The Lost Scripts

A recent lengthy commentary in The Hollywood Reporter is perpetuating an impression created by financial analysts regarding Dish Network, the satellite TV signal provider.

It doesn't delve into the problems created by the EchoStar Communications Corporation split this year, or even indicate an awareness of the balance sheet differences between November 2007 EchoStar Communications Corporation and November 2008 Dish Network, differences which are like night and day.

It does identify a truth that should dominate the rest of the analysis of the company. It's "Charlie Ergen's company."

When Charlie was a 30-something, he started EchoStar. When Charlie was 40-something he got EchoStar DBS going.

Charlie will be 56 in March. The now "Old Charlie" still may be a tenacious techie dreamer. Probably he has a really good idea for that 700MHz spectrum Dish Network is on the hook for. But finding what amounts to startup money in 2009 to do anything with that spectrum isn't going to be improbable, it's going to be all but impossible. And I believe Charlie's heart is with the new Echostar, the one that owns Slingbox and makes the ViP receiver/recorder boxes. That Charlie isn't the logical 21st Century mentor of the new Dish Network.

The new Dish Network is a retail service operation. Like WalMart, it demands clever marketing while renegotiating contracts with its suppliers, the various media companies and local channel owners. But that's also where the WalMart analogy completely breaks down. Acquiring those television signals can't be outsourced to producers in third world countries so Dish's prices can be kept low and still maintain a meaningful profit margin. The analogy to WalMart is flawed.

DirecTV and the new Dish Network compete against established cable and telecom companies that offer at least three products: (1) television signals, (2) internet connections, and (3) telephone service.

All these television signal providers are now selling insert advertising. On the other hand, Dish Network's sibling EchoStar designs and sells boxes designed to skip advertising while Dish Network needs to get a cash flow stream going from those ads.

DirecTV has already hedged it's hardware bets by repartnering with TiVo which is run by a former NBC executive and is already working to help advertisers get through to commercial skipping viewers (see this article). DirecTV has a cousin's relationship with media producers and has already put it's toe in the media production market. And in 2007-2008 it committed huge sums to the only real product it has to sell - TV signals - and huge sums to market to new customers during the runup to a major change in it's product from analog SD TV to digital HD TV.

Yes, EchoStar Communications Corporation offered HD early, developing really cool hardware and offering pioneering HD signals from HDNet and VOOM, much like a 20-something techie fiddling in the garage, definitely not like a 50-something marketing veteran laying out a 5-year plan for dominating a market. Then, just as it started losing the HD retail market advantage, EchoStar Communications Corporation split itself in two in what appeared for all intents and purposes to be a maneuver by Charlie to sell it's retail service component, Dish Network, and keep the garage, Echostar. That didn't work because nobody bought Dish Network before the economic meltdown.

In fact today Dish Network superficially looks like the WalMart of television signal providers. But the analysts' analogy is wrong. Dish Network has no real control of the cost of it's product and most certainly has no control over the content in its product. The advantage has gone to its competitor who recognized the truth about its mature product - TV channels. What appeared to be a somewhat expensive contract for a "cable" channel signal was, in fact, all DirecTV had to market. To DirecTV it wasn't foolishly signing too expensive contracts for signals, it was investing in the future, it fit into a logical market plan. Charlie is still holding out for bargain basement prices.

In the meantime, 50-something-Charlie's Echostar decided to make cool DVR boxes for OTA television viewers. These viewers, so far in the 40 years of "cable" channel existence, have had no need for "cable" channels and, apparently, wouldn't spend the money on a TiVo. And irony of ironies, Charlie has Dish Network dealing with the retail problems of these boxes which likely will alienate many who will ultimately switch to a signal provider, most likely an uncomplicated one which would either be cable or telecom company.

The only good advice in that article is this: "So, revisit Dish shares next year. Your Wal-Mart shares have served you better in 2008; those are down only a few bucks in the past six months and up year-to-date."

Yes, let's see what the new Dish Network without the new EchoStar looks like next November. Maybe Old Charlie really does have his finger on the door-to-door retail television signal service market.

Heck, I'm already "invested" heavily just as a customer of this company I think is analogous to the 1999 K-Mart. I'm eagerly awaiting its February "Blue Light Specials" (annual package and pricing changes) and wondering if it will ultimately need its "Sears Holding."

Under normal circumstances, I'm reluctant to recommend 30-minute sitcoms because people's sense of humor differ significantly. But "Rita Rocks" which started last week on Lifetime is a pretty good new family sitcom - some clever lines and good actors. Like all sitcoms at the start, it's a little bit uneven but it is well done.

Lifetime is repeating all six previous episodes next week. If you like family comedy, give it a try. I think you'll like it.

The plot summary: A woman who is nearing 40 works in a "Bed, Bath and Beyond" type of store starts a garage band with her neighbor, her mail carrier, and her teenage daughter's boyfriend, while her husband picks up some of the chores.

The adult regulars in the cast are familiar faces, including:

Rita (the lead character) - Nicole Sullivan (The King of Queens, Kim Possible, many others)

Patty (the mail carrier) - Tisha Campbell-Martin (My Wife and Kids, many others)

Jay (the husband) - Richard Ruccolo (you'll recognize him)

Owen (the unemployed neighbor) - Ian Gomez (Drew Carey, Jake in Progress, many others)

A two hour premier of the new series "Legend of the Seeker" will occur Saturday. Reviews have been...ah...mixed? But it is the pilot and we all know pilots today have to be crammed with everything. Typical are these comments from Variety:

"The producing team of Sam Raimi and Robert Tapert enjoyed considerable success a few years back with "Hercules" and "Xena,"....

"...There's nothing howlingly bad here (except perhaps for a few of the supporting performances), but nothing particularly distinctive, either. Rather, "Legend of the Seeker" feels like a hodgepodge of better sci-fi/fantasy fare, including slow-motion action sequences that looked way-cool in "300" and this time around merely feel like a cheap way of ensuring nobody gets clipped by an errant sword.

"Disney is producing and distributing the 22-episode order, which in light of the show's youth-oriented qualities could easily have played on one of the studio's cable platforms. Thus exploring the wilds of firstrun syndication is probably the most daring aspect of "Seeker's" familiar quest."

But I'm a great deal less jaded than many reviewers and feel more like these comments in TV Squad:

"Wow, "syndicated adventure series." Whatever happened to all of those cheesy syndicated adventure shows that used to dot the television landscape?...There aren't too many of them anymore, replaced by reality, home improvement, court shows, and talk shows, or not replaced at all.

"...It sounds silly and over the top and Legend of the Seeker is a horrible title (unless you're making a kids video game or a follow-up to the self-help book The Secret), but this could actually be a lot of fun...."

Personally, I like traditional fantasy over reality TV which is not only fantasy but frequently a depressing attempt to provide escapist entertainment. I prefer evil wizards to Donald Trump.

Because it's syndicated, it is offered on an independent or affiliated channel in each area of the country, though not in all DMA's. And, of course, it may not be available from your local channel in HD. But do not despair as it is offered nationally on WGN starting at 5 pm EDT (also see schedules for KTLA and WPIX). It will be repeated on Sunday.

The show has an official web site where you can put in your Zip Code to find out which local channel it is on. There is also a 10-minute preview video that was presented earlier this month on a 30-minute special hosted by Lucy Lawless (apparently the special is available from iTunes). An unofficial web site is also up and running.

A truly hilarious video from "Talkshow with Spike Fereston" is making the rounds on the internet.

You need to watch the video before any of this post makes sense. With that said, here it goes folks.

The video demonstrates how truly stupid the February 2009 digital "cutoff" is, a government mandated technological change that will have the most negative effect on the most vulnerable - mostly poor and dependent people.

There is no logical reason not to continue analog TV broadcasts for another five years while people discover that another choice for broadcast TV has been developing and actually represents something desirable. The cutoff is a move by the covetous, enabled by a bunch of mostly old men in Congress several years ago who either (1) really don't care much about what happens in the day-to-day lives of mostly poor and dependent people or (2) are just too dumb to see the big picture.

The video clearly presents the absurdity of the policy. Yeah, there are phone numbers in addition to web sites, and government coupons that are confusing and don't cover help with installation, and boxes that may or may not work in your location. None of that resolves the fundamental flaws in the policy.

Many are going to be surprised. No one took their "land lines" away from them before they began to appreciate the value of the cell phone, and most still have land lines. Before this video, I never saw anything in the new, spiffy media that truly addressed the impact of this change.

Unfortunately, some have gotten hung up because the video using humor portrays the difficulty affecting a member of the population that will have the most members struggling - old people, people my age.

Some have taken offense that the character is portrayed as an "elderly, almost senile woman." Senile. The term is applied to older people and it means a deterioration, an illness, which as we age we all fear more or less.

In fact, a better term has entered the lexicon more recently to describe what is depicted in the video: "clueless", which means "Lacking understanding or knowledge." (Dictionary.com). The problem is "clueless" behavior at any age resembles to some degree "senility." It's just that old people get tagged with "senility" when they are just "clueless", which is ageism and is as disturbing as overt racism, sexism, etc.

In this case, an older person was used because a greater percentage of people over 60 are "technologically challenged" than in other age groups. Don't let your internal "politically correct" alarm stand in the way of understanding the basic message of the video. The person portrayed in the video is not senile, just clueless, and it has nothing to do with ageism.

The February 2009 analog TV cutoff will affect people of all ages most of whom are among the least able to cope with the change and who are most dependent on broadcast TV. And this humorous video brings that truth out of the closet.

Newly misplaced. One TV show. Surprisingly mature plot, clever writing, with solid direction and acting, Last seen in the vicinity of The CW on Sunday, lost in the noise. If found, call HBO or AMC. Answers to the name of Easy Money.

Easy Money is a show that is as well produced and as offbeat HBO's Big Love, AMC's Mad Men, and Fx's The Riches. The only problem is that it debuted in October on Sunday at 9:00 pm on, get this, The CW.

Media Rights Capital (MR) bought The CW's fall Sunday night prime time. At 7:00 pm they scheduled In Harms Way, a reality series from Dirtiest Jobs' Craig Piligian that features people with dangerous jobs in places like subway tunnels, avalanches, and hurricanes. Not being a reality TV fan, I can't tell you anything about this show. At 8:00 pm they offer Valentine Inc., a truly vacuous show about the Valentine family, a group of Greek gods living in today's Southern California attempting to keep their true identities secret as they do whatever it takes to bring soulmates together, including hiring a romance novel writer who is supposed to help them.

But at 9:00 pm is this incredibly misplaced quality show about a family that runs "Prestige Payday Loans", one of those strip mall check cashing storefronts, and making a fine living at it. The Buffkin's matriarch is Bobette, played by Laurie Metcalf. Morgan Buffkin, her son played by Jeff Hephner (The OC), helps keep the business and family together. The only problem is he's morally troubled by the nature of the business and he inadvertently discovers he may not be her biological son nor sibling to brother Cooper played by Jay R. Ferguson or sister Brandy played by Katie Lowes. You'll recognize the rest of cast as all top actors, also.

Supposedly MRC is committed to 13 episodes of Easy Money (and Valentine, Inc.). However, they have put the shows on 4- to 6-week hiatus supposed to give the writers time to catch up on scripts.

In fact, MRC should find a couple more reality shows to fill the time slots which were in the past, and are today, total losers for The CW. They should dump Valentine, Inc., and shop Easy Money around to the cable channels. Easy Money should have been on HBO. It's that good!

Two shows from British television premiered against each other Thursday night - Eleventh Hour and Life on Mars. We weren't impressed with Life on Mars in our household but more on that later.

Eleventh Hour, on the other hand, was better than the Brit version.

The surprise was how much better we liked Rufus Sewell as Dr. Jacob Hood than we did Patrick Stewart and how ok we were with Marley Shelton in the Rachel Young part played in the Brit version by Ashley Jensen (Christina in Ugly Betty).

Sewell really made the Hood part his own with greater force of personality than Stewart.

We hadn't expected the American version pilot to be the same plot as the Brit first episode. The two scripts had the same basic plot outline. The Brit version from Granada Television ran 90 minutes on ITV which did give more time to develop the plot and characters.

But apparently some kind of "artistic differences" at the producer level caused plot changes in subsequent episodes and the Brit version only had four episodes. I hope we will have four seasons and fully realize the show's potential.

Then there's Life on Mars. We watched the English show on BBCA. I loved it, my wife was ambivalent about it. We both did not like the American pilot. The show in this episode was just too much like the Brit version. Whatever else, there were significant cultural differences between 1973 England and 1973 America.

Harvey Keitel was fine (what else?). Jason O'Mara is an actor we like, but and O'Mara is playing Sam too much like John Simm did.

And Gretchen Mol just looks too 21st Century. Liz White in the English version looked and "felt" like a slightly above average young English woman in 1973 struggling to find a place in law enforcement. Mol looks like a 2008 hottie dressed up for a Halloween Party as a 1973 NYPD police woman.

And here we go again with post 90's American TV pilots squeezing it all in to grab every viewer. In the British version it took a few episodes before Sam even chats with Annie about his secret and his thoughts on what it means. They had no need to develop a male-female intimacy in the first hour because they weren't going to cancel the show if the female 18-39 demo wasn't impressed.

So in the American version we have the new guy, lost, confused and uneasy, just tell some woman in the station: "Hey, I think either I've traveled back in time, this is all a dream, or I'm nuts. Now take me home then let's go solve crimes with our guns and stuff." But hey, she has a degree in psychology. Yeah, maybe, if her degree was in parapsychology, maybe.

The premise of the show isn't bad - how does a 2008 top investigator used to all the 21st Century rules and csi gadgets and criminal databases function in a 1973 police environment? Opportunities for tension and struggle abound.

We will try a few more episodes. But I have my doubts.

One show carried over from the disaster of last year is extremely well written, has stimulating characters played by strong actors, and is directed with great care. Unfortunately it's on NBC.

The show is Life. Yes, on the surface it's just another police procedural. But it also has a backstory that drives a subplot that is actually moving towards early resolution, not something to keep up ad nauseum as in so many shows.

They did change a supporting character this year and it's a good change.

The show was "given a chance" by NBC airing new episodes on Monday night the past two weeks as well as on its regular time of 10 pm Friday.

I'm hoping that they scheduled it on Friday because it's a less expensive show to produce. And because of that, they might consider shifting it to USA where characters are welcome? Life has some great characters.

Let's take a scifi show with hot women and a cute young guy and schedule it opposite ...oh, say... NFL football. And just in case, make sure it's against the top rated show Dancing With the Stars. And put it up against the techno nerds favorite, Big Bang Theory. Oh yeah, and let's not forget that a certain demo that might respond to the cute young guy is watching Gossip Girl on that day and time.

Then let's sit around and wring our hands about the poor live ratings.

Apparently someone at Fox is thinking about canceling Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles because of ratings. (See here, for example.)

Now if you were the idiot who scheduled the show this year and was wondering what was wrong, is there an indicator that this show actually does have an audience? How about the fact that the show had a 27.9% increase in viewers the week of September 8-14 from DVR usage (live + 7 days).

Who uses DVR's the most? Probably a demo that watches football and a demo that includes techno nerds. Hmmmm. What does that tell someone?

Well at Fox it tells someone to cancel the show. It might tell someone else to move the show. Perhaps pair it with Fringe on another night as a scifi lineup?

And if you're so greedy that you want to try for high Monday ratings against impossible opposition, put Bones and House on Monday night and kill your real scripted cash cows. Sounds like a plan. Then you can cancel them because you think they can't draw an audience.

Fools! You could have ratings wins four nights a week. Pretend Monday is the new Friday until the NFL season ends and schedule cheap junk.

It's official now, because the Nielsen's confirm it. Broadcast TV and cable channels are competing equally for the same prime-time audience. And the Monday night competition clearly presents the picture. But before I deal with this Fall's Monday lineup, let me offer this "startling" fact that recently came to light.

The Tuesday mid-season finale of ABC Family’s "The Secret Life of an American Teenager" beat every show aired by ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC and the CW among 18-34 women and 12-34 year old women, and this includes the second week of The CW's "90210". In fact, it beat "90210" by double and triple digit percentages. "Secret Life" was watched by 4.5 million total viewers, "90210" by 3.2 million. Of course, Fox's premier of "Fringe" drew 9 million viewers. But "The Secret Life of an American Teenager" wasn't even on most media experts radar late last spring.

I wanted to know which among the hot industry media covered will be 2008's biggest TV industry news story, "The Secret Life of an American Teenager"? A Google News archive search turns up not one story before June. A search on Fox's "Fringe" turned up about 195 stories. (I probably didn't do the search right.)

Take it from this old guy, "The Secret Life of an American Teenager" is a good show particularly considering its target audience. It has strong character development, talented actors, effective direction, and is topical - the central character is a pregnant teen in a middle-class home. Look out broadcast TV, because it'll be back in January.

Now about Monday night....

This past Monday in the 8 pm time slot, the second-season premiere of "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles" drew 6.3 million viewers, NBC's "Deal or No Deal" 9.6 million, the CW's "Gossip Girl" 3.1 million and so on. Oh but when the broadcast numbers were totaled, there were 12.5 million viewers missing. They were watching the Green Bay Packers-Minnesota Vikings game on ESPN. Yeah, that's right, cable's ESPN drew in the most viewers.

Here's the wrinkle as we approach the last week in September. As usual, and for reasons this writer cannot fathom, the broadcast networks have a huge investment in Monday night competition. At 8 pm we'll have to choose from Fox's "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles", NBC's "Chuck", ABC's "Dancing with the Stars", CBS's "The Big Bang Theory" and "How I Met Your Mother", The CW's "Gossip Girl", or we could and apparently will, watch ESPN's "Monday Night Football."

In the 10 pm slot, in addition to the ABC, CBS, and NBC fare, TNT has added to that mix Steven Bochco's "Raising the Bar" which drew 7.7 million viewers in its premier.

Of course, because the industry media, like the government, is still in 1958 instead of 2008, we still see dutifully reported the Nielsen's overnight's for broadcast TV as if it was a meaningful picture of what's going on. In fact, the declining broadcast TV viewership is part of a bigger picture which the industry needs to see.

For all intents and purposes, The CW's Tuesday lineup of "90210" and "Privileged" next week will be in competition with ABC Family's "Lincoln Heights" and "Greek", not with Fox's "House" and "Fringe".

And the Tuesday 10 pm lineup, CBS's "Without a Trace", ABC's "Eli Stone", and NBC's "Law & Order: SVU", isn't fairly reported without the numbers on FX's "The Shield".

In other words, the viewers have discovered that ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, and The CW are just five channels among 20+ meaningful nationwide programming choices, not the hundreds of local channels rapidly abandoning their last local obligation (and only viewer attraction), local news.

It's been a long time since both my wife and I have been enthused about a show's potential after watching the pilot. But "Fringe" is that show.

Yes, the show is about a mysterious conspiracy and has been compared to the X-Files. But it isn't about aliens, it is about science; particularly the odd weapons research conducted in the 1950's and 1960's and 1970's and...run amuck. Think Fort Detrick, Md., anthrax research scientist Bruce E. Ivins, but add in the fuzzy Homeland Security legal authority (oh yeah, like in the Ivins case), a super-sized ultra secret version of President Eisenhower's military-industrial complex (much like we actually have, hmmmm), a 1950's genius researcher locked up in a psychiatric unit after an accidental explosion, and so on.

Let's begin the pilot with Mulder and Scully declaring they are in love with each other and end the pilot with Mulder maybe "undead" and maybe working for "them."

Nope, that's not "The X-Files". It's better. It's us, now, with electronics for mind melds and no Spock.

Australian Anna Torv plays FBI Agent Olivia Dunham and if her performance in the pilot is any indication, she is a first class actor. We're really looking forward to watching her in upcoming episodes.

Desert Storm veteran Mark Valley, ("Boston Legal", "Swingtown") is the perfect choice to play her partner Agent John Scott. He plays the well-educated hunk perfectly. But this is more than a slightly different role the Mulder which bring us to....

Canadian born Joshua Jackson ("Dawson's Creek") as Peter Bishop, the disaffected genius con man who is conned by Dunham to help save her partner. To do that, Peter Bishop is her only access to his estranged hospitalized father....

Veteran Australian born (is there a pattern here?) actor John Noble plays Dr. Walter Bishop with his usual strong acting.

This team is managed by Homeland Security Agent Phillip Broyles ably portrayed by Lance Reddick ("The Wire") as an angry, focused investigative supervisor who already has a hate on for Dunham. Gee, Reddick is an American actor.

Rounding out this cast is veteran Blair Brown playing Nina Sharp, a cancer survivor with a creepy artificial limb and a corporate face that in no way resembles Molly Dodd.

Like all pilot's there were some weaknesses and inconsistencies. Why did she sit on the back bumper of the ambulance and snivel instead of securing the body? She knew they could talk to the dead. Oh, alright, it was critical to the show's plot.

Now if Fox were smart, they would move "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles" to the Tuesday 9 p.m slot and let NBC's "Heroes" struggle with ABC's "Dancing with the Stars" and ESPN's "NFL Monday Night Football". They'd end up owning Tuesday night.

It's hard to imagine, being able to watch on television important political speeches without a couple of talking heads telling me before the speech what the speech should and should not include, why the speaker will or won't succeed, and what he or she did for lunch.

Then immediately after the speech, not having additional talking heads tell me what the speech did and/or did not accomplish, what was right or wrong about the speaker's dress or smile, etc.

Dish Network allowed me to try using my own brain to receive and analyze speeches at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and is going to allow me the same opportunity for the Republican National Convention (RNC).

Dish has, in both high definition and standard definition, dedicated a channel to gavel to gavel audio and video of the conventions, without commentary.

The DNC without the talking empty heads providing "color" was pure enjoyment. I recorded it, of course, so I could skip the dead air times.

It did stretch my brain a little, having to consider the candidates' words with only the context I could provide. And I had to measure the sincerity using only my judgment.

But it was an enlightening experience. I also recorded some broadcast and cable network coverage. After watching that, I knew exactly why I refer to them as talking "empty" heads.

Based on the recent news that NBC is to start charging its local affiliates for network shows and that the local stations are planning to charge cable and satellite providers as much as 200% more for carrying their signals, I wrote the following letter to Senator Barbara Boxer who is on the Senate Commerce Committee:

Beginning last November I wrote a series of blogs that nobody read on the radical changes occurring in the TV industry. Basically I pointed out that the local broadcast TV industry in 2008 is exactly where the radio industry was in 1948.

The only difference is that we have such a myriad of federal regulations protecting local TV stations to the detriment of the public that they may not adapt effectively until it's too late and we, the public, have lost any chance at meaningful local TV.

It now appears that their primary attempt to adapt is to collect higher fees (as much as 200% higher) from cable and satellite carriers which will be passed on to us, the viewing public. In effect, they are attempting through a back door to become "pay TV" since fewer than 20% of homes are without cable or satellite services.

And with NBC announcing they will be charging the locals for network programming, it could be said that the networks are also becoming "pay TV" through the back door.

It's time for the Senate Commerce Committee to hold hearings on this attempt to turn broadcast television into "pay TV."

"I think the broadcast television universe has kind of, on a certain level, devolved, if you will," said Steven Bochco, in a recent interview in Forbes. "Additionally, the working environment in broadcast television has really shifted radically over the last half a dozen years or so."

In those few words Bochco described the malaise infecting the television industry everyone can see exists but no one seems to be attempting to cure. Perhaps it is because the cure is radical. So the American TV viewer may become the loser. It could happen as part of the digital TV "revolution."

The fact is broadcast television stations have been moribund for two decades. While one can always find examples of a quality documentary production offered somewhere around the United States, broadcast stations have a license for broadcasting 24/7, not 60 minutes every six months. If it weren't for content through seven networks - ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, PBS, The CW and MyNetwork - it's highly likely that viewers within most of the 210 broadcast television Designated Market Areas (DMA's) would have nothing of quality or substance to watch from 6 pm to midnight.

To test this statement, take a look at what is offered in your "competitive" market on the "independent" stations. Then check out what's on the affiliated stations outside the network content show times. The Fox affiliates receive only two hours of network prime-time programming a night. Allowing for up to two hours for news related shows, that leaves two hours a night they use to offer what? Do you see 10 hours of smart, syndicated new programming? Local programming produced by groups comparable to local regional theater efforts?

In my area, the nightly lineup on the Fox affiliate looks like this:

6:00 pm News
6:30 pm Friends
7:00 pm Friends
7:30 pm Sienfeld
8:00 to 10:00 Network Programming
10:00 pm News
11:00 pm Seinfeld
11:30 pm Frasier

So, of course, what Congress did is give these folks the exclusive use of three more digital channels without reducing any of the guarantees and protections in place. What protections you may ask? There are many, but let me describe one of them.

Most viewers do not get their programming from the two main cable competitors, DirecTV and Dish Network. If they did get their service from satellites, sooner or later a logical question might cross their collective minds: "Why are the satellite TV companies expending huge sums of money to provide the bandwidth to carry local stations? Wouldn't it be better to provide for viewers to be offered an East and West feed for each of the networks like they do HBO and Showtime?"

At one time, one could get network stations from the East, from Denver, and from the West on satellite. But that came to a halt. Why? The answer is, of course, the broadcast TV lobby persuaded Congress that it was in the public interest to prevent any competition between affiliates of the same network. So Americans can no longer receive differing views of news from other regions of this huge nation.

The satellite TV situation is only one symptom of the problem. The problem is that local broadcast stations are a 1950's structure created around limitations in technology at the time. They are as much as anachronism today as 1930's radio was when TV was allowed to replace it. It is now time to say goodbye to protected broadcast television stations.

"Wait a minute," you say. "Perhaps the stations in more rural areas and those owned by other than major media companies don't produce local content. But what about those in the major cities?"

There are 210 designated market areas. NBC owns outright seven stations, one of which is for sale, and is a 76% owner in two more. ABC owns 10 stations. CBS owns 14, Fox 18. They all own stations in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia. The original "Big Three" also own stations in San Francisco. NBC, the bellweather network, also owns a station in Dallas-Fort Worth as do CBS and Fox.

That's it. Six DMA's are worth the effort - New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Dallas-Fort Worth. And what an effort those locals put into providing local programming for their viewers.

On a typical week night between 5 pm and midnight on New York"s WNBC in addition to news and network programming, you get "Extra" and "Access Hollywood". WCBS gives you "Insider" and "Entertainment Tonight". WABC brings you "Jeopardy" and "Wheel of Fortune". WNYW Fox brings you "The Simpsons", "Seinfeld", and "TMZ" - twice. These have to be potentially the most profitable stations in the country. Not one regularly schedules 30 minutes of locally produced programming on a typical week night between 5 pm and midnight other than news. This is the home of great theater. There is no shortage of proven talent. Why did these four stations receive three more channels each from the public in the digital switch? And why does the government protect to the point of giving them gifts?

And now the networks are adding insult to the injury of poor prime time programming. For instance, while expanding its TV series streaming presence on the web in direct competition with its affiliates (jointly with Fox in the case of HULU), NBC is cutting its losses by requiring its affiliate local stations to share their revenue by paying for network programming.

In summary, NBC owns the NBC broadcast stations in the largest local markets, they are competing with the affiliate local stations on the web, they are introducing new fees charged to non-owned affiliates, and they have the federal government protecting and expanding their monopolistic interest in this broadcast structure designed around 1950's technology.

If that isn't enough, for their affiliate broadcast station the networks are dumbing down programming to the cheapest and most easily controlled common denominator while experimenting on their various cable channels.

Steven Bochco's new show "Raising the Bar" will be on a cable channel, TNT. In case you've forgotten who Bochco is, here are examples of his credits:

Hill Street Blues (1981-87):
Creator (with Michael Kozoll)
Executive Producer
Writer (54 of 146 episodes)

Doogie Howser, M.D. (1989-93):
Creator (with David E. Kelley)
Executive Producer
Writer (51 of 97 episodes)

NYPD Blue (1993-2005):
Creator (with David Milch)
Executive Producer
Writer (260 of 261 episodes)

In addition, in this period he was creating, producing and/or writing numerous other series. In my opinion no one in the broadcast television industry has done more in the past 30 years to keep it a meaningful source of creative writing, acting, directing and production. Only David E. Kelley, who for example has writing credits in 112 of the 112 episodes of his "Ally McBeal", is a comparable contributor to the scripted TV industry.

This coming season these two have adapted to the slow death of broadcast TV in different ways. As noted earlier, Bochco has shifted to the cable channel environment. Kelley has attempted to continue live with the broadcast networks' desire for assured success without risk by adapting a successful British show, "Life on Mars", for ABC.

So it comes down to this. A record number of Emmy nominations this year went to shows appearing on cable channels. The protected broadcast channels in prime time are showing lower risk adapted scripted shows with concepts that are a proven success with audiences in other countries. Or they are giving us low cost "reality" and game shows.

Yes, in the hours around prime time, they are giving us news. But if you have been following related news, they are rapidly reducing local news budgets.

The time has come for Congress to make some bold moves to unprotect broadcast TV stations altogether. It is time for the broadcast networks, ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, The CW, PBS, and MyNetwork, to offer the satellite and cable companies an East and West feed like HBO, Showtime, etc.

And it is time for the newly quadrupled broadcast TV station industry to find its way into the 21st Century through creative thinking without government help.

The beginning of the Opening Ceremonies of the 2008 Olympics is rapidly approaching. We Americans know that most of us have access to full coverage - 3,600 hours, about 200 hours a day - available in high definition for your widescreen television.

And apparently we'll have to skip through quite a few commercials for unhealthy Big Mac's, Budweiser - the King of Belgian Beers, and Barack Obama. Yes, Obama's campaign has made a $5 million buy for ad time during the Olympics, including time on NBC plus the NBCU cable channels. This was breaking news on the Advertising Age web site.

Which leads to this question: Have we become so blase a people that the campaign staff of a Presidential candidate feels comfortable buying $5 million in air time of state censored television?

As we watch on television the American soldier body count rise in our effort to "bring democracy to the Middle East", shouldn't we be uneasy about what we as consumers of the Olympics coverage are doing? It is already clear that NBCU is bringing us coverage only as approved by the Chinese government, which in the 21st Century has become the most insidiously pervasive totalitarian state that has ever existed.

It's important to acknowledge that China has had a strong centralized government in one form or another for 6000 years. The International Olympics Committee made a decision to hold the Olympics in China. Our American Olympics team decided to participate. Our President has made a decision to support the 2008 Olympic Games by attending. In order to make alot of money, NBCU is investing nearly a billion dollars to provide us, the American people, with the best coverage of the sporting events they can, being fully aware of the political constraints and being given a monopoly. These are the facts.

What are the Olympic Games, exactly? Of course, they are a sporting event, an international sporting event. And though somewhat nationalistic in their cheering, in the past the audiences at these venues do not get violent like they do at international soccer matches. But....

There was an Olympic Games (1972) where athletes were killed for political reasons. There was an Olympic Games (1936) where one of the most important stories was a black American man sprinting past Nazis in Germany. There was an Olympic Games (1980) that America boycotted, back when we believed in democracy. The Wikipedia entry on the Olympics has full sections on Boycotts, Politics and Violence. These are the kinds of stories American TV as a mass communications medium should be able to cover with effective presentation.

But it's becoming clearer that this won't be the case. As we get closer to the opening ceremonies, news stories indicate that the limits are being established on a day-by-day basis. From a recent AP story:

Sandy MacIntyre, director of news for APTN, said "things have improved dramatically" in the last few weeks. But he said he recently received a notice from Chinese authorities saying the broadcaster would have to give 24- or 72-hour notice to move a satellite truck around Beijing.

"There shouldn't be any notice at all needed to go live," MacIntyre said. "All of these rules should never have come down to the wire like this."

Americans like sports. Americans want to support their Olympic team. But do we Americans chose to ignore the fact that the world's general news media attempting to cover the "2008 Olympics in China" - the event in context - are being censored in China and that NBCU (General Electric) is taking a hands off approach to the issue? Must we completely ignore the moral implications of the use of technology developed in this country? Must we pretend that all this technology means nothing more than a refrigerator, apparently much like General Electric does?

Are we really obligated to ignore the the phenomenon that the Olympics are still a political event at the core and that a huge, unprecedented chunk of American commercial television time in August has been committed to supporting it?

It's my television time, it's your television time, it's America's television time. It's our media system. Given the depth and scope of our media coverage, the economics carry far greater impacts than the media coverage your (great)grandparents supported in the 1936 Olympics in Berlin.

What does it mean when we sit and watch Olympic athletes perform, quietly ignoring the fact that our primary media source accepting censorship of broader coverage of what's going on in the host country?

And most importantly, are we really so blase a people that the campaign staff of a Presidential candidate feels comfortable buying $5 million in air time of state censored televison?

For lovers of scripted television, this summer is a delight because of the "non-premium" cable channels. In fact, it has been better than the last few fall seasons of broadcast TV. Consider this lineup which isn't every show (in alphabetical order by network name):

The Cleaner on A&E
Mad Men on AMC
Not Going Out on BBCA
The Middleman on ABC Family
The Secret Life of the American Teenager on ABC Family
Rescue Me Minisode on FX
Army Wives on Lifetime
Charlie Jade on SciFi
Dr. Who on SciFi
Eureka on SciFi
Stargate Atlantis on SciFi
The Factory on Spike
Bill Engvall on TBS
My Boys on TBS
The Closer on TNT
Saving Grace on TNT
Law & Order: CI on USA
In Plain Sight on USA
Burn Notice on USA
Monk on USA
Psych on USA

Add to this list HBO's Generation Kill, Sundance's Shameless and Showtime's Weeds, and it is obvious you don't really need the broadcast networks even though CBS has given us Swingtown and Flashpoint with NBC contributing Fear Itself.

Last fall I started this blog with a six part series entitled The Screen Writers Guild strike, technology, and the future of scripted television. In that series my forecast was that the future of scripted TV was not going to be in broadcast network TV for a myriad of reasons, mostly economic. If this summer's cable lineup doesn't make you agree with me, I don't know what would. The list of cable shows represents 18 hours of scripted programming, or three hours a night over six nights. Comedy and drama. Shows for every interest. No reruns. No fear of some idiot canceling a show you like after the third episode.

I find I like the direction TV is taking. Not every show is going to please the critics or win Emmy nominations. But some of these do both. And a few are even getting ratings comparable to successful fall season network shows. No, American Idol class ratings are not going to be posted for this group, but millions of folks are watching these shows.

Two facts stand out about this summer season cable lineup. First, for reasons that escape me there is a crowd on Sunday night and nothing on Wednesday. What? Nobody watches scripted TV on Wednesday? But, the second fact is that many of these shows are repeated so that you can schedule to see most of them even if you only have one TV and no DVR.

However, since you can't watch cable channels without a satellite or cable source, get a DVR with your subscription if you can afford it. Dish Network, my signal source, even has a multiple tuner DVR box that allows you to record two (or three if you can get digital TV off the air) programs in high definition while watching a recording.