gravity. He uses the word "terrifying" to describe his response to this extortion letter. Later on he says, "This whole thing has been quite scary." But for every one of those statements there's one like this: "If you know anything about me, I am just a towering mass of Lutheran midwestern guilt." Of course, the crowd laughs. It sounds funny.
The first tipoff to the audience should have been Dave's statement, "This guy knows creepy stuff about me" --not "this guy thinks he knows creepy stuff about me."
And then finally, after telling the audience that the suspect, now ID's as Robert Halderman, had been arrested, applause, finally Dave reveals the allegation in the screenplay: that "I have had sex with women who worked for me on the show." And....?
My response to that is, yes, I have," said Letterman. At this admission, the audience laughs and then rolls into applause.
If this was the reaction of most of Dave's audience at home, then he's home free.
If it wasn't, he's got a lot of damage control to do.
I'm sure over time, the blackmailer will merge in my memory with the would-be babynapper and the schizophrenic stalker as evidence that David Letterman is some kind of magnet for seriously disturbed people–—the "King of Comedy" as well as of late night.
But right now, this night stands out as singularly icky in the annals of David Letterman. And I don't think that feeling's going to fade anytime soon.
For one thing, as employees of Worldwide Pants (!), the females who had sex with Dave work or worked for Dave. So there's potentially a power issue involved, as anyone who's been in an unfortunate liaison with their boss already knows.#
To see a clip of Letterman telling this story on his show, click here
]]>In the last 24-hours those whisperings to us have become a loud roar: Should Oprah, perhaps the most well-respected and influential person on TV today, be giving significant airtime to the most uncomfortable, squirm in your chair—and yes, many say, disgusting—story of this or any year—Mackenzie Phillips’ claim of being raped by her father and having an ongoing incestuous relationship with him.
The most cynical amongst us will say that all Oprah’s doing is a ratings play.
Indeed, in Michelle Kung’s Wall St. Journal’s Speakeasy blog she writes about Oprah’s show so far this year—including the Phillips’ interview: “Ratings decline? What ratings decline? Though average viewership for Oprah Winfrey’s talk show dipped below 7 million last season — according to Nielsen, one July rerun had its lowest rating since the show’s 1985 debut—the talk show matriarch has unleashed a torrent of not just A-list stars, but wounded celebrities with sordid tales, seeking redemption. O-loids, if you will. The results so far have been record breaking.”
But such cynicism is a disservice to Oprah. Truth be told, Oprah is no stranger to tabloid fare, as any regular Oprah-watcher will tell you.
From this couch-potato’s viewpoint, however, Oprah’s intent has never been tabloid for tabloids sake. Her show isn’t the Springer show. Oprah’s has always had a more serious intent.
Like most of us, I have no way of knowing if Phillips is telling the truth. A cynic would say she’s made it up to sell books.
But what is true, as you know and I know and Oprah knows, is that there are indeed victims of incest out there. Just as we all know that there are victims of domestic violence and other horrible behavior that most of us don’t usually want to talk about.
And if seeing Phillips talking about incest on Oprah allows just one victim of incest to get out of that situation, it’s worth the discomfort to the rest of us.#
]]>“’30 Rock’ still seems to be the preeminent critical and industry favorite, and is seen as a hip and hot comedy,” says TV Guide critic Matt Roush. “There’s nothing that’s come along to dethrone it.”
According to betting men like Bookmaker.com’s CEO Mickey Richardson, “Rock” has a whopping 75% chance of again taking the top comedy prize at the Emmys. (See table below for his odds on all the nominated shows.)
“This is ‘30 Rock’s’ time, and it continues to set the pace,” says media reporter Brian Stelter of The New York Times.” What’s heartening about ‘30 Rock’ is that more viewers are discovering it, and that patience is paying off for NBC—although ratings-wise, it’s never going to be ‘Two and a Half Men.’” (Which didn’t get a nod this year, but did in 2006, ‘07 and ’08.)
These are the other nominees:
Entourage
Family Guy
Flight of the Conchords
How I Met Your Mother
The Office
Weeds
So it’s three cable series versus three network programs: score two for HBO, two for NBC, one for Fox and one for Showtime. Young Hollywood Turks up against slacker musicians, young professionals, office workers, TV show staffers, pot dealers—and cartoon characters, the Griffin family.
“Family Guy” has been on the air for 10 years now and was nominated for outstanding animated series in 2000, ‘05, ’06 and ‘08. It’s the first time an animated series has been recognized in this category since "The Flintstones" made the cut in 1961.
“Entourage,” which earlier this year took home a prestigious Peabody Award, is still on the hot list for Emmy voters, but its heat may be waning. “The thing with long-running shows is you never know when their time in the Emmy lottery is going to come up,” says Roush about HBO’s half-hour series and “The Office,” which took home the outstanding comedy statuette in 2006 before it lost its perch at the top to another NBC series. Yet most critics agree the Dunder-Mifflin bunch had a very strong year.
Another HBO series, "Flight of the Conchords” picked up steam in the second season. “It is one of very few shows during which I actually laughed out loud,” says Dave Walker, television columnist for the New Orleans Times-Picayune.
“I thought it was goofy, inventive and unlike anything else anywhere, with a deep and wide cast. The supporting and guest stars were really funny. It’s broken through and reached a lot of people who found it through word of mouth. They’re blown away by it.”
“Weeds” is more of a dark comedy than a full-on laugh fest, but the series, which recently wrapped its fifth season, has a rabid fan base that eats up the exploits of Mary-Louise Parker and crew in and about their suburban milieu.
It’s "HIMYM’s" first Emmy nomination, meaning the CBS sitcom is finallly hitting its stride with awards voters, and Emmy host and the show’s star Neil Patrick Harris will have butterflies in his stomach when the winner is announced.
If “Mother” or any of the other entrants takes the prize from “Rock,” it will be quite the shock.
ODDS FOR WINNING THE OUTSTANDING COMEDY SERIES
30 ROCK (75%)
THE OFFICE (28%)
FAMILY GUY (22%)
WEEDS (20%)
ENTOURAGE (18%)
FLIGHT OF THE CONCHORDS (18%)
HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER (18%)
(Source: Bookmaker.com)
But those fresh faces are up against four major comedy heavyweights, including last year’s winner, Alec Baldwin.
And the other nominees are:
Steve Carell, The Office
Jemaine Clement, Flight of the Conchords
Jim Parsons, The Big Bang Theory
Tony Shalhoub, Monk
Charlie Sheen, Two and a Half Men
As the reigning king of Emmy comedy, most pundits and odds makers agree that Baldwin will keep the throne for his role as network television executive Jack Donaghy on "30 Rock." He also won the Golden Globe earlier this year for the role.
As The New York Times’ Brian Stelter noted, “The plotline with his romance in the middle of season gave him some great opportunities that he didn’t have in the last season.”
More than that, many Emmy voters don’t necessarily identify with the character, but resonate to their familiarity with real-life versions of Donaghy, the pompous, self-centered boss everyone loves to hate.
Mickey Richardson, CEO of Bookmaker.com, gives Baldwin a 61% chance of adding an Emmy to his trophy case.
But Baldwin has other Emmy royalty to contend with—like Shalhoub, as the brilliant but annoyingly neurotic San Francisco detective Adrian Monk, who carted home the statuette for his role on “Monk” in 2003, 2005 and 2006, and has been nominated every year since 2003.
And then there’s the drolly funny Steve Carell, who’s logged a nod in each of the last four years for the clueless, idiosyncratic boss he plays on “The Office.” He won a Globe for the role of Michael Scott in 2006, but so far, no golden Emmy true love.
It’s the same exact scorecard for Charlie Sheen, recognized four years running now for his turn as the womanizing Malibu beach house bachelor Charlie Harper on “Two and a Half Men.” Sheen can certainly nail the ladies, but maybe not the trophy.
Jim Parsons of "The Big Bang Theory" is getting some strong Emmy buzz for his performance as Sheldon Cooper, a geeky physicist who is both oblivious and imperious to everyday life and human relationships. "Sheldon is right up there. It's a classic comedy performance that keeps getting funnier," says TV Guide’s Matt Roush.
The other first-timer, Jemaine Clement, not only co-stars in HBO’s “Flight of the Conchords” but composes music, writes and produces the cult hit show. He’s one of New Zealand’s biggest stars, but as part of a “digi-bongo a cappella-rap-funk-comedy folk duo” gigging around New York City, he plays a barely coping loser doomed to musical obscurity. He’ll enter a whole new dimension if, as a long-shot, he gets the last laugh on Sunday.
-----------The Funniest Women on Television--------------------
They may know she was "F-ing Matt Damon," but Emmy voters may not know that much else about the surprise entrant into the exclusive club of the funniest women on television. Yet Sarah Silverman nabbed one of the six coveted slots in the lead actress in a comedy series race.
Silverman's brand of edgy comedy, bringing her sexuality and Jewishness to the fore in a way many people find offensive—and others find uproariously funny—is shaking up the contest. The other spots are all occupied by acclaimed actresses in more traditional shows who are veterans of the awards show circuit, proud owners of multiple trophies.
These are the other leading ladies in contention:
Christina Applegate, Samantha Who?
Toni Collette, United States of Tara
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, The New Adventures of Old Christine
Tina Fey, 30 Rock
Mary-Louise Parker, Weeds
Julia Louis Dreyfus, Mary Louise Parker and Tina Fey have all been here before (and I've had the pleasure of interviewing all of them, as well as their fellow nominee Christina Applegate), and they all deserve to be this time as well, joined by Toni Collette, whose star turn as a mom with multiple personalities in Showtime's “The United States of Tara” obviously turned Emmy voters’ heads.
Fey will be riding the tidal wave not only of "30 Rock's" record-breaking 22 nominations, but of her win last year in this category. Not only did her character Liz Lemon get a new love interest this year (fellow nominee Jon Hamm), but Emmy voters are clearly still madly in love with her.
And of course, her buzz from this season was intensified by her deft, iconic portrayal of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin on “Saturday Night Live” last fall, which drew critical raves and huge numbers of viewers—and just won her a Creative Arts Emmy last weekend.
Was it all part of a master plan by Fey, who as well as taking home the statuette last year as the lead actress in a comedy series also grabbed Emmys as a producer and writer of "30 Rock?"
Tina Fey is ruling the world right now, and we’re just living in it.
Bookmaker.com gives Fey a 67% chance of adding to her collection of Emmys. But the competition is stiff, stiff, stiff. The Emmys love JLD and MLP, and Ms. Applegate may draw a large sympathy vote, both for “Samantha Who?” being shown the door and for her high-profile battle with breast cancer.
Even Silverman might have trouble coming up with some jokes about that.
]]>Three-time champ Jeremy Piven is out of the running this year, and this is the rest of the field:
Jon Cryer, "Two and a Half Men"
Kevin Dillon, "Entourage"
Jack McBrayer, "30 Rock"
Tracy Morgan, "30 Rock"
Rainn Wilson, "The Office"
As in the supporting comedy actress category, actors on broadcast network comedies are the dominant force here, with Dillon the only rep from cable. For “Entourage’s” Johnny “Drama” Chase, this is well-tread territory—it will be his third year in a row as a contender.
Cryer and Wilson also are well-honored veterans. For Cryer, this is his fourth straight nom for playing Alan Parker, and as the show’s EP Chuck Lorre told me, “Cryer always brings it. He’s a comedy writer’s dream.”
The same could be said for Wilson, who’s on his third nom for playing Dwight. He recently told Vanity Fair the Emmys should be more like a contact sport, with screaming at competitors part of the game: "You're going down, Tracy Morgan! I'm going to wipe the mat with you! You say you can win this Emmy? I'm gonna take this Emmy and… shove it in your nose!"
Everyone would expect Morgan to do something crazy/funny on stage if he takes home the Emmy, which would be a highlight of the telecast. He and McBrayer, both first-time nominees, are part of “Rock’s” record 22 nominations for a comedy series.
McBrayer had a big moment earlier this year at the expense of co-star and Emmy winner Alec Baldwin when Baldwin hosted "SNL" and in an opening skit, the audience fawned over Jack and ignored Alec.
]]>Vanessa Williams is used to being the best-dressed queen of the castle in “Ugly Betty,” and with this, her third nomination in a row, she’s definitely a front-runner.
Here’s the rest of the playing field of contenders in the category:
Kristin Chenoweth, Pushing Daisies
Jane Krakowski, 30 Rock
Elizabeth Perkins, Weeds
Amy Poehler, Saturday Night Live
Kristin Wiig, Saturday Night Live
In “Betty’s” season finale, Williams’ role as Wilhelmina Slater found her playing tennis with Billie Jean King, singing with Christine Baranski and undergoing acupuncture on camera.
Williams—who hosted the Daytime Emmy Awards in August—has said playing Wilhelmina makes her step up to the plate and learn to do something new.
Chenoweth and Poehler were both also nominees last year. Neither of them still performs the role she is nominated for—Poehler by choice (moving on to NBC’s “Parks and Recreation”) and Chenoweth because her show was cancelled.
This is the third time Elizabeth Perkins has gotten an Emmy nom for playing
Celia Hodes on “Weeds.” She’s another Emmy voter favorite, having been nominated in 2006 and 2007, as well as receiving nods for her work from the Screen Actors Guild and the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn.
The two new comediennes in the category are way beyond learning the ropes, although this is the first time each will be making the Emmy rounds.
Wiig has really come into her own in the past year as SNL’s breakout female star--playing signature roles like Penelope, the hilarious serial one-upper and exaggerator, Gilly, the mischievous schoolgirl and the crazy collector Target cashier lady—as well as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Diane Sawyer and Suze Orman.
But Krakowski, who plays the fictional late night sketch comedy show’s Jenna Maroney on “30 Rock” could be swept up to the stage as a winner, as part of the comedy’s record 22 nominations.#
How much of a windfall? Well, according to the report below, "if Exxon Mobil had spent just one percent of its 2008 profits on political advertising in that year's election, it would have outspent both Obama and McCain combined."
Now, that's real money, as they say. And press reports of the oral arguments from Wednesday's Supreme Court session indicates that the conservative majority on the court may very well overturn the current rules preventing the corporate and union funding of these ads.
To really understand this, here's the transcript from a report that ran on Tuesday, Sept. 8th on a program entitled "Marketplace" from American Public Radio:
Show host Kai Ryssdal: The Supreme Court is going to hold a rare instant replay tomorrow. Instant at least in judicial time. The justices are going to re-hear a case from last spring, called Citizens United vs. The Federal Election Commission. As you can gather from the name of one of the parties to that case, and from the fact that we're covering it on this program, it's a case about money in politics. About whether companies can buy ads to support or to attack candidates in federal elections. Marketplace's Steve Henn reports.
________________________________________
STEVE HENN: The case the Supreme Court hears tomorrow could remake American elections. But when it began, it looked like a minor fight about a pay-per-view documentary called "Hillary: The Movie."
DICK MORRIS: Hillary is really the closest thing we have in America to a European Socialist.
Voice Over: If you thought you knew everything about Hillary Clinton, wait until you see the movie.
HENN: David Bossie is president of Citizens United, the nonprofit group that made the movie.
DAVID BOSSIE: We are a political group. We make political films. We make films that are timely.
HENN: And Citizens United accepts individual and corporate money to do it. Groups that accept individual contributions can air ads about candidates right up to election day. But corporate money changes that. And that's why Bossie always runs into trouble with the Federal Election Commission, or FEC.
BOSSIE: We made this movie knowing we were headed to the Supreme Court.
HENN: Bossie planned to run his film during Hillary Clinton's campaign. But officials at the FEC thought it was really a 90-minute attack ad. And because Bossie took a little corporate money to make the film, the FEC told him he couldn't run it on pay-per-view or air ads for it on television without facing consequences.
BOSSIE: I would open myself up to five years in prison. That's the penalty. It's not like, oh, they slap you with a little fine. We are talking about criminalizing speech. Not just criminalizing it, but with a massive jail sentence.
HENN: So Bossie sued. Michael Toner is a former chair of the FEC. In this case, he filed a brief supporting Citizen's United.
MICHAEL TONER: Congress didn't intend to focus on pay-per-view programming and advertising of this nature.
HENN: Originally, that's what this case was about: Can the FEC legally ban a pay-per-view film? But instead of deciding that issue, this spring the Supreme Court surprised everyone by asking for a new hearing addressing a different issue: Do corporations have a first amendment right to political speech? Michael Toner...
TONER: It's a very unusual situation to have the court ordering rehearing in a case, and it usually only occurs when a number of justices are seriously contemplating overturning established precedent.
HENN: Toner believes campaign finance laws have been on a collision coarse with the first amendment for years. And this isn't the first time the FEC has interfered with a documentary film.
CLIP FROM FAHRENHEIT 9/11: You had some airplanes authorized at the highest level of our government to pick up Osama bin Laden's family members and transport them out of this country.
HENN: Back in the summer of 2004, the FEC began investigating Loinsgate and Michael Moore, asking questions about the promotion of Fahrenheit 9/11, which skewered President George W. Bush. Here's David Bossie.
BOSSIE: And they actually took their ads off the air, as opposed to fighting it. I found that to be kind of incredible actually. That the biggest distributors, the biggest movie companies in the country, would be afraid of the Federal Election Commission.
HENN: The FEC's power has alarmed the ACLU, and the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, and major unions. They are all backing Bossie in this case.
But campaign finance reform advocates like Trevor Potter say there are half a dozen ways Bossie could have made his movie legally and aired it on TV without breaking campaign finance rules.
Potter is a former chairman of the FEC. Now he runs the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center, which promotes enforcement of campaign finance laws.
TREVOR POTTER: There isn't a problem. This is an artificial crisis created by people who have another agenda.
HENN: Potter thinks Citizen's United real agenda has always been to challenge the ban on corporate money in elections and overturn a law that's been on the books for 62 years. If they win...
POTTER: In essence, you would be giving corporate America the capacity for dominance of our electoral and our decision-making process.
HENN: Fred Wertheimer lobbies for strict campaign finance laws at Democracy 21. He points out that if Exxon Mobil had spent just 1 percent of its 2008 profits on political advertising in that year's election, it would have outspent both Obama and McCain combined.
In Washington, I'm Steve Henn for Marketplace.
To read one of the many accounts of yesterday's arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court, click here. It's the report from the Los Angeles Times.#
]]>It doesn’t matter whether or not Ellen is some kind of expert on singing, though, as an entertainment professional for her entire adult life, she likely knows a lot more about the subject than some are giving her credit for.
Her abilities as a judge of talent have nothing to do with her hiring. She was hired for the simple reason that she happens to be one of the world’s most popular and likable personalities on television. That’s it — you don’t really have to spend too much time analyzing it further.
She’s hugely appealing and at the top of her game. Sure, we’ll all miss kooky Paula, but Ellen DeGeneres? It’s a no-brainer. Whoever did the deal to land this huge star deserves a bonus.
It seems only fitting that in the wake of the passing of one of the greatest anchors of our time, Walter Cronkite, that there is a rare shake-up in the three coveted chairs that historically have been occupied for years and even decades at a time.
With Charlie Gibson passing his “World News” throne on to ABC's Diane Sawyer at the beginning of 2010, we will enter a new era of network news royalty--with two of the three seats being held by women for the first time in history.
Remember a few years back when Dan Rather was dragged kicking and screaming, which he still is, from the “CBS Evening News” desk and Katie Couric took over? Under an intense spotlight, the perennially perky (and yes, she rightfully hated that word) television veteran tried to redefine the genre of the tradition-bound evening news broadcast, with little success. Not to mention the scrutiny of her hair, clothing and makeup that just wasn't part of the equation when Brian Williams smoothly assumed the “NBC Nightly News” desk from long-time popular anchor Tom Brokaw.
Gibson inherited his mantle following a rocky, tragic period at ABC, after Peter Jennings died and then his successor, co-anchor Bob Woodruff was seriously injured in Iraq. He's done an estimable job, bringing in his newscast at number two, after top-rated NBC.
Yet the rumbling currents of criticism are already being directed at Sawyer, who's done some very softball interviews and puff pieces during her long and successful tenure at “Good Morning America”-- as well as hard-hitting broadcast journalism.
She's a tough cookie and a classy woman, although I've never gotten the part where she willingly worked as an aide to the most reviled president in modern history, Richard Nixon, before she made a major career change and became the media doyenne she is today.
But the tea leaves read that Sawyer's hairstyle, hair color, lipstick, weight and wardrobe will be as much as part of the discussion as her journalistic credentials. Aside from Couric’s elevation, it's been more than 25 years since the last female network news anchor, Jessica Savitch, made headlines for helming a network newscast (and she only held the weekend slot on NBC before her untimely death in a traffic accident).
Shamefully, much of the discourse about women in broadcasting has not evolved much beyond the superficial since then.#