Perspectives from the City of Angels
Powerful House leader, Tom Delay, has been rebuked by a Congressional ethics committee. Twice.
And a third time is just around the corner.
This second admonishment comes for improperly using his position to use the Federal Aviation Administrations for political purposes and accepting political donations.
Any objective viewer would say Kerry excelled in presidential debates.
Ignore the pundits, though. Just vote.
I wrote a few days ago that gay-themed shows were the new black. I'll now clarify that they're the new black as a genre of shows.
LOST, with its whopping 6.8 rating among 18-49 year olds, is the highest-rated new show.
I'll give it another look next week and try to skip TOP MODEL.
LOST's nearest competition was NBC's HAWAII. I predict it will be canceled soon, if not for NBC lacking something to replace it. But I think NBC has plenty of FEAR FACTOR reruns on the ready.
In the key demo, it's essentially a 5-way-tie for last place on Wednesday nights. Household numbers are a little different but not by much.
I am thrilled for my man J.J. Abrams and ABC.
You may have missed it on the Emmy's this year. I did.
But when "Jesus Christ" was uttered by award-recipient Elaine Strich, it was muted out for broadcast. Meanwhile, her "f'n" variant on the f-word was broadcasted freely and clearly.
It seems Jesus Christ, spoken aloud for national broadcast, may be considered "indecent" by the federal government. No shit.
This flies in the face of my intuitions of free speech protected by the First Amendment--not to mention constitutional doctrine separating church and state.
After the Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction from CBS' Superbowl broadcast, the networks are Super-sensitive to government fines and regulation. CBS has been fined $550,000 by the FCC.
Jesus Christ!
I suspect CBS will appeal the FCC fine.
Just as meteorologists could predict the hurricanes' paths to Florida, bloggers and political scientists can foresee a protracted legal battle involving Florida's elections this November.
There is plenty of evidence to raise serious doubts about the Diebold-made electronic voting machines. Recall, Diebold's leaders have worked hard to get George Bush re-elected.
In 2000, there were poorly explained reasons why the numbers didn't add up. Some claimed outright fraud.
Supporters of these machines say they are much better. Indeed, they are being used in another important swing state, Ohio. Critics say that will only lead to more problems.
Diebold insists their machines are accurate and election-ready. Yet, more news has surfaced on missing votes from these allegedly accurate vote counters. Unfortunately for us, this isn't from the 2000 debacle, but from just last week.
Vote By Mail. It's the best way.
Donald Rumsfeld has essentially said just that. Let freedom ring!
Apparently, Republicans feel the same way here at home in America. They aren't interested in allowing everyone to vote. In Ohio, the Republican Secretary of State wants to throw out applications to vote because the paper cardstock isn't thick enough. It is no coincidence that most of these potential new voters are registering as Democrats.
What's more, former president Jimmy Carter--who has monitored over 50 international elections--has called Florida's upcoming elections poor, and predicts a repeat of 2000.
Feel like doing something in Florida? I do, too.
Consider Election Protection in Florida. Tax-deductible, too!
It will be an exciting, emotional Presidential race.
Over the weekend, I drove with ten volunteers from southern California to Scottsdale, Arizona, in a growing trend sweeping the nation. Non-swing state residents are traveling to help their swing-state neighbors.
Specific to Arizona, the goals are to register new voters, encourage currently registered voters to Vote By Mail, and turn the state Blue (a.k.a. Democratic).
This is a formidable goal, given Arizona's historic Republican tradition. Both of Arizona's Senators are Republican.
But the demography of Arizona is rapidly changing. New residents from states like California have moved in--and in big numbers. Consequently, the electoral mix becomes more progressive and more Democratic. For instance, Arizona elected its first Democratic governor in many years--and a woman to boot.
Additionally, the "ground forces" are engaged in hand-to-hand combat. Something Democrats are best at, according to a Democratic spokesman. This article is worth the read based on her quote alone.
Meanwhile, I will be traveling to Arizona throughout the next 5 weeks doing my best to do my part. You can too. Just get involved and start here.
Gay TV is the new black. Even the Nielsen Family people are considering going queer.
From a programming perspective, Showtime had "ground breaking" QUEER AS FOLK. (The original British version is head and shoulders better.)
Then Bravo made the hit show QUEER EYE FOR THE STRAIGHT GUY.
Viacom announced the LOGO channel exclusively targeted to gays and lesbians.
Not to be outdone, Bravo had the idea to do America's Next Hot Male Model, better described as Uber Gay Show To Date: MANHUNT.
Just don't confuse it with this.
It's true that the Nielsen numbers are not what they used to be ten--or even five--years ago. Alas, network executives, fear not!
Wednesday's numbers--and likely Thursday's too--tell a simple, but powerful story: the viewers are out there. And they will turn to the major broadcast networks in droves if we put out original, quality programming.
It's a simple calculation, really. A Nielsen "share" is the percentage of total TV viewers at any given moment. So for instance, if a show received a 5 rating and a 9 share, that would be about 6.25 million viewers (5 x 1.25M viewers) and 9% of the total viewers who have their TVs on at that specific time.
Looking at Wednesday at 9:30PM, we count among the 6 broadcast networks a total share of 93! That means of all of the TV's on at that time, 93% of them were on a non-cable network.
This, my dear reader, spells hope for the broadcast networks. Theoretically, with more broadcast networks than ever before, competition should produce higher quality shows. (On the dark side, they could go in reverse and it would be a competition for who makes the least objectionable. I prefer to look from the brighter side.)
Most importantly, however, a 93 share is empirical evidence that viewers can (and have) come to broadcast TV. The numbers are right before your eyes.
It bears worth repeating: If you make TV good, they will come.
(At one point in the night, ABC's THE BACHELOR was in 6th place [out of 6], or dead last.)
Notably, this is premiere week when the hype is high, the families are home from vacation, and kids are starting school. It could be just all downhill from here. Or, maybe later in the season, we'll see a 95 share, then a 96 share.
In one month's time, broadcast networks will see if these levels hold up--and so will we.
The LOST season premiere handily won its time slot. At its peak, LOST earned a rating of 7.0 in the key demo (18-49 year olds), compared to its closest competition: the DR. PHIL's Special at 4.8.
AMERICA'S NEXT TOP MODEL tied for last place at 2.0.
Each point translates into about 1.25 million viewers.
There are many explanations to why all of this happened and to extract every permutation would be lengthy. I suggest LOST did so well--and will do so well--not be because its pilot episode was particularly well written (again, I LOVE show-creator J.J. Abrams), but the idea of the show is different.
In a crowded TV marketplace, people will watch just about anything. But what people want is innovative, unique TV. The premise behind LOST is just that. I just wish there wasn't so much pipe-laying in the pilot, "Back when I was a resident...", versus showing a character practicing medicine on 12 people and the viewer is smart enough to figure it out. And cliched characters, a pregnant woman going into labor, the "foreign" couple with a dominating Asian husband barking orders which need subtitles, and a stupid fat guy.
Why does TV refuse to make fat people smart in shows? And for the record Camryn Manheim's character in THE PRACTICE was not smart. And Tyne Daily... well, you get my point.
What if you made the foreign couple Arab? Too daring? It's a national audience, we can't put Arab's in a show where a plane goes down! We need to stick with familiar stereotypes. I think little tweaks in story could get even more viewers.
Just because it's on broadcast TV, doesn't mean producers need to dumb it down. LAW & ORDER has had--and continues to have--a strong run because Dick Wolf and his talented group do not dumb the 20 LAW & ORDER shows, down.
Aside from being different than any other show in premise, LOST benefited from huge amounts of advertising which is not sustainable for the entire season. We all know how easily people are manipulated with commercials. Look at the presidential race to see that. Just because George Bush advertises more, doesn't mean he's better. The same can be said for LOST.
This is certainly not to imply that LOST is the George Bush of TV choices. Rather, the lesson to possibly be learned from Disney is to cross-promote properties. In LOST's case, it was on the Travel Channel; ESPN 1, 2, classic; Discovery Channel, and more.
TV learned another big lesson last night. Save that for tomorrow.
The first 15 minutes of LOST seems disappointingly mundane and full of cliches. And I'm a huge--I mean HUGE--fan of show-creator/director J.J. Abrams, whose almost-a-hit-show ALIAS is also on ABC. (Sunday nights, 9PM.)
ALIAS is "appointment TV" for me. That is, it's in my Palm Pilot like an appointment so I don't miss it.
If the first act of LOST is any indication, ALIAS will be the only Abrams' appointment TV show I'll be watching this season.
Three acts to go.
(submitted 8:20PM, 22 Sep 2004)
Addendum:
I never made it through the first act of LOST. Instead, I channel flipped over to UPN to watch AMERICA'S NEXT TOP MODEL. Keep in mind, I never watched last season's show. I did watch half of a painful "recap" episode. That was, perhaps, one of the worst things I've ever watched on broadcast TV aside from WHOOPI (also from last season, NBC).
If I'm not alone in my channel flipping--and we'll learn if I am tomorrow thanks to the TV Nielsen gods--ABC may be in trouble. They are heavily invested in LOST, an expensive-to-produce, highly marketed and publicized show.
(I even saw commercials of LOST on the WORLD SERIES OF POKER [on ESPN, a Disney-owned channel] and the World Poker Tour [on the Travel Channel, another Disney property!])
AMAZING RACE 5 won its timeslot for the entire 2-hour season finale. Congrats to CBS on their excellent programming and scheduling; congrats to the producers for a terrific show.
CBS, and naturally their leader Leslie Moonves, deserve credit for how they've pushed NBC out of the Number One spot after a long reign in that position. It was NBC's to lose.
During the 90's, NBC had an unbeatable lineup. But "Must See TV" is rare these days. And when it does happen, it's not for NBC.
One of the reasons NBC was so strong was its comedy line-up. Now, there are few stand-out comedies on NBC. They don't have a night to rule.
So, today, kudos to CBS.
The outings of closeted, gay but anti-gay Republicans continue. Thanks to take-no-prisoners Larry Flynt, who--it's been suggested--hired young men to be available to Republican leaders during the New York convention.
I have a first-hand account of such things happening. No, I wasn't one of the rentable young men, but I did witness an older Republican fellow in my hotel escorting a young man to his room. The amusing part happened already in the lobby. Because of heightened security, all guests needed ID and a special keycard. Visitors of guests--hired boys included--needed to be escorted, in an ironic twist.
I listened to their awkward banter on the elevator:
Republican Daddy: So, you got here sooner than I expected.
Twink Boy Toy: Yeah.
Republican Daddy: Very fast. Really.
Twink Boy Toy: Yeah, the cab was quick.
(longer awkward pause)
Twink Boy Toy: No traffic.
Ding. My floor! And I left the two love birds to their own.
Newsday calls this year's Miss America Pageant a "hit with viewers" with about 6 million total TV watchers on Saturday night. Six million TV viewers beat the other "major" broadcast networks for the night.
Oh, how the times have changed.
Just FIVE years ago, the MAP had nearly 16 million viewers--and it was a 3 hour show! Who has that kind of stamina to watch Stepford women for 3 hours?
In 5 years, 10 million people have decided to watch or do something else.
Here's why.
MAP was one of the first successful reality shows. Ironic since reality shows are anything but. But it was a TV model that everyone copied (I love play on words, forgive me; I promise no more parenthetical; this is a blog [not the Back Page of Time Magazine] where parentheticals are tacky in the former [but what about brackets?]).
Like I was saying, MAP is a TV model everyone copied. It was a familiar, almost comforting structure. Mini-contest after contest, tensions rise as contestants were whittled away through elimination, then a final winner.
MAP couldn't have predicted how many spin-offs of them would happen in just 5 years. THE SWAN, BACHELOR, WHAT IF I MARRIED A MILLIONAIRE, the list goes on.
Beauty pageants aren't anything special anymore; TV isn't anything special anymore.
The ratings prove it in both cases.
But there's hope.
TV can be special again but it will take bold leadership. Unfortunately, this is hard to come by in both politics and Hollywood. Some say the viewers lost to XBox players and the Internet are gone forever. I disagree.
If you make it good, they will watch.
Let's start making it good again.
I have priased this website for sometime.
But I may have to move it to my "can't say it better" category.
Polls will soon be out of vogue.
John Kerry has suggested that George Bush is waiting until after the November elections to call up additional troop reserves in Iraq.
Does it matter?
Uneducated voters don't care.
In this election year, cynicism is taking over. I'm not alone and fighting it off desperately.
The overwhelming evidence is that Bush has made this country worse off--through rolling back environmental policies, special tax cuts to his rich friends and causing a massive deficit, and trampling on civil rights.
Internationally, the United States is now disliked more than ever--making new, future alliances more difficult and inspiring the poor and destitute (men and women alike) to give their lives in a suicide bomb for promises of a better after-life.
Yet, swing voters still blow with the wind.
Ironically, people who vote for Bush--especially because of his religion--are America's version of a political suicide bomber. Bush Suicide Bombers don't trigger explosive devices on their bodies, they injure themselves and others in the polling booths.
Despite it all, I'm going to some very important states over the next two weeks. I hope you'll join us.
This will be a close presidential election.
Bounces have flattened.
Swing voters are swinging.
As we get closer to November, the attacks will get uglier.
Do Democrats have it in them to fight dirty like the Republicans have for the last two decades?
It's clear that broadcast networks are losing viewers to cable.
It's clear TV is losing viewers to video game players and the hyper-educated who snub it as bourgeois.
So, what to do?
Salon.com has surveyed a rag-tag group of entertainment personalities--none of whom are charged with the responsibility of advertising, programming or budgeting in a broadcast TV world--or have good knowledge about historical trends in TV in the context of business. Still, here they are.
In TV, actors are not to blame. Unfortunately for them, most are as disposable as a packet of Taco Bell hot sauce.
In TV, directors are not to blame. (See reason for "actors", above.)
Who is the blame? Drum roll...
The buck stops with...Writers and TV Executives.
The latter must make a pronouncement--a jihad, if you will--against Common Denominator TV.
And writers must resist from creating CDTV, despite the temptation.
It's hard to make non-CDTV. Only a few talents can make non-CDTV. But for TV to get better, it will take TV executives smart enough and courageous enough to reject CDTV; writers must rise to the occasion to develop excellent, scripted shows. (Or semi-scripted in the case of CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM.)
This is show business. Plenty of blame to go around. But we need to make a better product soon to make money once again. We may not have another chance.
David Dreier, what's the truth?
Dreier is a Republican Congressman from Pasadena.
Some of you may have heard about the US Open tennis controversy which took place during the Serena Williams / Jennifer Capriati match. The chair umpire made a bad overrule which many have said caused Williams to lose the game and eventually the match.
(As a fair disclaimer, I should tell you that I was at the US Open as a tennis official but was not on court during the controversy.)
To her credit, Williams said afterward that the overrule didn't cost her the match--implying that one bad call is not to blame for a loss of an entire match.
To her discredit, Capriati could have yielded the point to Williams, but chose not too. Instead, Capriati most likely lied when she said she didn't see the ball and therefore couldn't determine whether the ball was in or out. Replays clearly show the ball in. Replays also clearly show Capriati looking at the ball as it struck in.
Some have called for the immediate institution of instant replay in tennis. Most players seem to want to keep the status quo despite the human error rate (which is not possible to calculate with any certainty).
Others want more cameras on court which may better assess whether a ball is in or out. Still others think have nearly 10 officials for 2 players is ridiculous.
While the debate continues over instant replay, the debate over Capriati's behavior is likely closed. Simply put, Capriati's behavior is unacceptable and deplorable.
What makes tennis different from other sports (aside from possibly golf) is a special code of conduct. Good sportsmanship is written into the rules of tennis--for example--if a player is not certain that a ball is out, s/he must call it good.
Some argue that at the high level in which Capriati and Williams play, they are held to a different standard and need not capitulate points in gross error. I totally reject that rationale and, furthermore, believe it harmful to the game as a whole. When young players learning what good sportsmanship is emulate players like Capriati by lying and calling "in" balls as "out", it's bad for the game. Period.
The FBI has approached, interviewed, and intimidated possible would-be protesters of the Democratic and Republican National Conventions. But let's be clear, in all probability, the majority of those interviewed by the FBI were likely anti-Republican. The FBI won't say whom they have interviewed so far, or whom them will interview in the future.
It is a troubling time for civil libertarians in a post-9/11 world. Proponents of the interviewings argue it's done in the name of natinoal security--preventing violent or illegal crime before it happens. The line of harassment and execution of anti-terrorism duties is blurred when interviewing and investigating witnesses pre-emptively.
The FBI is under incredible pressure these days. Flawed and poor investigations. Punishing internal FBI whistle-blowers. And now this.
Hopefully, reform and change is on the way.
We all know about the Janet Jackson costume "malfunction" during last year's Superbowl and the outcry which followed from politicians. But did you know that the government wants more regulation of Hollywood?
The relationship between the TV industry and the government is complex and tenuous. By law, the government regulates TV insofar as the government leases broadcast frequencies and TV networks are charged with broadcasting programs designed to serve the public interest. Consequently, issues of decency, production, and corporate regulation are important. Additionally, these concerns must be balanced with First Amendment freedom of speech and freedom of expression concerns.
At the heart of most recent debates is whether the government should and can regulate what's on TV.
What has been happening (in the last 10 years in particular) is the exponential growth of TV viewer options with the spread of satellite and cable (S&C) broadcasting. The major broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, UPN, WB) are losing viewers to S&C.
Lower viewership on any given station means less revenue generated from advertisers who look for shows with high numbers of viewers. Consequently, as TV networks experience reductions in revenue, they also may cut back on spending.
These cutbacks can mean cutting network staff, budgets for productions, or both. As networks spend less on developing and producing new TV shows, the quality of television will drop fast. And let's face it, the quality is pretty low already.
Budget reduction trends are occuring across every network--broadcast, satellite, and cable alike; TV will become increasingly based on cheap-to-produce "reality" or unscripted programming. This includes shows like Big Brother, Extreme Makeover, game shows, and others. In short, TV will start to all look the same. One reality show after another.
In short, creativity is dying in television and will soon be dead.
A friend of mine who heads the scheduling department at a major cable network told me that there will never be another hit show on TV like The Cosby Show ever again. The Cosby Show finale earned a 50 Nielsen share (meaning--among all TV viewers that night--50% watched The Cosby Show). Now, the broadcast networks are thrilled to get a 35 share, collectively. In other words, broadcast TV audiences are small.
If TV is getting worse and more homogeneous, what's the answer to this dark path?
Ironically, the answer is for TV-viewing families to watch MORE TV.
But not just any TV, quality TV. And not just any TV viewing family, Nielsen Families.
If you aren't a Nielsen Family, watch any trash TV show you want (I personally endorse the uber-trash reality "dating" show CHEATERS).
But if you are a Nielsen Family, the future of TV is in your hands. We're running out of time, and the responsibility on your shoulders to watch quality TV. By supporting quality programming, we show networks and advertisers that we care about original, scripted television.
What a mess. New Jersey Governor James McGreevey, married to a woman and a father of two, announced that he will resign from office under a cloud of scandal.
Not only did McGreevey face political heat from alleged illegal fund-raising by supporters and staff members, but now this bombshell: he cheated on his wife. But that's not all. He had the affair with another man. And it appears that man was threatening McGreevey with a public lawsuit or blackmail. If that wasn't enough, here's another kicker.
The man whom McGreevey may have had the affair with was a high level "consultant" whom the state paid a salary of over $100,000 a year for advising on homeland security issues. That was controversial in and of itself because the consultant, a 33-year old Israeli-born citizen, couldn't even get security clearance!
It is unfortunate if the media's take home message from this story is: if you are gay, you cannot serve as governor. McGreevey, for what it's worth, said explicitly that being gay had nothing to do with serving as governor. The implication was the US is ready for a gay governor. But the extra-marital affair--plus the added drama of the affair being with another man who was already under political scrutiny--would be too distracting for the governor's office to continue under McGreevey's leadership.
Okay, so McGreevey resigned because of the affair.
Boy, what a drama queen. You wouldn't have been able to write it better in Hollywood movie.
The Senate race in Illinois has taken a startling turn with the Republicans putting up Alan Keyes as their guy. (GOP leader Dennis Hastert denies being involved in the selection of an out-of-state Black candidate to go up against the popular Barak Obama. Hastert claims he was "out of town" when that decision was made).
Keyes is a self-described conservative. He ran and lost--twice--for Senate in his state of Maryland and for the presidential nomination. Now he's moving to Illinois to see if he can win there. Even after he criticized Hillary Clinton for moving to New York to run for Senate in 2000. Despite the appearance of hypocrisy, Keyes says that he's not running for personal ambition like Hillary.
Today, Keyes accused Obama, who is also black, of taking a "slaveholder's position" regarding abortion. Keyes' simplified argument is that because Obama voted for allowing abortions in the state of Illinois, Obama defies the Declaration of Independence because he doesn't give any value to the inalienable rights of the fetus.
Obama replied (as quoted by USA Today), Keyes "should look to members of his own party to see if that's appropriate if he's going to use that kind of language."
The irony of Obama's reply is that he subtly jabs Keyes for being mastered by Republican leaders. Whether intended or not, Obama's response was politically brilliant. He has time and again taken the high road in lieu of mud-slinging. He welcomed Keyes to the race and asked him to make the contest issue-oriented, not based on personal attacks.
What's clear in this: Keyes will attack Obama much like he has done on Day 1 of the campaign when he implied Obama a slave for supporting a woman's right to choose. Meanwhile, Keyes undoubtedly has been called an Uncle Tom for his positions and willingness to do the Republicans' bidding as a token black candidate.
But beyond the potential for ugliness in politics with Keyes levying insults and making personal attacks, there is some good to come of this.
By putting ultra-conservative, out-of-the-mainstream Keyes into the race, Illinois will elect Barack Obama to the US Senate in November.
Presidential nominee John Kerry says publicly that he doesn't think the terror alert announcements are politically timed. Daniel Schorr of NPR doesn't think so either.
But what do you think of the coincidental timing of press conferences and terror alert action based on information that was known years ago. Why does the Bush Administration pick the week which historically represents the time when a presidential challenger gets his biggest bounce from his national convention?
They do it to take attention away from John Kerry.
No! No! It's in the interests of national security, other say. A former CIA anti-terrorism expert disagrees.
In the end, we may never know whether the intention of the current Administration was to steal the media thunder from John Kerry. We certainly know they could have foreseen such a thing happening.
Let there be no doubt that the power of incumbency gives one presidential candidate a huge advantage.
It seems like every month we hear that TV is bad for your health. But the real picture isn't so clear.
A study by Robert Hancox and colleagues was published earlier this month in the esteemed British academic journal, The Lancet. No public internet link, sorry.
What strikes my about the sexy titled article, "Association between child and adolescent television viewing and adult health: a longitudinal birth cohort study," brings little new insight as to the health costs of watching TV. Simply put, obesity--which is their main proxy for health--is not a flawless health measuring instrument. In other words, there are many potential reasons for obesity. The greatest predictor is genetic.
But what is clear is this: If you consume more calories than you use, you get fat.
So what did Hancox's study show? In a large sample of participants whom they tracked since adolescence into adulthood, they found that those who watched more TV were, on average, fat. They also looked at whether they smoked, high blood pressure, and other factors.
We know that smoking and high-blood pressure are associated. We know that obesity and high blood pressure are associated. But do we know if TV watching is associated with high blood pressure, obesity, and smoking? That's the key question.
The problem of Hancox's study, and others like it, is that it suffers from inappropriate conclusions: simplifying complex social and scientific phenomena to a flawed result.
If long-term TV watching is bad for your health, why then are so many TV watchers actually healthy?
What if one watched 4 hours of TV a day, and 2 of those hours were on a treadmill or an elliptical machine? You can see where I am going with this argument without discussing the weaknesses of the study in academic verbiage.
I suggest like most things, moderation is best when it comes to television viewing. And Hancox's study making it to the top-ranked journal, The Lancet, just goes to show that politics plays in research, too.
Congrats to the producers of BOURNE SUPREMACY which raked in $53.5 million in its opening weekend. Compare that to CATWOMAN, which earned a pitiful $17.2 million.
CATWOMAN is the classic example of what is wrong with Hollywood. Produced and developed (in part) by Denise Di Novi, the movie cost over $100 million to make and will come no where close to generating that much money.
Bad show + bad business = bad showbusiness. Yet, Denise gets work over and over again. In Hollywood, we call this failing up.
Who is Denise Di Novi? She has her deal with Warner Bros. and is best known as Tim Burton's former development head. Although since she left his company (or was fired, depending on whom you ask), she's produced features such as CABIN BOY, MESSAGE IN A BOTTLE, and PRACTICAL MAGIC.
All of which bombed under no uncertain terms.
Yet she keeps plugging along and getting bad movies made. So in some respect, she's a good producer. She just has utterly horrible taste and no creative ability to make good movies.
Last comment on Denise: Not only does she have others open her water bottles for fear of chipping a finger nail, but she also pays her manicurist/pedicurist to come into the office during staff meetings to get a soak and a polish.
Makes you proud to live and work in this town, no?
The 9/11 Commission has released its first comprehensive report on the September 11th attacks in the United States. It's unclear whether they will produce another report assessing whether the US has since taken positive or negative steps to combat terrorism. Such a discussion might include looking at whether invading Iraq was justified or a good idea--a political hot potato that Bush certainly wouldn't want discussed by an independent commission just before presidential elections.
Let's not forget that the Bush administration was against the 9/11 Commission from even being created. Journalist Alison Mitchell of the New York Times (5/20/2002) wrote, "Vice President Dick Cheney said today that he would advise President Bush not to turn over to Congress the August intelligence briefing that warned that terrorists were interested in hijacking airplanes, and he insisted that the investigation into Sept. 11 should be handled by the Congressional intelligence committees, not an independent commission."
Some said--and say--that Bush is not at fault for 9/11. He wasn't in office long enough to have done anything, the argument goes.
I suggest you read the independent commission report for yourself. Not all 500 pages if you don't have the time, but Chapter 8, in particular, which talks about how Bush had 40 references to Bin Laden in his Presidential Daily Briefings over several months (the media generally reported on just one).
Still don't think Bush could have done anything? Read the chapter, then decide.
Donald Rumsfeld says if you ask him personally what he thinks about any forthcoming draft, he rules it out. But what about professionally--in his capacity as Secretary of Defense? Does he rule it out then?
What I like about Donald Rumsfeld is he is a politician's politician. In other words, he says a lot about obvious things, gives away little, and for the most part says few offensive things prima facie. When asked about the status of Osama bin Laden over a year ago (I think the hunt is basically over given our military is focused in Iraq--not Afghanistan or Pakistan--where most intelligence officials think he is), Rumsfeld replied he's either alive or he's dead. Duh.
There are many signs that the draft is just around the corner. I have been saying this for over a year now and it hasn't happened. But I never expected it to happen unless we had a George W. Bush 2nd term as President. That is the least of our worries, of course. To be more precise, the least of MY worries since I'm ineligible for the draft. My genes are finally coming in handy!
The next President of the United States (POTUS) will have 3--maybe 4--Supreme Court justice appointments. That will have an incredible affect on our society for the next two generations. The choice for the next POTUS is obvious. But if you need help deciding, I'll make it easy. Just click here and give a few dollars. Then do something fun and poltical.
AMAZING RACE 5 continues its domination of the airwaves on Tuesday nights among young adults. AR5 had 4.7 million viewers--destroying all competition.
Sandy Berger is in the news most likely due to a well-timed and orchestrated leak by Republican leadership. It's no coincidence that this leak happened just before the Sept. 11 commission report which will probably make Bush look like a putz.
Despite the timing, Berger's claim of accidental removal of classified documents is insulting at best. Berger is a smart man, and one does not unintentionally remove inventoried papers from the National Archives. In the end, I think swing voters won't care either way. It all wreaks of partisanship and politicking which turns off voters in a big way.
In that spirit, check this out.
No reader should think I that I support Martha Stewart going to jail. There are bigger fishes to fry in the corporate world than Martha. The media frenzy over her sentencing is out of control and shows how souless it is as an institution. But I do get a kick that Martha likens herself to Nelson Mandela.
If the media were doing its job, they would talk about Donald Rumsfeld and why he isn't in jail yet. Or they could talk about Kenneth Lay, former head of Enron, and how long it has taken prosecutors to just indict him--let alone for him to be sentenced. There are big differences between Kenny Boy (George W's personal nickname for him) and Martha, you say? The case is much more complicated in Enron. Is it?
Andrew Fastow, the former top finance guy of Enron, is fully cooperating with the Fed now. He received a 10 year sentence. His wife, one year. To get Martha, all the Fed had was her broker's assistant. And she was not found guilty of insider trading. She was found guilty of misleading federal investigators. So in some way, you're right that there's a difference between Martha and Kenny Boy. It's the magnitude of harm done to our society. There is a huge difference there and Kenny Boy did much, much worse.
I feel obligated to talk about a scientific study in the news about children and TV. Given I am a Hollywood guy and once was in public health, there's an irrational sense of personal responsibility I have to say something about it. And I will write something, but later. Golf's on.
Ten months in jail. Actually, it's just five in jail and five in one of her pastel decorated homes. Martha Stewart got off easy.
Forbes Magazine writes, "She asked the court 'to consider all the intense suffering' she had endured and told the judge that her 'heart goes out to you and everyone in the room. Thank you and peace be with you.'" In previous interviews, she has said she doesn't understand why people don't like her.
In TV, 3.6 million Americans (18-49 years old) watched BB5 last night. It easily won the time slot against repeats of WILL & GRACE. CBS executives in Hollywood must be soiling themselves with glee. They surely know how poor a show it is since they run it during the summer against such weak competition; Fox's NORTH SHORE has less viewers than UPN's wrestling franchise SMACKDOWN.
Nevertheless, Fox's programming is original, insists Gail Berman, Fox's entertainment head. I know Gail and she can spin with the best of them. Another example of how Hollywood and politics live in the same neighborhood. She does have a point about a competitive marketplace producing similar competitive goods. Everyone tried to copy ER when it first came out. More recently, have you seen the AMERICAN IDOL knock offs? The irony is that NBC's Jeff Zucker casts the first stone when now much of their line-up is based on British TV. Oh where are the days of original programming and bold leadership. Where are the Grant Tinker's and Warren Littlefield's of yesterday?
Warren who? Sit down, and let me link you a story about my dear friend Warren Littlefield, former head of entertainment at NBC from the 1990-98, who some credit with the "Must See TV" slogan and then was later fired for one season of low ratings. However, not Everyone Loves Warren. Certainly not Bob Wright of General Electric/NBC Corporate. Bob, after all, fired Warren and probably--if Bob's honest with himself--regrets it every day.
Speaking of firings, Secretary of Torture Don Rumsfeld is getting more heat for the prison scandal, and deservedly so. I imagine his departure will come by the end of this beautiful summer. And that day will be especially more pleasant.
Popular state Senator Barack Obama, who has no major opponent for the US Senate race in Illinois after kinky millionaire Jack Ryan dropped out, breathed a huge sigh of relief on the news that Mike Ditka will not enter the race. Ditka, the well-known and foul-mouthed former Chicago Bears coach, was courted by state Republican officials after internet grassroots campaign DraftDitka generated a significant base of supporters.
Certainly being foul-mouthed is not a disqualifier for public office. Let's not forget Vice President Dick Cheney on the Senate floor last month who told Senator Patrick Leahy to fuck himself.
Nevertheless, Mike Ditka would have still faced a tough test running against Barack Obama, who is incredibly popular himself. In the end, skeletons in Mike's closet and the invasive and sometimes critical media probably scared him out of the race. Lucky for the Democrats. Now that Ditka's out, what about BIG BROTHER 5?
CBS' utterly affected and boring reality show on Tuesday (and other) nights is painful to watch. I feel myself getting dummer with each passing moment. Watching these self-important half-naked bimbo boys and girls with their lame tasks like ring toss make my eyes bleed. Time will tell how low American standards for TV has become. The premiere of BIG BROTHER 5 feted 4.8 million viewers in the key demo. Episode 2 had less viewers due to the All Star Game on FOX. Tonight may tell us how popular BB5 will be. However, let's not fool ourselves. BB5 is not getting canceled. It's cheap to produce and gets high niels: CBS' crystal meth.
But not all CBS reality is uninteresting. AMAZING RACE 5 premiered the same night as BB5. AR5 built on the strong lead-in an earned a whopping 5.5. This show is great; we all liked scavenger hunts as kids. This world scavenger hunt with regular adult contestants whom we can relate to in some way--combined with conflict each of us has faced in one form or another (running late, reading a map wrong, picking the right Tango dancer)--makes great network TV.
Speaking of great TV, if Emmy nominations are any guide, you don't find it on the broadcast networks but on HBO. Sign up.
